Sank's Glossary of Linguistics 
 Comp-Compas

COMP-TRACE EFFECT

  1. (Syntax) A constraint on wh-movement. Notice first that long-distance wh-movement of complements and adjuncts is unaffected by whether the complement clause is headed by an overt complementizer or a silent one (indicated in the following examples by ∅):

    1. [Which friends]i did they say {that, ∅} they saw ti?
    2. [Which way]i did they say {that, ∅} they would fix the leaky faucet ti?

     By contrast, long-distance movement of subjects is possible only with a silent complementizer. The presence of an overt complementizer immediately preceding the trace of wh-movement is ungrammatical; hence the name of the effect.

    1. [Which friends]i did they say ∅ ti saw them?
    2. * [Which friends]i did they say that ti saw them?

     There is some variation among English speakers with regard to the status of (4) (Sobin 1987). But even speakers who judge it to be acceptable report a Comp-trace effect in connection with movement out of indirect questions. | Beatrice Santorini and Anthony Kroch, 2007
  2. (Syntax) The COMP-trace effect is exemplified in (1):

    1. a. Whoi do you think [(that) Alex punched ti]?
      b. Whoi do you think [ti is stupid]?
      c. * Whoi do you think [that ti is stupid]?

     (1a) shows that when an object is wh-extracted from an embedded clause into the matrix, the complementizer that is optional. But when the subject is extracted, that suddenly must be dropped, as is clear from the contrast between (1b) and (1c). The first important point to note is that the COMP-trace effect descriptively amounts to a constraint against a silent subject position in a particular context, just like the EPP. The second is that there is mounting evidence that COMP-trace effects are not actually syntactic, as was long thought, but rather involve something phonological or prosodic (Kandybowicz 2006, Bruening 2009, McFadden 2012, Salzmann et al. 2013). For one thing, ellipsis seems to eliminate the effect (Merchant 2001):

    1. John said that someone would write a new textbook, but I can't remember whoi  John said that ti would write a new textbook .

     For another, the intonational break created by Right Node Raising (indicated here by the | character), while not completely removing the effect, greatly improves grammaticality (de Chene 1995):

    1. ? Whoi does John doubt whether | and Bill suspect that | ti cheated?

     Finally, the effect is substantially ameliorated by having an adverbial intervene between the complementizer and the presumed position of the trace (Bresnan 1977, a.o.):

    1. Whoi do you think [that, against better judgment, ti punched Alex]?

     | Thomas McFadden and Sandhya Sundaresan, 2018

COMPACT NOTATION

  1. (Relational Network Theory) In RNT, relationships are diagrammed with lines and nodes. Lines represent connections allowing for the flow of activation in and out of the nodes. Nodes are classified according to three dimensions of contrast, namely: type (AND vs. OR), orientation (upward vs. downward), and ordering (ordered vs. unordered). Biologically speaking, activation takes the form of electrochemical signals traveling through neuron circuits in the brain.
     AND nodes are represented with triangles, whereas OR nodes are represented with horizontal brackets. Each node has a singular and a plural side, determined by the number of nodes each side is connected to. The singular side of a node is the one possessing just one connecting line. The position of the plural side (the side linked to at least two other nodes) dictates the node's orientation: if the plural side faces upwards, then the node is Upward; if the plural side faces downwards, then the node is Downward. However, in compact notation "all nodes are bidirectional", regardless of their orientation.
     For example, within the lexicogrammatical stratum, both Upward and Downward nodes can send activation to a higher stratum (i.e., the semantic system) and to a lower stratum (i.e., the phonological system). Similarly, within the phonological stratum, both types of nodes can send activation above (to lexicogrammatical nodes) or below (to phonetic nodes).
     Lastly, a node is Ordered if its connecting lines converge in (or stem from) different points on the node's plural side, implying that each line will be activated sequentially, one after the other. On the contrary, a node is Unordered if its connecting lines converge in (or stem from) one and the same point on the node's plural side, implying that all such lines will be activated simultaneously.


     | Adolfo Martín García, 2015
  2. (Relational Network Theory) Here is a very informal proposal for a way to have a new "bracketed notation", a way of representing relational networks in math-like strings that mimic compact notation. These days, there is a huge inventory of characters available for use, unlike in the early years of Stratificational Grammar, when useable symbols were found on a typewriter, all ASCII.
     In parentheses are the Unicode (in hexadecimal) and the HTML name if the character has one. All of these symbols can be easily written on paper and can digitally be copy-and-pasted like ordinary alphanumerics. How these characters look can vary a little, depending on which device you're using.




     | Jon Paul Sank, 2026
  3. (Examples)
     ○ The activation path is traced from the speaker's intention (conceptual level) through the lexico-grammatical nodes to the phonological output (production), or from the phonological input to the conceptual interpretation (comprehension). The choice between narrow (directional) or compact (bidirectional) notation is made based on the need to emphasize production/interpretation dynamics or the underlying structural relations, respectively. | José María Gil, 2025
     ○ Lamb (1999) makes the distinction between compact (later called abstract) notation, which uses AND and OR nodes and bidirectional lines, and narrow notation, a more detailed one, which reveals the internal structure of compact nodes and has unidirectional lines. Lamb (2016) also refers to a third, even more detailed notation, which would depict networks down to the level of neocortical columns (Montcastle 1998). | Paul Buzilǎ, 2021

COMPARATIVE ELLIPSIS

  1. (Syntax) A syntactic phenomenon in which elements of a sentence are omitted because they can be inferred from context, particularly within comparative constructions. It serves as a mechanism for linguistic economy, allowing speakers and writers to avoid unnecessary repetion while maintaining clarity and grammaticality.
     Ellipsis is a fundamental grammatical mechanism that enables speakers to omit certain linguistic elements when they are contextually inferable (Leech 2006). This process enhances linguistic efficiency by reducing redundancy while preserving meaning. One important type of ellipsis is comparative ellipsis, which occurs in comparative constructions where repeated components, often verb phrases or predicates, are left unexpressed. For example, in the sentence


    the predicate is tall is understood from the preceding clause and is therefore omitted.
     Comparative ellipsis allows sentences to remain concise without losing semantic clarity and is widely observed across various registers in English, including both spoken and written forms. While comparative ellipsis occurs in both British and American English (BrE and AmE), prior research indicates subtle yet significant differences between the two varieties.


     Additionally, AmE relies on do-support in many ellipsis contexts, a feature that distinguishes it from BrE. | Goncha Ahmadova, 2025
  2. (Syntax) Two construction-specific types of deletion processes have been claimed in the literature to co-determine comparative formation.


     | Winfried Lechner, 2008
  3. (Syntax) At least three rules have been taken to operate in comparatives:

    1. Comparative Deletion (CD), an obligatory rule that deletes the entire compared constituent under identity with the head of the comparative clause.
    2. Subdeletion, an obligatory rule that deletes only the quantifier-like element of the compared constituent under identity with the quantifier-like element in the head of the comparative clause.
    3. Comparative Ellipsis (CE), an optional rule that deletes material in the comparative clause that is outside the compared constituent, under identity with material in the matrix sentence in which the head of the comparative clause is embedded.

     These rules are exemplified below, where CD has applied in (1), Subdeletion has applied in (2), and both CD and CE have applied in (3).

    1. Mary wrote more books than John wrote φCD .
      (φCD = x many books)
    2. Mary wrote more books than John wrote φSub articles .
      (φSub = x many)
    3. Mary wrote more books than John φCE φCD .
      (φCE = wrote; φCD = x many books)

     | Donna Jo Napoli, 1983

COMPARATIVE INVERSION

  1. (Syntax) Comparative inversion (CI) has a number of properties that make it appear to be a special case of subject auxiliary inversion (SAI; Merchant 2003). Yet it has very special discourse properties, and its syntactic structure is constrained in ways that normal SAI is not. In particular, we will show that in CI, the canonical subject position (Spec,IP) is not filled. Hence CI contrasts dramatically with SAI, and with other cases of subject inversion.

      Comparative Inversion
    1. a. Sandy is much smarter than the professor is.
      b. Sandy is much smarter than is the professor.

     | Peter W. Culicover and Susanne Winkler, 2008
  2. (Examples)
     ○ Comparative inversion is compatible both with light subject DPs and with heavy ones; the difference in the length of the subject does not change the acceptability of this construction.

    1. a. ? (Mary had never been to France at that time but) she spoke French more fluently than did the other students.
      b. ? (Mary had never been to France at that time but) she spoke French more fluently than did the other students who had ever been to France.

     | Mizuki Sakamoto, 2024
     ○ Unlike other inversion constructions, comparative inversion allows the subject to be preceded by more than one auxiliary verb.

    1. a. It is no more expensive than would be the system you are proposing. (Huddleston and Pullum 2002)
      b. White women in our study would have used relatively more IAAT than would have the black women.
      c. The Relief and Aid Society was a genuinely civic-minded organization that very possibly did administer the world's contributions more efficiently and honestly than could have the city government.
      d. Her name on that list affected me more than would have divorces from a dozen Kathyrns.

     | Dongwoo Park, 2017
     ○ Comparative inversion (CI) is the phenomenon found in sentences such as (1).

    1. a. Harvard undergrads, however, were unmoved. They generally give the impression of being far more supportive of their president than is the faculty. (The Weekly Standard, March 7, 2005)
      b. The Rochester scientists have now shown that parthenolide is in fact more selective at stopping cancer through apoptosis was the standard drug cytarabine. (Townsend Letter for Doctors and Patients, July, 2005)

     | Remus Gergel, 2008

COMPARATIVE LINGUISTICS

  1. (Diachronic) Previously known as comparative grammar or comparative philology. Used to study the relationships between two or more languages in order to reveal whether or not the languages have a common ancestor (Britannica n.d.). Comparative linguistics was mostly used during the 19th century in Europe as it was firstly initiated in 1786 by Sir William Jones who discovered that Sanskrit was related to Latin, German, and Greek.
     Robins (1975/2013) wrote that comparative linguistics has a very important role in contributing to the understanding of the nature of how language works and the development (change) of languages in the world. In this regard, the main task of comparative linguistics is to analyze and provide an explanation of the nature of language change. In general, the nature of language (1) has a structure (synchronic dimension) and (2) is always changing (diachronic dimension). | Ruminda Ruminda, 2023
  2. (Diachronic) Today the use of the term comparison and of the phrase comparative linguistics has been sharply restricted. The terms are not used for treatment of one language at one period; indeed they even seem inappropriate for application to such linguistic study in view of terminology now in widespread use. For study of a specific language a succession of special labels has been in vogue, from synchronic through descriptive, and today most oddly theoretical, as if all scientific concern were not theoretical. In the last decades of the 20th century then we do not apply the term comparative linguistics to synchronic study even though it too uses comparison as its basic structure.
     In keeping with the separate position assumed by many for synchronic study, Klimov (1986) identifies three "main branches" of comparative linguistics: genetic, typological, areal. | Winfred P. Lehmann, 1992
  3. (Examples)
     ○ Finally, there was the problem of finding a place of contrastive linguistics within the spectrum of language comparison, relative to other comparative approaches to linguistic analysis, i. e. historical comparative linguistics, language typology, microvariation (comparative dialectology) and intercultural communication. This is the issue addressed in this paper. It will be shown that only by relating contrastive linguistics to and by delimiting it from other subfields of comparative linguistics will we obtain a clear picture of its agenda, its potential and its limits. What contrastive linguistics shares with these other approaches is its focus on variation between languages and within a language. | Ekkehard König, 2012
     ○ The comparative linguistic method remains the only reliable tool for investigating linguistic prehistory. Its successful application to different language families all over the world shows that the method can be used in the study of any sufficiently described language family, regardless of idiosyncratic phonological, grammatical and other features. | Ilia Peiros, 1998

COMPARATIVE MORPHOSYNTAX
(Examples)
 ○ Morphosyntax is the mainstream theoretical approach to word classes, as distributional phenomena based on syntagmatic or paradigmatic contexts. But despite its widespread application, the morphosyntactic approach faces well-known problems. If applied rigorously, distributional classes often turn out to be messy, gradient, or splinter into an unwieldy array of micro-classes. Comparative morphosyntax also highlights the flexibility of some languages, for example where the same lexemes can be systematically used in both noun-like and verb-like morphosyntactic contexts. This flexibility can be understood as an extreme degree of lexical conversion, which at the same time brings into question the validity of a purported word-class distinction. | John Mansfield, 2026
 ○ This paper examines pseudo-ABA patterns exhibited by the gender agreement markings of Germanic possessive pronouns in relation to regular patterns, drawing on data found in both standard and non-standard varieties. The analysis which we propose aims to capture the attested variation while maintaining the structural conditions that rule out true ABAs. We thus wish to contribute to ongoing debates on morphological spell-out and the comparative morphosyntax of Germanic languages. | Anne-Li Demonie and Pamela Goryczka, 2025
 ○ This chapter is concerned with the comparative morphosyntax of spatial prepositional phrases in Hawaiian and Māori, two closely related languages within the Central Eastern Polynesian subgroup of Polynesian. | David J. Medeiros, 2020
 ○ The fact that at least some of the elements of Proto-Niger-Congo (Proto-NC) can be reconstructed is much more evident today than it was at the time of Greenberg's suggestions. This is evident both from the side of the basic lexicon, which provides quite a few reliable Proto-NC roots, and of comparative morphosyntax. The best example of cognate morphology between families that are quite distant from each other (e.g. Bantu, Atlantic, and Kordofanian) is arguably the system of noun classes. The discovery of noun class relics in Mande has strengthened the idea of its affiliation within NC. The paradigm of personal pronouns seems to be one of the clearest proofs of genetic relationship, even though it has not, so far, been analyzed in rigorous detail. | Kirill Babaev, 2011
 ○ The framework of Distributed Morphology (DM) was established by the pioneering work of Halle and Marantz (1993, 1994), which has subsequently inspired a wide range of research in theoretical morphology. In this section I will briefly outline the major tenets of the approach and address why I think it is a fruitful framework for research into comparative morphosyntax. This discussion follows closely the overview of the framework provided by Harley and Noyer (1999). First, however, we must contrast DM with other current approaches to the interface of syntax and morphology. | Jason D. Haugen, 2004

COMPARATIVE PSEUDOGAPPING
(Examples)
 ○ The predominance of comparative clauses, which reveals as a general characteristic of pseudogapping in Miller's (2014) corpus study and Hoeksema's (2006) experimental study, does have the effect of strengthening structural parallelism between the antecedent and the clause hosting a remnant. | Joanna Nykiel, 2025
 ○ Miller (2014) showed that comparative pseudogapping is a very frequent construction, and our results further confirm that it is highly acceptable as well. By contrast, Hoeksema's findings on non-comparative pseudogapping suggest that it is degraded in acceptability relative to comparative pseudogapping. | Till Poppels and Philip Miller, 2023
 ○ Levin (1979/1986) notes that a wider range of constituents seem to appear as remnants in cases of pseudogapping in comparatives. For instance, APs, VPs and PP complements to nominal arguments may occur as comparative pseudogapping remnants only; they are ungrammatical as remnants in "regular" pseudogapping in coordination.

  1. a. I probably feel more jubilant than you do relieved.
    b. * You probably just feel relieved, but I do jubilant.
  2. a. Rab felt more comfortable dancing than he did singing.
    b. * Rab felt comfortable dancing, but Bill did singing.
  3. a. Rab bought more pictures of his dog than he did of his cat.
    b. * Rab bought pictures of his dog, and Bill did of his cat.
 | Gary Thoms, 2016
See Also PSEUDOGAPPING.

COMPARATIVE QUALITATIVE BINOMINAL NOUN PHRASE

  1. (Grammar) The data in (1) involves a comparison between the two DPs.

    1. a jewel of a village

     Indeed, Den Dikken (2006) designates it as a Comparative Qualitative Binominal Noun Phrase. In its copular variant, the village is equated with a jewel:

    1. a village is a jewel ⟶ village = jewel

     | Angelapia Massaro, 2019
  2. (Grammar) The Spanish comparative qualitative binominal noun phrase (c-QBNP) (Español-Echevarría 1997, 1998, García and Méndez 2002, Casillas 2003, den Dikken 2006, Bartra and Villalba 2006, Villalba and Bartra-Kaufmann 2010, González-Rivera and Delicado-Cantero 2010) displays the following syntactic structure:
    DEF-N/A
    'Def-N/A
    de
    of
    DEF-N
    Def-N'
    and, like the attributive QBNP, involves DP-internal predication. However, its meaning is different from attributive QBNPs. Consider, for instance, (1a). In this example the AP-predicate applies directly to the DP-subject.

    1. a.
       
      el
      the
      idiota
      idiot
      del
      of-the
      decano
      dean
        'the idiot of the dean'
      b.
       
      el
      the
      decano
      dean
      es
      is
      un
      an
      idiota
      idiot
        'The dean is an idiot.'

     In English, there is an attributive QBNP variant that has the two NPs juxtaposed without the intervention of any lexical material between them (2a,b); this is not possible, however, in English comparative QBNPs—i.e., (3a) cannot be paraphrased as (3b) (den Dikken 2006):

    1. a. an idiot of a doctor
      b. an idiot doctor
    2. a. a jewel of a village
      b. * a jewel village

     | Melvin González-Rivera, 2011

 

Page Last Modified August 30, 2026

 
 B a c k   T o   I n d e x