Syntagma

The syntagma (from ancient Greek: σύνταγμα sýntagma, 'arrangement, coordination, grouping —orderly—') is a type of syntactic constituent formed by a group of words that form other subconstituents, at least one of which is a syntactic nucleus. The New Grammar of the Spanish Language (2009), the reference grammar of the Royal Spanish Academy, opts for the name syntactic group. The combinatorial properties of a group or phrase are derived from the properties of its syntactic head; This fact is paraphrased by saying that "a phrase is characterized by being the maximum projection of a nucleus." For its part, the syntactic nucleus is the word that gives its basic characteristics to a phrase and is therefore the most important or highest-ranking constituent found within it; by way of illustration: a phrase is nominal because it is the maximum projection of a name (or noun), and so on.

Introduction

Phrases are syntactic constituents with an articulated internal structure that we can recognize. We will first consider the fundamental phrases, which are those that articulate around a noun (noun), an adjective, a verb, a preposition and an adverb.

"The phrase is understood as a grammatical entity, not a semantic one" since it is "considered as an intermediate unit between "word" and "sentence". The elements of the clause or sentence can be "words" (simple morphemes or free words, or compound words) or groupings of words that are syntactically interchangeable with "words” as elements in the clause or sentence. In looking at the distributive behavior of the elements of the sentence, therefore, some unit is required that takes this feature of language into account. For groups of words at this analytical level, the term "phrase" is used.

Each phrase has a specific syntactic function within the sentence. Unlike the sentence, the phrases do not have a specific intonation (at least in Spanish). From the hierarchical point of view, a phrase is a syntactic constituent immediately higher than the non-syntagmatic constituent, which in turn is the rank immediately higher than the word and the syntactic nucleus. That is to say, a phrase in general will be a syntactic unit formed by a set of words and morphemes hierarchically organized around a syntactic nucleus, in such a way that all these elements together perform a syntactic function or grammatical relationship.

All sentences are immediately decomposable into phrases (the sentence itself can be considered a macrosyntagm) and phrases can be attached to, dependent on, or revolving around each other through syntactic relationships of parataxis (coordination), hypotaxis (subordination), or morphosyntactic relationships of concordance, also by semantic relations of cohesion and congruence called textual coherence. The interior composition of the phrase varies from phrases with a single word that functions as the nucleus, to those in which there are several phrases dependent on a central one or even a proposition subordinate to the nucleus of the phrase.

A phrase may be obligatory because it has been selected by a syntactic nucleus (for example, a transitive verb requires an SD, SN or pronoun as its complement, a preposition requires an SN or SD, etc.). This phrase is called an argument or syntactic complement. The phrase not selected by the predicate is always optional and is called a syntactic adjunct.

Endocentric and exocentric phrases

The distinction between endocentric and exocentric phrases is a distinction abandoned in modern generative grammar, since currently the hypothesis of «generalized endocentricity» has abandoned the analysis through exocentric phrases, redefining them as endocentric phrases of functional categories. The model of Generative Grammar known as Government and Binding Theory (also, Principles and Parameters Model; eng.: 'Government and Binding'), proposed by Noam Chomsky in 1981, distinguished between endocentric phrases, which were maximum projections of a nucleus, and exocentric phrases, which lacked a nucleus:

Eocentric symptoms

The best-known example of eocentric syntagma was the sentence that simply consisted of the adjunction between two endocentric syntagmas: the subject (SN) and the verbal phrase (SV) with inflection. Thus a main prayer (O) or a subordinate prayer (O') came given by rules of rewriting the type:

O→ → SN INFL SV,O♫→ → Comp O{displaystyle {mbox{O}}to {mbox{mbox{SN INFL SV}},qquad {mbox{O}}{mbox{Comp O}}}}}}}

Where clearly O and O' would be eccentric "syntagmas", with some new features not present in any

Endocentric symptoms

Unlike the previous case, an endocentric syntagma would be of the same grammatical category as its core and with properties inherited from the sintactic core.

New perspectives

It has been commonly accepted that the phrase can be verbal, nominal, adjective, adverbial, prepositional (in some languages it is convenient to also distinguish the determining phrase). More recently, phrases associated with functional categories have also been introduced, which are, in addition to the determining phrase, the complementing phrase and the time phrase (or inflection).

The generalized endocentricity hypothesis comes to say that every phrase is the maximum projection of a nucleus, which means that the combinatorial properties of the phrase are given by the nature of the nucleus, since the «traits» of the nucleus would be inherited or "projected" through the syntax tree from the head to the phrase. The hypothesis of generalized endocentricity also supposes the abandonment of exocentric constructions.

X hypothesis diagram

The basic structure of a phrase is explained by the hypothesis of the X' according to which a nucleus is projected twice and receives a modifier on each projection. Therefore, if the letter X is used to designate some kind of head (N = name, adjective or pronoun; V = verb, P = preposition,...). the phrase X (SX) can be decomposed as indicated in the diagram.

• A X core is projected at level X' by receiving as a modifier to a Complement.
• X' can optionally receive a Deputy without modifying its nature of intermediate projection.
• X' is projected to SX by receiving as a modifier to a specified.

An example of an adjective phrase with the previous structure would be the following:

[chuckles]SA[chuckles]SAdvmuch more][chuckles]A! ! [chuckles]A! ! prone[chuckles]SPto disease]][chuckles]SPfor lack of defences]]]{displaystyle} [_{SAdv} {mbox{mbox{much more}] [_{bar {A}}} [_{bar {A} {mbox{propenso}}}}} [_{SP}{mbox{a las enfermedades}}]] [_{mbox{mbox{for lack of defenses}}}}}}

Where:

[chuckles]SAdvmuch more]{displaystyle [_{SAdv} {mbox{much more}}}}} would be the specifier.

[chuckles]SPto disease]{displaystyle} {mbox{mbox}}}}} would be the complement.

[chuckles]SPfor lack of defences]{displaystyle} {mbox{for lack of defenses}}}} I would be a deputy.

[chuckles]Aprone]{displaystyle [_{A} {mbox{propenso}}}}} It would be the syntactic core.

Finally, it is worth mentioning that some more recent proposals suggest that there really are no phrases associated with lexical categories. Thus, the verbal, nominal, adjective or adverbial phrase would not really exist, but there would only be phrases associated with functional categories such as the determining phrase, the complementing phrase and the inflection phrase.

Lexical phrases

Depending on the type of core of the endocentric phrase, it was classified in the same way as in traditional grammar into noun, verbal, adjective or adverbial phrase depending on whether its core was a noun or pronoun, a verb, an adjective or an adverb respectively. As for the exocentric phrase, it is currently much discussed, and the hypothesis of generalized endocentricity has even been proposed.

Noun phrase

"We will call the nominal phrase the constituent that is grouped or articulated around a name". Where the nucleus is a noun or pronoun.

In Spanish, the nominal phrase or SN can function as an agent or patient subject, as an attribute, as a direct object of a thing, as a predicative object, as an apposition, as a vocative and as a circumstantial object. If its nucleus is a pronoun, it can also function as an indirect object and a direct object of person.

Examples: Juan, the record, the record that I like the most. A noun phrase can have the structure noun + adjective

Prepositional phrase

"A prepositional phrase is one that is articulated around a preposition". It can be used as a nucleus, and a phrase as a mandatory complement. For example: "between the weeping willows".

In Spanish, the prepositional phrase (SPrep or SP) can work:

• As a follow-up to a verb: I don't think politicians.
• As a direct complement to the person: He loved to the princess.
• As an attachment within a verbal or nominal syntagma:
  • With a nominal syntagma making a prepositional complement of a name, adjective or adverb, also called a complement to the name or CN.
  • In a passive voice sentence of agent complement that obliquely marks the agent.
  • Optional or attached "Complement" that makes circumstantial supplement.
• Exceptionally as a subject: Between Pedro and Luis They did..

In some functionalist theories, it has been proposed to use the expression Noun Phrase Introduced by Preposition (SNIP) or Adjectival Phrase Introduced by Preposition (SAIP), since the nucleus of the phrase, that is, the most semantically important word, is not the preposition, but the noun or the adjective.

Verb phrase

"The verb phrase is the one that is articulated around a [...]" non-auxiliary verb, that is, a phrase whose syntactic nucleus is a verb with lexical meaning. For example in Spanish:

[Chuckles]_i [chuckles]Eat._N fish]].

Juan [There.]_N here.].

In Spanish, the Verb Phrase or SV can function only as a predicate, either as a verbal predicate, as a nominal predicate, or as a mixed predicate.

It must be borne in mind that when there are auxiliaries, a distinction can be made between a verb phrase that has the verb in non-personal form as its nucleus and a time phrase that has the auxiliary verb as its nucleus. Thanks to this analysis, it can be explained how the peculiar behavior of certain adverbs in English or French and other languages where an adverb can occur between the auxiliary and the main verb. If the time phrase is not postulated, in addition to the fact that certain facts of these languages remain unexplained, we would have to assume the existence of "discontinuous phrases" or some other type of inelegant solution. On the other hand, in Spanish, no element can appear between the auxiliary verb and the main verb, so in Spanish the main verb will always be there. Almost always a verb phrase must be placed in the verb predicate.

Adjectival phrase

The adjective phrase is the one that is articulated around an adjective.

Its structure is:(QUANTIFIER) + NUCLEUS + (ADJECTIVE COMPLEMENT)

In Spanish, the adjectival phrase or SAdj. It can function as an adjacent, as an attribute, and as a predicative complement.

Example: Fast, absolutely true to his ideas.

Adverbial phrase

It is the phrase whose nucleus is an adverb: «very carefully», «very slowly», «mainly»

In Spanish, the adverbial phrase or SAdv. It can function as a direct object, as an adverb object, as a circumstantial object, and as a degree or quantifier of an adjective.

Functional Phrases

Functional phrases are those whose syntactic core does not generally have a lexical meaning, but is simply:

• A subordinate link (suppliers).
• An indicator of quantity, definition or type of reference (successful indicator).
• An auxiliary verb without lexicon meaning that specifies the type of aspect or modality.

In modern theory, it has been proposed that syntactic structures can be grouped into three levels, each of which contains different types of phrases:

• The level of V-projections (Lexicon level), formed by the verb and verbal arguments required by him, as well as attachments related to them.
• The level of I-projections (inflexional/functional level), formed by abstract categories that were initially considered within the inflection syntagma (grammatical time, number, person, structural case, etc.). Within this level they are currently considered syntagmas well settled by the facts of numerous languages such as the syntagma of time, the syntagma of negation and the syntagmas of concordance with the argument-subjecture and the argument-objecture.
• The level of C-projections (pragmatic/discursive level), formed by elements involved in pragmatic functions such as topicalization, marking of the orational focus, the ilocutive force and the formation of interrogative prayers (in languages with movement Qu-). Initially a complementary syntagma was postulated but soon the need to explain certain facts led to the hypothesis of the fine structure of the left periphery.

Time phrase

Several syntactic facts related to auxiliaries, the facts of V2 languages, and the position of clitics, led to the postulation that there was a structural position related to morphologically encoded aspects of verb forms, which require peculiar order constraints. The hypothesis of the existence of a syntactic position associated with abstract features allows a unified explanation to be given to facts that cannot be explained so simply by postulating that the verb is the nuclear element of the sentence and that the sentence is an exocentric construction formed by a subject and a predicate. Some of the facts present in certain languages of the world that can be explained by means of the time phrase:

• The uniqueness of the time mark
• The problem of prayer as endoccentric construction
• Anomalous case marking in certain infinitive sentences
• The behaviour of auxiliaries in many languages
• Syntactic order in V2 languages
• The order of the lytic pronouns in Spanish and other Romance languages (prolistic with finite forms / critique non finite forms).

Complementary phrase

The complementing phrase allows us to explain what structural position is assigned to the subordinating nexus that introduces certain subordinate clauses. Another set of facts that has been explained by means of the complementing phrase is the structural position occupied by the interrogatives that in many languages occupy the initial positions of the interrogative sentences, it can also be explained how the inversion of subject and verb is possible in certain interrogative sentences totals.

Negation phrase

Traditional grammar places the negative particle 'not' in a different category than other negative words ('never', 'no one', 'nothing'), but those elements in many languages have co-occurrence restrictions that they require the introduction of adhoc rules, which do not always seem natural.

For example, the grammatical agreement associated with the negative polarity that many languages, such as the Romance languages, require can be explained if the existence of a negation phrase whose nucleus position is occupied by a word of negative polarity is assumed. This hypothesis allows to explain certain restrictions in the appearance of negative elements and the concordance restrictions.

Determinative Phrase

The hypothesis that there is a determiner phrase headed by a determiner, instead of the classical analysis that the determiners are mere formants of the nominal phrase, allows us to explain some characteristics common to pronouns and determiners, which occur in certain languages. For example, in Romance languages, several third-person clitics have the same form as articles, this is due to historical reasons, although the introduction of the determiner phrase hypothesis can naturally explain this and other more complex facts in Romance languages. and other languages.

Paradigmatic and syntagmatic axes

In the structural linguistics inaugurated by Ferdinand de Saussure, he observes (as if they were axes of Cartesian coordinates) two elementary axes that constitute language: the syntagmatic axis (based on words or, directly, on signifiers) and the paradigmatic axis or metonymic constituted by a chain of signifiers with a possible meaning in common that gives it meaning.

On the other hand, Noam Chomsky has considered a possible generative grammar made up of lexical phrases and functional phrases, and subject to universal combinatory principles. These principles are part of the innate ability to acquire a mother tongue.