Coordination (linguistics)

In linguistics, a coordination is a complex syntactic structure that links together two or more elements, known as conjuncts or conjoins. Coordinators are typically: "and" and "or". The word "but" is also often considered a coordinator although it may have slightly different properties from others.

Coordination has a number of interesting linguistic properties.

• Any syntactic category can be coordinated.
• It is subject to the Rule of Coordination of Likes
• It is subject to the Coordinate Structure Constraint.
• but is subject to an exception in the form of Across-the-Board extraction.

Coordinating conjunctions are often, though not always, used to link the conjuncts in a coordination. Depending on the number of conjunctions used, coordinations can be classified as "syndetic", "asyndetic", or "polysyndetic". Coordination can be contrasted with subordination, a complex structure in which the component parts do not have parallel functions. This is also known as pseudo-coordination. The interest of pseudo-coordination lies in the ways this construction differs from coordination proper.

Coordination of likes

The following examples show that like constituents can be coordinated but unlike ones generally cannot.^[1]

• [Sarah and Xolani] went to town (coordination of NPs)
• [The chicken and the rice] go well together (coordination of DPs)
• [That the president understood the criticism and that he took action] was appreciated (coordination of CPs)
• The president [understood the criticism and took action] (coordination of VPs)

• (*)[Sarah and that the president understood the criticism] were appreciated

There are, however, a number of exceptions to the Rule of coordination of likes for example the following sentence. ^{[2] [3] [4] [5] [6]}

• Sarah is a CEO and proud of her job.

The conjuncts generally have similar grammatical features (e.g. syntactic category, semantic function), and the coordinated structure as a whole retains most of the same properties as the individual conjuncts, although it may introduce new features (e.g. plurality).

Island Properties

The Coordinate Structure Constraint Coordination constructions are strong islands for extraction; one cannot extract from any single conjunct.^[7]

• (*)Who and Sarah went to town?
• (*)Sarah and who went to town?
• (*)What did the president understand the criticism and take?

The Across-the-Board Constraint There is an exception to the islandhood property however: it is possible to extract from a coordination construction if one extracts the same constituent from both conjuncts simultaneously.^[8][9]

• What did Sarah like and Xolani hate?

There are other apparent exceptions the Coordinate Structure Constraint and the Across-the-Board generalization and their integration to existing syntactic theory has been a long-standing disciplinary desideratum.^{[10] [11] [12] [13] [14][15] [16]}

Pseudo-coordination

In pseudo-coordinative constructions, the coordinator, generally `and', appears to have a subordinating function. It occurs in many languages and is sometimes known as "hendiadys", and often, but not always, is used to convey a pejorative or idiomatic connotation.^[17] Among the Germanic languages, Pseudo-coordination occurs in English, Afrikaans, Norwegian, Danish and Swedish.^[18][19] Pseudo-coordination appears to be absent in Dutch and German. The pseudo-coordinative construction is limited to a few verbs. In English, these verbs are typically "go", "try" and "sit". In other languages, typical pseudo-coordinative verbs and/or hendiadys predicates are egressive verbs (e.g. "go") and verbs of body posture (e.g. "sit", "stand" and "lie down").

• Why don't you go and jump in the lake
• I will try and jump in the lake
• The pupils sat and read their textbooks

A typical property of pseudo-coordinative constructions is that, unlike ordinary coordination, they appear to violate the Across-the-Board extraction property. In other words, it is possible to extract from one of the conjuncts.^[20][21]

• What did she go and jump in t?
• What did she try and jump in
• Which textbooks did the pupils sit and read.

It has been argued that pseudo-coordination is not a unitary phenomenon. Even in a single language such as English, the predicate "try" exhibits different pseudo-coordination properties to other predicates and other predicates such as "go" and "sit" can instantiate a number of different pseudo-coordinative construction types.^[22] On the other hand, it has been argued that at least some different types of pseudo-coordination can be analysed using ordinary coordination as opposed to stipulating that pseudo-coordinative `and' is a subordinator; the differences between the various constructions derive from the level of structure that is coordinated e.g. coordination of heads, coordination of VP etc.^[23]

Notes

1. ^ Williams, E. (1978). Across the board rule application. Linguistic Inquiry 9,31--43.
2. ^ Sag, I., Gazdar, T., Wassow, T. and S. Weisler. (1985). Coordination and how to distinguish categories. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 3, pp117--171.
3. ^ Progovac, L. (1998). Structure for coordination (Part 1). GLOT International 3(7), pp3--6.
4. ^ Bayer, S. (1996). The coordination of unlike categories. Language 72,pp579--616
5. ^ Dik, S. (1968). Coordination: its implications for a theory of general linguistics. Amsterdam: North Holland Publishing Company.
6. ^ Zoerner, E. (1995). Coordination: the syntax of &P. Ph.D thesis. University of California, Irvine.
7. ^ Ross, J. (1967). Constraints on variables in syntax. Ph.D. thesis. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
8. ^ Ross, J. (1967). Constraints on variables in syntax. Ph.D. thesis. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
9. ^ Williams, E. (1978). Across the board rule application. Linguistic Inquiry 9,31--43.
10. ^ Progovac, L. (1998). Structure for coordination (Part 1). GLOT International 3(7), pp3--6
11. ^ Carden, G. and D. Pesetsky (1977). Double-verb constructions, markedness and a fake coordination. In Papers from the 13th regional meeting, Chicago Linguistic Society, Chicago, pp82--92. University of Chicago. Reprinted in: Minoru Yasui (Ed.), Kaigai Eigogaku-ronso, (1979) Tokyo: Eichosha Company.
12. ^ Culicover, P. and R. Jackendoff (1997). Semantic subordination despite syntactic coordination. Linguistic Inquiry 28(2), pp195--217.
13. ^ Zoerner, E. (1995). Coordination: the syntax of &P. Ph.D thesis. University of California, Irvine.
14. ^ De Vos, M. (2005). The syntax of pseudo-coordination in English and Afrikaans.
15. ^ Lakoff, G. (1986). Frame semantic control of the coordinate structure constraint. In A. Farley, P. Farley, and K-E. McCullough (Eds). CLS 22, Part 2: Papers from the parasession on pragmatics and grammatical theory, Chicago, pp152--167. Chicago Linguistic Society.
16. ^ Goldsmith, J. (1985). A principled exception of the coordinate structure constraint. In W. Eilfort, P. Kroeber and K. Peterson (Eds). CLS 21, Part 1: papers from the general session at the twenty-first regional meeting, Chicago, pp133--143. Chicago Linguistic Society.
17. ^ Na, Y. and G. Huck (1992). On extracting from asymmetrical structures. In D. Brentari, G. Larson and L. Macleod (Eds), The joy of grammar: a festschrift in honour of James D. Mccawley, pp251--274. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
18. ^ Wiklund, A-L. (2005). The syntax of tenselessness: on copying constructions in Swedish. Ph.D. Thesis. University of Umeaa
19. ^ De Vos, M. (2005). The syntax of pseudo-coordination in English and Afrikaans.
20. ^ De Vos, M. (2005). The syntax of pseudo-coordination in English and Afrikaans.
21. ^ Lakoff, G. (1986). Frame semantic control of the coordinate structure constraint. In A. Farley, P. Farley, and K-E. McCullough (Eds). CLS 22, Part 2: Papers from the parasession on pragmatics and grammatical theory, Chicago, pp152--167. Chicago Linguistic Society.
22. ^ De Vos, M. (2005). The syntax of pseudo-coordination in English and Afrikaans.
23. ^ De Vos, M. (2005). The syntax of pseudo-coordination in English and Afrikaans.

Other references

• Postal, P. (1998). Three investigations of extraction. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
• Schmerling, S. (1975). Asymmetric coordination and rules of conversation. In P. Cole and J. Morgan (Eds). Speech Acts, Volume 3 of Syntax and semantics, pp211–231. New York: Academic Press.

See also

• Parataxis
• Compound sentence (linguistics)