Parataxis is a non-dependency connection of two or more elements (modifications or clauses) that are on the same level and depend on the same governing element (in the same way).
The tectogrammatical trees are two-dimensional and we do not introduce a third dimension for paratactic structures (which leads to the violation of the dependency principle; see also Section 1.2, “Non-dependency edges”).
Representing parataxis in the tectogrammatical
trees. Paratactic connections are represented by a
paratactic structure(see Fig. 4.50 and
Fig. 4.51). A paratactic structure root node is a node for the coordinating connective or
operator. In those rare cases in which there is no coordinating connective
nor punctuation mark present in the surface structure, the root node of the
paratactic structure is a newly established node with the t-lemma #Separ.
He was troubled by insects.ACT[is_member=1]
#Separ.CONJ etc.ACT[is_member=1]Fig. 4.52
Paratactic structure root nodes are assigned the
value coap (see Chapter 2, Node types)
in the nodetype attribute.
A paratactic structure root node is an immediate daughter of the governing node of the effective roots of the paratactically connected elements (i.e. terminal members of the paratactic structure).
The root nodes of the paratactically connected elements are
immediate daughters of the paratactic structure root node and the value of
their is_member attribute is 1.
Paratactically connected elements are thus distinguished from nodes for
shared modifiers. The root node of a shared modifier is also an immediate
daughter of the paratactic structure root node but the value in its
is_member attribute is not 1.
A paratactically connected element can also be represented by an
embedded paratactic
structure. Further, direct and terminal members of
paratactic structures are distinguished. Terminal members of a paratactic structure are the effective
root nodes of paratactically connected elements. Direct members of a paratactic structure are all immediate
daughters of the paratactic structure root node whose value in the
is_member attribute is 1. A direct member of a paratactic structure can
also be a terminal member but a direct member can also be represented by
the root node of an embedded paratactic structure; the root node of a
paratactic structure is never a terminal member.
An immediate daughter of the root of a paratactic structure
(nodetype = coap) can be:
the effective root of a paratactically connected element (i.e. the terminal member of the paratactic structure), whose value of the
is_memberattribute is1.the root of a(n embedded) paratactic structure, whose value in the
is_memberattribute is1.the root of a shared modifier, whose value in the
is_memberattribute is0.NB! A shared modifier can also be instantiated by a paratactic structure. The root of the shared modifier is, then, a paratactic structure root node; its
is_memberattribute is however assigned the value0.a node for a rhematizer of a shared modifier, i.e. a node with the
RHEMfunctor. The value in itsis_memberattribute is then0.a node for a conjunction modifier, i.e. a node with the
CMfunctor. The value in itsis_memberattribute is then0.
Shared modifiers. A shared modifier is such a modification that relates to every paratactically connected terminal element and that is expressed only once at the surface level. Any kind of modification (i.e. both arguments and adjuncts) can be a shared modifier. Non-obligatory modifications are analyzed as shared modifiers only in unambiguous cases.
The root node of a shared modifier is represented as an immediate
daughter of the root of that paratactic structure the terminal elements of
which it modifies. It is distinguished from the paratactically connected
elements by the value of the is_member
attribute, which is 0. For
example:
I saw and heard Mary sing.Fig. 4.53
Peter had been working on his dissertation and preparing for an English exam the whole day but in the evening he was doing nothing more. (Fig. 4.54)
NB! If a potential shared modifier
requires a different value in any attribute with respect to any of the
terminal members (e.g. the functor or the value in the tfa attribute), it is not possible to represent
the modification as a shared modifier but it has to be represented
separately for every terminal member (with the help of newly established
nodes). For example:
John was stressed and difficult to get along with.Fig. 4.55
Principle of the simplest structure. Generally, we represent paratactic structures as deep as possible in the tree structure and we make use of the possibility of shared modification. Therefore, it is usually not necessary to add new nodes into the tree for the elided modifications. The simplest possible structure is chosen, which means the parataxis of sentence parts is preferred to clausal parataxis.
Nevertheless, it is not always possible to represent the construction as parataxis of sentence parts. All cases which do not fullfil the conditions on the parataxis of sentence parts (agreement in form and function), are represented as clausal parataxis, i.e. new nodes for the governing predicates of the clauses are added to the tree (see Section 6.1.1, “Ellipsis of a governing meaning unit”). For example:
Peter arrived and Paul probably as well.
= Peter came and Paul probably came as well. The Actors Peter and Paul cannot be captured as being in constituent coordination; the expression probably modifies the absent predicate. The construction is therefore represented as clausal coordination. Fig. 4.56.
Functors for terminal members of paratactic structures. Paratactic structures are usually formed by elements with the same functor. The functors of the terminal members of paratactic structures can also differ, but it holds that:
the functors of all operands for expressing mathematical operations and intervals are always identical.
the functors of the terminal members in the case of clausal parataxis are always identical.
in the case of parataxis of sentence parts, the terminal members can only have differing functors if it is coordination or apposition of non-obligatory adjuncts. For example:
eight-hour.
RSTR[is_member=1] working.RSTR[is_member=0]time and.CONJwithout break.ACMP[is_member=1]They did it with pleasure.
ACMP[is_member=1] , i.e. well.MANN[is_member=1] [#Comma.APPS]if the paratactic connection is mixed, the non-clausal modification is assigned a functor depending on its relation to the governing node. The clausal (verbal) terminal member has the same functor as the non-clausal terminal member; e.g.:
Little is known about other interesting places.
PAT[is_member=1], such as.APPS#EmpVerb.PAT[is_member=1] Hogwarts.If the paratactic connection is a connection of a verbal clause and a verbless clause, the functor assignment follows the rules in Section 3.1, “Verbal and verbless clauses”. For example:
The topic.
DENOM[is_member=1][#Colon.APPS] What I am doing.PRED[is_member=1] at the moment
Semantic types of paratactic connections. The functor assigned to the root of a paratactic structure expresses the semantic relation between the connected elements. All functors (and their definitions) for paratactic structure root nodes are in Section 12, “Functors expressing the relations between members of paratactic structures”.
