HOMEWORK, Syntax: Structural ambiguity

Linguistics $220,$ Simon Fraser University$1$

Phrase Structure Rules $($PSRs$)$

S $$ NP VP $($PPloc$)($PPtime$)$

NP $($Det$)($AP$)$ N $($PP$)($PP$)$

NP $$ Name

NP $$ Pro

VP $($Qual$)($Aux$1)($Aux$2)($Aux$3)$ V $($NP$)($AP$)($PP$)($PP$)$

AP $($Deg$)$ A $($PP$)$

PP $($Deg$)$ P $($NP$)($PP$)$

Part A$.$ The PSRs above successfully account for the sentences below.

$(1)$ The letter to the editor is very unbelievable.

$(2)*$It to the editor is very unbelievable.

$(3)$ These pieces of wood are rotting.

$(4)*$They of wood are rotting.

Show this by doing two things. In the first box below, draw a sentence tree for $(1),$ to show that the PSRs can

generate it$.$ Your tree structure must show all syntactic categories $($phrasal$,$ lexical, non$-$lexical$)$ as nodes on the

tree, and it should show the constituent structure that the PSRs assign. Also, the trees must follow the rules for

well$-$formed trees $($see the Syntax lecture slides if this is unclear$).$ In the second box on the right, explain why

the rules cannot generate $(2)$ and $(4).$ Use complete sentences and make explicit reference to the syntactic

categories of these sentences and the PSRs$.$

Tree for $(1)$

The letter to the editor is very unbelievable

Explanation of ungrammaticality of $(2),(4)$