Quantity of Sentence Structure
Theories of syntax that build on the X-bar schema tend to posit a large amount of sentence structure. The constituency-based, binary branching structures of the X-bar schema increase the number of nodes in the parse tree to the upper limits of what is possible. The result is highly layered trees (= "tall" trees) that acknowledge as many syntactic constituents as possible. The number of potential discontinuities increases, which increases the role of movement up the tree (in a derivational theory, e.g. Government and Binding Theory) or feature passing up and down the tree (in a representational theory, e.g. Lexical Functional Grammar). The analysis of phenomena such as inversion and shifting becomes more complex because these phenomena will necessarily involve discontinuities and thus necessitate movement or feature passing. Whether the large amount of sentence structure associated with X-bar schemata is necessary or beneficial is a matter of debate.
Read more about this topic: X-bar Theory
Famous quotes containing the words quantity of, quantity, sentence and/or structure:
“The Great Society is a place where every child can find knowledge to enrich his mind and to enlarge his talents.... It is a place where the city of man serves not only the needs of the body and the demands of commerce but the desire for beauty and the hunger for community.... It is a place where men are more concerned with the quality of their goals than the quantity of their goods.”
—Lyndon Baines Johnson (1908–1973)
“If we take in our hand any volume; of divinity or school metaphysics, for instance; let us ask, Does it contain any abstract reasoning concerning quantity or number? No. Does it contain any experimental reasoning, concerning matter of fact and existence? No. Commit it then to flames: for it can contain nothing but sophistry and illusion.”
—David Hume (1711–1776)
“I grow daily to honour facts more and more, and theory less and less. A fact, it seems to me, is a great thing—a sentence printed, if not by God, then at least by the Devil.”
—Thomas Carlyle (1795–1881)
“One theme links together these new proposals for family policy—the idea that the family is exceedingly durable. Changes in structure and function and individual roles are not to be confused with the collapse of the family. Families remain more important in the lives of children than other institutions. Family ties are stronger and more vital than many of us imagine in the perennial atmosphere of crisis surrounding the subject.”
—Joseph Featherstone (20th century)