From competing theories to fieldwork: the challenge of an extreme agreement system

研究背景语言学是一门学科，它面临着其核心组成部分，即句法（句子结构）之间的几种理论之间似乎无法解决的竞争。进一步的进展要求我们澄清每个理论的具体预测是如何不同的。我们将创建一个框架来比较和评估句法的主要理论（HPSG，LFG和极简主义）的主张。我们通过专注于语法的一个核心领域来做到这一点，即一致性。具体来说，我们将使用达吉斯坦语阿尔奇的数据来分析每一种主要的理论，因为它具有非常丰富和复杂的一致性系统，当代句法理论在解释一致性时往往集中在不同语言中发现的复杂性的孤立实例上。为了确定为这些单独问题提出的解决方案的兼容性，我们需要扩大到一个完整的协议系统的全面考虑。阿尔奇提出了一个罕见的情况下，一种语言的协议系统挑战主要索赔发现在三个不同的句法理论。我们先前关于一致性的工作为我们提供了以一致的方式描述极端一致性系统所必需的理论工具。我们的类型学工作使我们意识到的范围内的形态和句法的可能性，在协议系统。我们早期对阿尔奇的研究，通过实地考察，导致了一个创新的电子词典的编纂，使我们能够评估不同的协议策略的频率。这将使我们能够研究协议系统如何在阿尔奇中发挥作用，以及它的不同组成部分如何相互作用。现有材料的范围，而不是一个独特的非书面语言与少数发言者，我们在实地工作的专业知识和良好的工作关系与社区，使之有可能调查的差异，协议，该系统允许。该项目将采用一种创新的调查和传播模式。它是围绕定期为期一天的研讨会，其中一个关键部分的协议系统的阿尔奇将分析根据三种理论，差异将讨论这些理论的代表，并进一步实地考察的要求将被指定。最早将在项目的第三个月通过一个Wiki开始开始传播。这将提供基本的阿尔奇数据，并参考注释语料库的阿尔奇，在线发布的平行维基。维基将有三种回应，有助于三种数据分析，HPSG，LFG和极简主义。这些浓缩的材料对于那些对任何一种主要的句法理论感兴趣的人，对于那些希望比较和对比这三种理论的人，以及那些想要接近一种具有极高句法要求的语言的人来说，都是有价值的。目标和目标1.为比较和评估句法理论提供一个可实现的框架。2.在Archi.3中对协议系统进行本体论上一致的描述。对具有挑战性的数据主体给出三个平行的句法解释。研究阿尔奇协议系统的功能和可变性的全方位。潜在的应用和好处明显的好处是对理论：以前从来没有句法理论被比较和对比在这样一个控制，严格和创新的方式。就我们对极端一致系统的理解而言，其好处也是相当大的，因为我们将有三个互补的观点，以及对频率数据的调查和对系统功能的研究，这往往超出了同步学家的主要兴趣。方法上的创新也应该提供一个模式，合作研究的问题，这是具有挑战性的固有的，因为该领域的理论多样性。

CONTEXT OF THE RESEARCHLinguistics is a discipline which faces a seemingly irresolvable competition between several theories of its central component, namely syntax (sentence structure). Further progress requires us to clarify how the concrete predictions of each theory differ. We will create a framework for comparing and evaluating the claims of leading theories of syntax (HPSG, LFG and Minimalism). We do this by focusing on one core area of syntax, namely agreement. Specifically, we shall use data from the Daghestanian language Archi, which has an outstandingly rich and complex agreement system, for analyses in each of the leading theories.When accounting for agreement, contemporary syntactic theories tend to concentrate on isolated instances of complexity found in different languages. To determine the compatibility of the solutions suggested for these separate problems, we need to scale up to a full account of a complete agreement system. Archi presents a rare case of a language whose agreement system challenges major claims found in three different syntactic theories. Our previous work on agreement gives us the theoretical apparatus necessary for describing an extreme agreement system in a consistent way. Our typological work makes us aware of the range of morphological and syntactic possibilities in agreement systems. Our earlier research on Archi, through fieldwork which led to the compiling of an innovative electronic dictionary, enables us to assess the frequencies of the different agreement strategies. This will allow us to investigate how the agreement system functions in Archi, and how its different components interact. The range of available materials, rather unique for an unwritten language with a small number of speakers, our expertise in fieldwork and the excellent working relations with the community make it possible to investigate the variation in agreement that the system allows. The project will employ an innovative model of investigation and dissemination. It is structured around regular day-long seminars, at which a key part of the agreement system of Archi will be analysed according to the three theories, the differences will be discussed by representatives of these theories, and further fieldwork requirements will be specified. Dissemination will begin as early as the third month of the project, through a Wiki. This will give the essential Archi data, and refer to the annotated corpus of Archi, published online in parallel to the Wiki. The Wiki will have three strands of responses, contributing to the three analyses of the data, in HPSG, LFG and Minimalism. These condensed materials will be of value for those interested in any one of the major theories of syntax, for those wishing to compare and contrast the three theories, and for those wanting to approach a language with extremely demanding syntax. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES1. Provide an implemented framework for comparing and evaluating syntactic theories. 2. Produce an ontologically consistent description of the agreement system in Archi.3. Give three parallel syntactic accounts of the body of challenging data.4. Investigate the full range of function and variability of the Archi agreement system.POTENTIAL APPLICATIONS AND BENEFITSThe obvious benefit is for theory: never before have syntactic theories been compared and contrasted in such a controlled, rigorous and innovative way. In terms of our understanding of extreme agreement systems, the benefits will also be considerable, since we shall have three complementary views, together with investigation of frequency data and research into the functioning of the system, which often lie outside syntacticians' main interests. The methodological innovations should also provide a model for collaborative research on problems which are challenging both inherently and because of the the theoritical diversity of the field.