<h4>Introduction</h4>We discuss event-related power differences (ERPDs) in low- and broadband-γ oscillations as the embedded-clause edge is processed in <i>wh</i>-dependencies such as <i>Which decision regarding/about him/her did Paul <b>say that</b> Lydie rejected without hesitation?</i> in first (L1) and second language (L2) French speakers.<h4>Methods</h4>The experimental conditions manipulated whether pronouns appeared in modifiers (Mods; <i>regarding him/her</i>) or in noun complements (Comps; <i>about him/her</i>) and whether they matched or mismatched a matrix-clause subject in gender.<h4>Results</h4>Across L1 and L2 speakers, we found that anaphora-linked ERPDs for Mods vs. Comps in evoked power first arose in low γ and then in broadband γ. Referential elements first seem to be retrieved from working memory by narrowband processes in low γ and then referential identification seems to be computed in broadband-γ output. Interactions between discourse- and syntax-based referential processes for the Mods vs. Comps in these ERPDs furthermore suggest that multidomain γ-band processing enables a range of elementary operations for discourse and semantic interpretation.<h4>Discussion</h4>We argue that a multidomain mechanism enabling operations conditioned by the syntactic and semantic nature of the elements processed interacts with local brain microcircuits representing features and feature sets that have been established in L1 or L2 acquisition, accounting for a single language epistemology across learning contexts.

Abstract This Delphi study investigates whether linguists from diverse theoretical backgrounds can reach consensus on core metaconcepts at the syntax–semantics interface, and how these metaconcepts are perceived as interconnected within linguistic theory and education. Expanding on a previous study conducted primarily with Dutch experts, this research draws on an international sample of 58 linguists across generative, cognitive and functional traditions. Through iterative Delphi rounds and Perceived Causal Network analysis, participants evaluated and refined a shared set of metaconcepts and their perceived relationships. The study identifies a stable core of foundational metaconcepts valued across theoretical traditions and shows that the perceived importance of 23 metaconcepts is largely reproduced from the earlier study, despite the broader linguistic and theoretical diversity of the current expert group. Structural metaconcepts continue to be rated as the most important ones for both theoretical linguistics and language education. The network analyses further illuminate how experts view interdependencies among key metaconcepts, revealing several that function as threshold concepts and may need to be acquired before others can be fully understood. These findings strengthen the validity of a metaconceptual approach to grammar teaching, in which the school grammar curriculum is enriched with metaconcepts that are relevant in linguistic theory. Ultimately, the study helps bridge divisions between theoretical schools of thought and between linguistics and grammar education, offering a shared and empirically grounded foundation for developing learners’ metalinguistic understanding.

Cartographic syntax Metasyntax Musical syntax Semiotics Syntactic category Syntax (academic journal) Syntax (programming languages) Syntax–Semantics Interface Usage In linguistics, syntax ( SIN-taks) is the study of how words and morphemes combine to form well-formed larger units such as phrases and sentences. Central concerns in this area of linguistics include word order, grammatical relations, hierarchical sentence structure (constituency), agreement, cross-linguistic variation, and the relationship between form and meaning (semantics). Diverse approaches, On… In linguistics, syntax ( SIN-taks) is the study of how words and morphemes combine to form well-formed larger units such as phrases and sentences. Central concerns in this area of linguistics include word order, grammatical relations, hierarchical sentence structure (constituency), agreement, cross-linguistic variation, and the relationship between form and meaning (semantics). Diverse approaches, such as generative grammar and functional grammar, offer unique perspectives on syntax, reflecting its complexity and centrality to understanding human language. One basic description of a language's syntax is the sequence in which the subject (S), verb (V), and object (O) usually appear in sentences. Over 85% of languages usually place the subject first, either in the sequence SVO or the sequence SOV. The other possible sequences are VSO, VOS, OVS, and OSV, the last three of which are rare. Some languages have no dominant order for these three sentence elements. In most generative theories of syntax, these surface differences arise from a complex clausal phrase structure, and each order may be compatible with multiple derivations. Word order can also reflect the semantics or function of the ordered elements. Dependency grammar is an approach to sentence structure in which syntactic units are arranged according to the dependency relation, as opposed to the constituency relation of phrase structure grammars. Dependencies are directed links between words. The (finite) verb is seen as the root of all clause structure and all the other words in the clause are either directly or indirectly dependent on this root (i.e. the verb). Some prominent dependency-based theories of syntax are the following: Recursive categorical syntax, or algebraic syntax Functional generative description Meaning–text theory Operator grammar Word grammar Lucien Tesnière (1893–1954) is widely seen as the father of modern dependency-based theories of syntax and grammar. He argued strongly against the binary division of the clause into subject and predicate that is associated with the grammars of his day (S → NP VP) and remains at the core of most phrase structure grammars. In place of that division, he positioned the verb as the root of all clause structure. Categorial grammar is an approach in which constituents combine as function and argument, according to combinatory possibilities specified in their syntactic categories. For example, other approaches might posit a rule that combines a noun phrase (NP) and a verb phrase (VP), but CG would posit a syntactic category NP and another NP\S, read as "a category that searches to the left (indicated by \) for an NP (the element on the left) and outputs a sentence (the element on the right)." Thus, the syntactic category for an intransitive verb is a complex formula representing the fact that the verb acts as a function word requiring an NP as an input and produces a sentence level structure as an output. The complex category is notated as (NP\S) instead of V. The category of transitive verb is defined as an element that requires two NPs (its subject and its direct object) to form a sentence. That is notated as (NP/(NP\S)), which means, "A category that searches to the right (indicated by /) for an NP (the object) and generates a function (equivalent to the VP) which is (NP\S), which in turn represents a function that searches to the left for an NP and produces a sentence." Tree-adjoining grammar is a categorial grammar that adds in partial tree structures to the categories. Functionalist models of grammar study the form–function interaction by performing a structural and a functional analysis. Transformational grammar (TG) (Original theory of generative syntax laid out by Chomsky in Syntactic Structures in 1957) Government and binding theory (GB) (revised theory in the tradition of TG developed mainly by Chomsky in the 1970s and 1980s) Minimalist program (MP) (a reworking of the theory out of the GB framework published by Chomsky in 1995) Other theories that find their origin in the generative paradigm are: Arc pair grammar Generalized phrase structure grammar (GPSG) Generative semantics Head-driven phrase structure grammar (HPSG) Lexical functional grammar (LFG) Nanosyntax Relational grammar (RG) Harmonic grammar (HG) The syntax of natural language: An online introduction using the Trees program – Beatrice Santorini & Anthony Kroch, University of Pennsylvania, 2007

Endangered Languages at the Semantics / Syntax Interface ” (slides), presented at 50 Years of Linguistics at MIT ... Binding by Verbs: Tense, Person, and Mood under Attitudes”, in The Syntax and Semantics of the Left Periphery ... that the non-standard syntax of classifiers arises at least in part from their iconic semantics ; we revisit ...

])} . A major debate in the syntax-semantics interface concerns the proper treatment of apparent mismatches between form and meaning, particularly related Formal semantics is the scientific study of linguistic meaning through formal tools from logic and mathematics. It is an interdisciplinary field, sometimes regarded as a subfield of both linguistics and philosophy of language. Formal semanticists rely on diverse methods to analyze natural language. Many examine the meaning of a sentence by studying the circumstances in which it would be true. They Terminal Node: If α {\displaystyle \alpha } is a syntactic node with no daughters, then [ [ α ] ] {\displaystyle [\![\alpha ]\!]} is specified in the lexicon. Nonbranching Node: If α {\displaystyle \alpha } is a node whose sole daughter is β {\displaystyle \beta } , then [ [ α ] ] = [ [ β ] ] {\displaystyle [\![\alpha ]\!]=[\![\beta ]\!]} . Function Application: If α {\displaystyle \alpha } is a node with daughters β {\displaystyle \beta } and γ {\displaystyle \gamma } where [ [ β ] ] {\displaystyle [\![\beta ]\!]} is a function whose domain contains [ [ γ ] ] {\displaystyle [\![\gamma ]\!]} , then [ [ α ] ] = [ [ β Terminal Node: If α {\displaystyle \alpha } is a syntactic node with no daughters, then [ [ α ] ] {\displaystyle [\![\alpha ]\!]} is specified in the lexicon. Nonbranching Node: If α {\displaystyle \alpha } is a node whose sole daughter is β {\displaystyle \beta } , then [ [ α ] ] = [ [ β ] ] {\displaystyle [\![\alpha ]\!]=[\![\beta ]\!]} . Function Application: If α {\displaystyle \alpha } is a node with daughters β {\displaystyle \beta } and γ {\displaystyle \gamma } where [ [ β ] ] {\displaystyle [\![\beta ]\!]} is a function whose domain contains [ [ γ ] ] {\displaystyle [\![\gamma ]\!]} , then [ [ α ] ] = [ [ β ] ] ( [ [ γ ] ] ) {\displaystyle [\![\alpha ]\!]=[\![\beta ]\!]([\![\gamma ]\!])} . A major debate in the syntax-semantics interface concerns the proper treatment of apparent mismatches between form and meaning, particularly related to scope. One common approach posits a level of grammatical structure called logical form. In this view, sentences do not have a unique syntactic form, but rather a phonological form, which gets pronounced, and a separate logical form, which undergoes semantic interpretation. In these approaches, apparent mismatches between form and meaning can be explained using syntactic mechanisms such as movement. This is in contrast to approaches such as direct compositionality, which assume that the surface grammatical form is the only grammatical form and that mismatches should be explained using other semantic mechanisms such as type shifting. Empirical evidence informing this debate includes ACD, scope islands, and data from languages such as Hungarian which has been argued to "wear its [logical form] on its sleeve". Formal logic studies the laws of deductive reasoning, focusing on entailment relations between premises and conclusions rather than linguistic meaning in general. It investigates rules of inference, such as modus ponens, which describe the logical structure of deductively valid arguments. Formal logicians develop artificial languages, like the language of predicate logic, to avoid the ambiguities of natural language and give precise descriptions of the laws of logic. Formal semantics plays a central role in this endeavor for applying these laws to natural language arguments. It helps logicians discern the logical form of everyday arguments, serving as a crucial step in translating them into logical formulas. Another key overlap between formal semantics and formal logic concerns the meaning of artificial logical languages. The semantics of logic examines the construction of mathematical models of formal languages, similar to the models used by formal semanticists to study natural language. These models typically include abstract objects to represent individuals and sets. The relation to formulas is established through an interpretation function that maps symbols to the abstract objects they denote. A key aspect of this interface is the contrast between syntactic and semantic entailment. A premise syntactically entails a conclusion if the conclusion can be deduced using rules of inference. A premise semantically entails a conclusion if the conclusion is true in every possible model where the premise is true. In the following decades, Montague's work influenced many scholars, who sought to refine or modify his insights and apply them to diverse linguistic phenomena. Barbara Partee was instrumental in explaining and popularizing Montague's ideas, helping formal semantics grow into a subfield of linguistics by integrating Montague's insights into linguistic theory. In response, various theorists focused on the relation between syntax and semantics, proposing diverse grammatical theories to explain the interface, such as generalized phrase

Phenomena, and the Syntax /Pragmatics Interface ”, in Structures and Beyond: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures ... pragmatic additions to the underdetermined output of syntax are governed by a rationality principle called an ... Lying at the Semantics -Pragmatics Interface , Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. ––– (ed.), 2018, The Oxford Handbook ...

Recent years have witnessed much research on semantic analysis and syntactic anatomy in ordinary language processing. However, it is still a matter of considerable debate about when and how the semantic integration of single word meanings works and interacts with syntax during on-line comprehension. This study, in an eye-tracking paradigm, took 38 native speakers of Mandarin Chinese as the participants and took Chinese relative clauses as stimuli to figure out the functions of semantics by investigating the conditioning semantic factors influencing and governing the word order variation of Chinese relative clauses during different processing stages. Accordingly, this study manipulated two syntactic variables, i.e., relative clause type and the position of the numeral-classifier sequence (NCL) in the relative clause, as well as a semantic variable, i.e., the abstractness of the head noun that the relative clause modified. Specifically, the study addressed two questions: (1) when semantics is activated and interacts with syntax and (2) how semantics affects syntax during the time course of Chinese relative clause processing. The results indicated that: (1) Semantics was activated and interacted with syntax during the early and late processing stages of Chinese relative clauses, which challenged the sequential order of syntactic and semantic processes, and supported the claims of the Concurrent Processing Model. (2) The syntactic order of the Chinese relative clause was affected by the semantic information of the head noun that the clause modified. Object-extraction relative clauses (ORCs) had a conjunction preference for the order "an object relative clause preceding the numeral-classifier sequence and the head noun." Instead, the subject-extraction relative clause (SRC) which modified a concrete noun (CN) had a co-occurrence preference for the order "numeral-classifier sequence preceding the subject relative clause and the head noun," while the subject-extraction rel Over the last two decades, experts explored the interaction of syntax and semantics of Chinese relative clauses by analyzing two syntactic variables. The first one is the universality of the subject preference. Findings from Indo-European languages generally support a “universal” subject advantage: adults process SRCs more quickly and accurately than ORCs; children understand and produce SRCs earlier than ORCs. Research on typologically distinct languages and with groups other than We can investigate how semantics functions in the early processing stage by comparing the first fixation durations and gaze durations between conditions with different syntactic and semantic variables, while we explore the case in the late processing stage by comparing the regression path durations between conditions to see whether syntactic or semantic information was activated and how they interacted with each other in different processing stages, thus sketching a full picture of syntax-semantics interaction continuum in Chinese language comprehension. Specifically, this study took Chinese native speakers as participants, and took Chinese relative clauses as stimuli to explore the function of semantics in Chinese on-line processing and evaluate the mechanism of semantic integration with syntax by means of dealing with two research questions. First, when will semantics be activated and interact with syntax during the time course of language comprehension? Second, how will semantics affect syntax during the on-line processing of Chinese sentences? We assume that even in the early stages of Chinese relative clauses comprehension, semantics will be activated and interact with syntax, continuing through the late processing stages, which is different from the case of Indo-European languages. Plus, Chinese sentence comprehension may rely on semantic cues to a greater degree than Indo-European languages do. Semantic information of the clause’s constituent words may have an impact on the syntactic order of Chinese relative clauses, but the time course of their interaction remains unsettled. 2. Methods 2.1. Discussion This study adopted an eye-tracking paradigm to explore how semantics functions when Chinese native speakers process Chinese relative clauses by examining the semantic factors governing the word order variations. This study manipulated two syntactic variables and a semantic variable to explore when semantics is activated and interacts with syntax and how it affects syntax during the time course of Chinese relative clause processing. The results indicated that semantics was activated and interacted with syntax during the early and late processing stages of Chinese relative clauses. First, this study confirmed the activation and interaction of syntax and semantics in Chinese RC-embedded sentences during the early and late processing stages, which supported the claims of the concurrent model that syntactic and semantic systems both make use of the information of lexical entry in a concurrent manner so as to construct sentence representations interactively even from the early processing stages. Second, this study confirmed that lexical semantic factors governed the word order variation that is possible for a subset of relative clauses in Mandarin Chinese. Specifically, the subject-extraction relative clause which modified a concrete head noun had a co-occurrence preference for inner modifier nominal, with the numeral-classifier sequence preceding the subject relative clause and the head noun, forming constructions as “NCL + SRC+ CN,” while the subject-extraction relative clause which modified an abstract head noun had a co-occurrence preference for outer modifier nominal, forming such a construction as “SRC + NCL + AN,” indicating the change of word order is accompanied and influenced by the change of semantics, and the influence was conversely embodied by the syntactic order, consequently forming a “syntax-semantics” interface.

English passives and unaccusatives share similarities in both syntactic derivation and semantic properties of the subject argument. However, similarities in syntactic derivation have primarily been discussed in the literature as a core trigger of prevalent overpassivization errors with unaccusative verbs by second language learners of English. In this study, we conducted two experiments to investigate which cue, either syntactic similarity or semantic similarity, is active for incorrectly applying passive frames to unaccusative verbs. The first experiment assessed whether learners represent unaccusatives as sharing a syntactic derivation with passives. Based on the assumption that stress patterns reflect syntactic derivations, participants judged acceptability of stress patterns of intransitives and passives. The results did not provide conclusive evidence that L2 learners treat unaccusatives and passives as sharing a common syntactic derivation. Even the five most native-like learners showed residual optionality, and their divergent performance on passive versus intransitive constructions indicates that highly advanced learners may still lack fully distinct syntactic representations for the two types of intransitives. In the second experiment, we investigated whether learners instead rely on thematic information. The results show that learners consistently rated unaccusative subjects as less agentive than unergative subjects, indicating that they recognize the thematic-role similarity between unaccusatives and passives. Taken together, the findings suggest that semantic similarity between passives and unaccusatives, rather than syntactic identity, drives learners' overpassivization behavior.