Accessible Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter (A) November 5, 2020

Mixed evidence for crosslinguistic dependency length minimization

Zoey Liu

Abstract

We investigate whether and to what extent the principle of Dependency Length Minimization (DLM) predicts crosslinguistic syntactic ordering preferences. More specifically, we ask: (i) is there a typological tendency for shorter constituents to appear closer to their syntactic heads in constructions with flexible constituent orderings? (ii) how does the extent of DLM in these constructions vary for languages with different structural characteristics? Our study uses prepositional and postpositional phrase (PP) typology as a testbed. Leveraging multilingual corpora for 34 languages, we focus on sentences with verb phrases that have exactly two PP dependents on the same side of the head verb, the ordering of which under certain conditions contains flexibility. Overall we show a pronounced preference for shorter PPs to be closer to the head verb, establishing the first large-scale quantitative evidence that DLM exists in crosslinguistic syntactic alternations. Furthermore, we present evidence that while the efficacy of DLM depends on the specific ordering structures of different language types, across languages there appears to be a much stronger preference for DLM when the two PPs appear postverbally, compared to no or a much weaker tendency for shorter dependencies when the two PPs occur preverbally. This contrast is the most visible in mixed-type languages with head-initial PPs that can appear both after or before the head verb. Within the limited number of rigid OV languages in our dataset, which have head-final PPs before the head verb, we observe no robust tendency for DLM, in contrast to the patterns in languages with head-initial PPs after the head verb. This contradicts previous findings of a longer-before-short preference in preverbal orders of head-final languages.


Corresponding author: Zoey Liu, Department of Linguistics, University of California, Davis One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA 95616, USA, E-mail:

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Kenji Sagae, John Hawkins and Emily Morgan for their insightful comments and feedback on the manuscript.

  1. Notes: Part of the work in the paper has been accepted as two conference presentations in both the 2018 and 2019 Society for Computation in Linguistics (SCiL). The two extended abstracts for the presentations, titled Dependency Length Minimization and Lexical Frequency in Prepositional Phrase Ordering in English (2018) and Quantifying Structural and Lexical Constraints in PP Ordering Typology (2019) respectively, can be accessed online in the proceedings of SCiL. Since they are abstracts, they are not counted as archived publications.

Appendix Descriptive statistics of total VP instances

The number of total VP instances examined in each language under different case scenarios is presented below.

Table 2:

Descriptive statistics of total VP instances for languages with head-initial PPs after the head verb.

LanguageTotal VP instances
Danish198
Norwegian1323
Swedish488
Arabic561
Hebrew964
Greek127
Indonesian357
Galician221
Latvian59
Irish83
Serbian177
Slovak114

Table 3:

Descriptive statistics of total VP instances for Afrikaans, Persian and Chinese.

LanguageTotal VP instances
Afrikaans92
Persian870
Chinese111

Table 4:

Descriptive statistics of total VP instances for languages with head-final PPs before the verb.

LanguageTotal VP instances
Japanese166
Hindi1152
Urdu294

Table 5:

Descriptive statistics of total VP instances when head-initial PPs appear after the verb, in languages where head-initial PPs can also appear before the verb.

LanguageTotal VP instances
English1250
German6400
Dutch459
Bulgarian164
Ukrainian237
Slovenian200
Russian2179
Czech3093
Croatian305
Polish936
French2236
Spanish2672
Portuguese504
Romanian564
Italian2188
Catalan714

Table 6:

Descriptive statistics of total VP instances when head-initial PPs appear before the verb, in languages where head-initial PPs can also appear after the verb.

LanguageTotal VP instances
English55
German14892
Dutch625
Bulgarian77
Ukrainian121
Slovenian248
Russian1655
Czech1640
Croatian151
Polish318
French151
Spanish182
Portuguese70
Romanian62
Italian330
Catalan115

References

Arnold, Jennifer E., Anthony Losongco, Thomas Wasow & Ryan Ginstrom. 2000. Heaviness vs. newness: The effects of structural complexity and discourse status on constituent ordering. Language 76(1). 28–55. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2000.0045.Search in Google Scholar

Behaghel, Otto. 1932. Deutsche Syntax: eine geschichtliche Darstellung. Heidelberg: Carl Winters Universitätsbuchhandlung.Search in Google Scholar

Bender, Emily M. 2009. Linguistically naïve!= language independent: Why NLP needs linguistic typology. In Proceedings of the EACL 2009 workshop on the interaction between linguistics and computational linguistics: virtuous, vicious or vacuous?, 26–32. Athens, Greece: Association for Computational Linguistics.Search in Google Scholar

Bresnan, Joan, Anna Cueni, Tatiana Nikitina & R. Harald Baayen. 2007. Predicting the dative alternation. In Gerlof Bouma, Irene Kraemer & Joost Swarts (eds.), Cognitive foundations of interpretation, 69–94. Amsterdam: Royal Netherlands Academy of Science.Search in Google Scholar

Cai, Lei. 2013. The semantic functions of prepositions and postpositions in Chinese spatial circumpositions – A perspective from language typology. In Pengyuan Liu & Qi Su (eds.), Chinese lexical semantics, 248–257. Berlin & Heidelberg: Springer.Search in Google Scholar

Chang, Franklin. 2009. Learning to order words: A connectionist model of heavy NP shift and accessibility effects in Japanese and English. Journal of Memory and Language 61(3). 374–397. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2009.07.006.Search in Google Scholar

Choi, Hye-Won. 2007. Length and order: A corpus study of Korean dative-accusative construction. Discourse and Cognition 14(3). 207–227. https://doi.org/10.15718/discog.2007.14.3.207.Search in Google Scholar

De Smedt, Koenraad J. M. J. 1994. Parallelism in incremental sentence generation. In Geert Adriaens & Udo Hahn (eds.), Parallel natural language processing. 421–447. Norwood: Ablex.Search in Google Scholar

Dryer, Matthew S. 1991. SVO languages and the OV: VO typology. Journal of Linguistics 27(2). 443–482. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0022226700012743.Search in Google Scholar

Dyer, William Edward. 2017. Minimizing integration cost: A general theory of constituent order. University of California, Davis dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Dryer, Matthew S. & Martin Haspelmath (eds.). 2013. The World Atlas of Language Structures Online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. .Search in Google Scholar

Enfield, Nicholas J. 2009. ‘Case relations’ in Lao, a radically isolating language. In Andrej Malchukiv & Andrew Spencer (eds.), The Oxford handbook of case, 808–819. Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Ferreira, Fernanda & Benjamin Swets. 2002. How incremental is language production? Evidence from the production of utterances requiring the computation of arithmetic sums. Journal of Memory and Language 46(1). 57–84. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.2001.2797.Search in Google Scholar

Futrell, Richard, Kyle Mahowald & Edward Gibson. 2015a. Large-scale evidence of dependency length minimization in 37 languages. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 112(33). 10336–10341. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1502134112.Search in Google Scholar

Futrell, Richard, Kyle Mahowald & Edward Gibson. 2015b. Quantifying word order freedom in dependency corpora. In Proceedings of the third International Conference on Dependency Linguistics (DEPLING 2015), 91–100. Uppsala, Sweden: Uppsala University.Search in Google Scholar

Gibson, Edward. 1998. Linguistic complexity: Locality of syntactic dependencies. Cognition 68(1). 1–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0010-0277(98)00034-1.Search in Google Scholar

Gibson, Edward. 2000. The dependency locality theory: A distance-based theory of linguistic complexity. In Alec Marantz, Yasushi Miyashita & Wayne O’Neil (eds.), Image, language, brain, 95–126. Cambridge, MA.: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar

Gibson, Edward & H.-H. Iris Wu. 2013. Processing Chinese relative clauses in context. Language & Cognitive Processes 28(1/2). 125–155. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690965.2010.536656.Search in Google Scholar

Gil, David. 2017. Chapter 19 – Isolating-monocategorial-associational language. In Henri Cohen & Claire Lefebvre (eds.), Handbook of categorization in cognitive science, 471–510. San Diego: Elsevier.Search in Google Scholar

Gildea, Daniel & T. Florian Jaeger. 2015. Human languages order information efficiently. arXiv preprint arXiv:1510.02823.Search in Google Scholar

Gildea, Daniel & David Temperley. 2007. Optimizing grammars for minimum dependency length. In Proceedings of the 45th Annual Meeting of the Association of Computational Linguistics, 184–191. Prague: Association for Computational Linguistics.Search in Google Scholar

Gildea, Daniel & David Temperley. 2010. Do grammars minimize dependency length?. Cognitive Science 34(2). 286–310. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-6709.2009.01073.x.Search in Google Scholar

Gulordava, Kristina, Paola Merlo & Benoit Crabbé. 2015. Dependency length minimisation effects in short spans: A large-scale analysis of adjective placement in complex noun phrases. In Proceedings of the 53rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and the 7th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (volume 2: short papers), 477–482. Beijing, China: Association for Computational Linguistics.Search in Google Scholar

Hawkins, John A. 1983. Word order universals. New York: Academic Press.Search in Google Scholar

Hawkins, John A. 1994. A performance theory of order and constituency. Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Hawkins, John A. 1999. The relative order of prepositional phrases in English: Going beyond manner – place – time. Language Variation and Change 11(3). 231–266. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0954394599113012.Search in Google Scholar

Hawkins, John A. 2004. Efficiency and complexity in grammars. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Hawkins, John A. 2014. Cross-linguistic variation and efficiency. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Hawkins, John A. 2019. Word-external properties in a typology of Modern English: A comparison with German. English Language and Linguistics 23(3). 701–727. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1360674318000060.Search in Google Scholar

Jaeger, T. Florian & Elisabeth J. Norcliffe. 2009. The cross-linguistic study of sentence production. Language and Linguistics Compass 3(4). 866–887. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-818x.2009.00147.x.Search in Google Scholar

Jaeger, T. Florian & Harry Tily. 2011. On language ‘utility’: Processing complexity and communicative efficiency. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science 2(3). 323–335. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.126.Search in Google Scholar

Kempen, Gerard & Karin Harbusch. 2004. A corpus study into word order variation in German subordinate clauses: Animacy affects linearization independently of grammatical function assignment. In Thomas Pechmann & Christopher Habel (eds.), Multidisciplinary approaches to language production, vol. 157, 173–182. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar

Kiparsky, Paul. 1996. The shift to head-initial VP in Germanic. In Höskuldur Thráinsson, Samuel David Epstein & Steve Peter (eds.), Studies in comparative Germanic syntax, vol. 2, 140–179. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Search in Google Scholar

Kizach, Johannes. 2012. Evidence for weight effects in Russian. Russian Linguistics 36(3). 251–270. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11185-012-9096-0.Search in Google Scholar

Konieczny, Lars. 2000. Locality and parsing complexity. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 29(6). 627–645. .Search in Google Scholar

Konieczny, Lars & Philipp Döring. 2003. Anticipation of clause-final heads: Evidence from eye-tracking and SRNs. In Proceedings of the ICCS/ASCS Joint International Conference on Cognitive Science, 13–17.Search in Google Scholar

Levshina, Natalia. 2019. Token-based typology and word order entropy: A study based on universal dependencies. Linguistic Typology 23(3). 533–572. https://doi.org/10.1515/lingty-2019-0025.Search in Google Scholar

Levy, Roger. 2013. Memory and surprisal in human sentence comprehension. In Roger P. G. van Gompel (ed.), Sentence processing, 78–114. Hove: Psychology Press.Search in Google Scholar

Levy, Roger, Evelina Fedorenko & Edward Gibson. 2013. The syntactic complexity of Russian relative clauses. Journal of Memory and Language 69(4). 461–495. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2012.10.005.Search in Google Scholar

Li, Charles N & Sandra A. Thompson. 1974. Co-verbs in Mandarin Chinese: Verbs or prepositions?. Journal of Chinese Linguistics 2(3). 257–278.Search in Google Scholar

Liu, Haitao. 2008. Dependency distance as a metric of language comprehension difficulty. Journal of Cognitive Science 9(2). 159–191.Search in Google Scholar

Liu, Haitao. 2010. Dependency direction as a means of word-order typology: A method based on dependency treebanks. Lingua 120(6). 1567–1578. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2009.10.001.Search in Google Scholar

Liu, Haitao, Yiyi Zhao & Wenwen Li. 2009. Chinese syntactic and typological properties based on dependency syntactic treebanks. Poznań Studies in Contemporary Linguistics 45(4). 509–523. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10010-009-0025-3.Search in Google Scholar

Liu, Zoey. 2019. A comparative corpus analysis of PP ordering in English and Chinese. In Proceedings of the First Workshop on Quantitative Syntax (quasy, syntaxfest 2019), 33–45. Paris, France: Association for Computational Linguistics. .Search in Google Scholar

Lohmann, Arne & Tayo Takada. 2014. Order in NP conjuncts in spoken English and Japanese. Lingua 152. 48–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2014.09.011.Search in Google Scholar

Lohse, Barbara, John A. Hawkins & Thomas Wasow. 2004. Domain minimization in English verb-particle constructions. Language 80(2). 238–261. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2004.0089.Search in Google Scholar

MacDonald, Maryellen C. 2013. How language production shapes language form and comprehension. Frontiers in Psychology 4. 226. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00226.Search in Google Scholar

MacWhinney, Brian, Elizabeth Bates & Reinhold Kliegl. 1984. Cue validity and sentence interpretation in English, German, and Italian. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 23(2). 127–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-5371(84)90093-8.Search in Google Scholar

Mei, Kuang. 1980. Is modern Chinese really a SOV language?. Cahiers de Linguistique Asie Orientale 7(1). 23–45. https://doi.org/10.1163/19606028-90000247.Search in Google Scholar

Merlo, Paola. 2015. Predicting word order universals. Journal of Language Modelling 3(2). 317–344. https://doi.org/10.15398/jlm.v3i2.112.Search in Google Scholar

Momma, Shota, L. Robert Slevc & Colin Phillips. 2016. The timing of verb selection in Japanese sentence production. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 42(5). 813. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000195.Search in Google Scholar

O’Horan, Helen, Yevgeni Berzak, Ivan Vulić, Roi Reichart & Anna Korhonen. 2016. Survey on the use of typological information in natural language processing. In Proceedings of COLING 2016, the 26th International Conference on Computational Linguistics: Technical Papers, 1297–1308. Osaka, Japan: The COLING 2016 Organizing Committee.Search in Google Scholar

Östling, Robert. 2015. Word order typology through multilingual word alignment. In Proceedings of the 53rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and the 7th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (vol. 2: Short Papers), 205–211. Beijing, China: Association for Computational Linguistics.Search in Google Scholar

Ponti, Edoardo Maria, Helen O’horan, Yevgeni Berzak, Ivan Vulić, Roi Reichart, Thierry Poibeau, Ekaterina Shutova & Anna Korhonen. 2019. Modeling language variation and universals: A survey on typological linguistics for natural language processing. Computational Linguistics 45(3). 559–601. https://doi.org/10.1162/coli_a_00357.Search in Google Scholar

Prince, Ellen F. 1988. On pragmatic change: The borrowing of discourse functions. Journal of Pragmatics 12(5). 505–518. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(88)90045-8.Search in Google Scholar

Rajkumar, Rajakrishnan, Marten van Schijndel, Michael White& William Schuler. 2016. Investigating locality effects and surprisal in written English syntactic choice phenomena. Cognition 155. 204–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2016.06.008.Search in Google Scholar

Rasekh-Mahand, Mohammad, Mojtaba Alizadeh-Sahraie & Raheleh Izadifar. 2016. A corpus-based analysis of relative clause extraposition in Persian. Ampersand 3. 21–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amper.2016.02.001.Search in Google Scholar

Ros, Idoia. 2018. Minimizing dependencies across languages and speakers. Evidence from Basque, Polish and Spanish and native and non-native bilinguals. University of the Basque Country dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Sapir, Edward. 1921. Language: An introduction to the study of speech. New York: Harcourt, Brace &Co.Search in Google Scholar

Siewierska, Anna (ed.). 1998. Constituent order in the languages of Europe. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar

Sun, Chao-Fen & Talmy Givón. 1985. On the so-called SOV word order in Mandarin Chinese: A quantified text study and its implications. Language. 329–351. https://doi.org/10.2307/414148.Search in Google Scholar

Temperley, David. 2007. Minimization of dependency length in written English. Cognition 105(2). 300–333. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2006.09.011.Search in Google Scholar

Temperley, David & Daniel Gildea. 2018. Minimizing syntactic dependency lengths: Typological/cognitive universal?. Annual Review of Linguistics 4(1). 67–80. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-linguistics-011817-045617.Search in Google Scholar

Tsunoda, Tasaku, Sumie Ueda & Yoshiaki Itoh. 1995. Adpositions in word-order typology. Linguistics 33(4). 741–762. https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1995.33.4.741.Search in Google Scholar

Ueno, Mieko & Maria Polinsky. 2009. Does headedness affect processing? A new look at the VO–OV contrast. Journal of Linguistics 45(3). 675–710. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0022226709990065.Search in Google Scholar

Vasishth, Shravan & Richard L. Lewis. 2006. Argument-head distance and processing complexity: Explaining both locality and antilocality effects. Language 82(4). 767–794. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2006.0236.Search in Google Scholar

Wang, Dingquan & Jason Eisner. 2017. Fine-grained prediction of syntactic typology: Discovering latent structure with supervised learning. Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics (TACL) 5. 147–161. https://doi.org/10.1162/tacl_a_00052.Search in Google Scholar

Wang, William S.-Y. & Chaofen Sun. 2015. The Oxford handbook of Chinese linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Wasow, Thomas. 1997. End-weight from the speaker’s perspective. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 3. 347–361. .Search in Google Scholar

Wasow, Thomas & Jennifer Arnold. 2003. Post-verbal constituent ordering in English. Topics in English Linguistics 43. 119–154.Search in Google Scholar

Wiechmann, Daniel & Arne Lohmann. 2013. Domain minimization and beyond: Modeling prepositional phrase ordering. Language Variation and Change 25(1). 65–88. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0954394512000233.Search in Google Scholar

Yamashita, Hiroko. 2002. Scrambled sentences in Japanese: Linguistic properties and motivations for production. Text – Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse 22(4). 597–634. https://doi.org/10.1515/text.2002.023.Search in Google Scholar

Yamashita, Hiroko & Franklin Chang. 2001. “Long before short” preference in the production of a head-final language. Cognition 81(2). B45–B55. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0010-0277(01)00121-4.Search in Google Scholar

Zeman, Daniel, Joakim Nivre, Mitchell Abrams, Noëmi Aepli, Željko Agić, Lars Ahrenberg, Gabriele Aleksandravičiūtė, Lene Antonsen, Katya Aplonova, Maria Jesus Aranzabe, Gashaw Arutie, Masayuki Asahara, Luma Ateyah, Mohammed Attia, Aitziber Atutxa, Liesbeth Augustinus, Elena Badmaeva, Miguel Ballesteros, Esha Banerjee, Sebastian Bank, Verginica Barbu Mititelu, Victoria Basmov, Colin Batchelor, John Bauer, Sandra Bellato, Kepa Bengoetxea, Yevgeni Berzak, Irshad Ahmad Bhat, Riyaz Ahmad Bhat, Erica Biagetti, Eckhard Bick, Agnė Bielinskienė, Rogier Blokland, Victoria Bobicev, Loïc Boizou, Emanuel Borges Völker, Carl Börstell, Cristina Bosco, Gosse Bouma, Sam Bowman, Adriane Boyd, Kristina Brokaitė, Aljoscha Burchardt, Marie Candito, Bernard Caron, Gauthier Caron, Tatiana Cavalcanti, Gülşen Cebiroğlu Eryiğit, Flavio Massimiliano Cecchini, Giuseppe G. A Celano, Slavomír Čéplö, Savas Cetin, Fabricio Chalub, Jinho Choi, Yongseok Cho, Jayeol Chun, Alessandra T. Cignarella, Silvie Cinková, Aurélie Collomb, Çağrı Çöltekin, Miriam Connor, Marine Courtin, Elizabeth Davidson, Marie-Catherine de Marneffe, Valeria de Paiva, Elvis de Souza, Arantza Diaz de larraza, Carly Dickerson, Bamba Dione, Peter Dirix, Kaja Dobrovoljc, Timothy Dozat, Kira Droganova, Puneet Dwivedi, Hanne Eckhoff, Marhaba Eli, Ali Elkahky, Binyam Ephrem, Olga Erina, Tomaž Erjavec, Aline Etienne, Wograine Evelyn, Richárd Farkas, Hector Fernandez Alcalde, Jennifer Foster, Cláudia Freitas, Kazunori Fujita, Katarına Gajdošová, Daniel Galbraith, Marcos Garcia, Moa Gärdenfors, Sebastian Garza, Kim Gerdes, Filip Ginter, Iakes Goenaga, Koldo Gojenola, Memduh Gökırmak, Yoav Goldberg, Xavier Gómez Guinovart, Berta González Saavedra, Bernadeta Griciūtė, Matias Grioni, Normunds Grūzıtis, Bruno Guillaume, Céline Guillot-Barbance, Nizar Habash, Jan Hajič, Jan Hajič jr, Mika Hämäläinen, Linh HàM, Na-Rae Han, Kim Harris, Dag Haug, Johannes Heinecke, Felix Hennig, Barbora Hladká, Jaroslava Hlaváčová, Florinel Hociung, Petter Hohle, Jena Hwang, Takumi Ikeda, Radu Ion, Elena Irimia, lájıdé Ishola, Tomáš Jelınek, Anders Johannsen, Fredrik Jørgensen, Markus Juutinen, Hüner Kaşıkara, Andre Kaasen, Nadezhda Kabaeva, Sylvain Kahane, Hiroshi Kanayama, Jenna Kanerva, Boris Katz, Tolga Kayadelen, Jessica Kenney, Václava Kettnerová, Jesse Kirchner, Elena Klementieva, Arne Köhn, Kamil Kopacewicz, Natalia Kotsyba, Jolanta Kovalevskaitė, Simon Krek, Sookyoung Kwak, Veronika Laippala, Lorenzo Lambertino, Lucia Lam, Tatiana Lando, Septina Dian Larasati, Alexei Lavrentiev, John Lee, Phng Lê Hồng, Alessandro Lenci, Saran Lertpradit, Herman Leung, Cheuk Ying Li, Josie Li, Keying Li, KyungTae Lim, Maria Liovina, Yuan Li, Nikola Ljubešić, Olga Loginova, Olga Lyashevskaya, Teresa Lynn, Vivien Macketanz, Aibek Makazhanov, Michael Mandl, Christopher Manning, Ruli Manurung, Cătălina Mărănduc, David Mareček, Katrin Marheinecke, Héctor Martınez Alonso, André Martins, Jan Mašek, Yuji Matsumoto, Ryan McDonald, Sarah McGuinness, Gustavo Mendonça, Niko Miekka, Margarita Misirpashayeva, Anna Missilä, Cătălin Mititelu, Maria Mitrofan, Yusuke Miyao, Simonetta Montemagni, Amir More, Laura Moreno Romero, Keiko Sophie Mori, Tomohiko Morioka, Shinsuke Mori, Shigeki Moro, Bjartur Mortensen, Bohdan Moskalevskyi, Kadri Muischnek, Robert Munro, Yugo Murawaki, Kaili Müürisep, Pinkey Nainwani, Juan Ignacio Navarro Horñiacek, Anna Nedoluzhko, Gunta Nešpore-Bērzkalne, Lng Nguyễn Th, Huyền Nguyễn Th Minh, Yoshihiro Nikaido, Vitaly Nikolaev, Rattima Nitisaroj, Hanna Nurmi, Stina Ojala, Atul Kr. Ojha, Adéday Olúòkun, Mai Omura, Petya Osenova, Robert Östling, Lilja Øvrelid, Niko Partanen, Elena Pascual, Marco Passarotti, Agnieszka Patejuk, Guilherme Paulino-Passos, Angelika Peljak-Łapińska, Siyao Peng, Cenel-Augusto Perez, Guy Perrier, Daria Petrova, Slav Petrov, Jason Phelan, Jussi Piitulainen, Tommi A Pirinen, Emily Pitler, Barbara Plank, Thierry Poibeau, Larisa Ponomareva, Martin Popel, Lauma Pretkalniņa, Sophie Prévost, Prokopis Prokopidis, Adam Przepiórkowski, Tiina Puolakainen, Sampo Pyysalo, Peng Qi, Andriela Rääbis, Alexandre Rademaker, Loganathan Ramasamy, Taraka Rama, Carlos Ramisch, Vinit Ravishankar, Livy Real, Siva Reddy, Georg Rehm, Ivan Riabov, Michael Rießler, Erika Rimkutė, Larissa Rinaldi, Laura Rituma, Luisa Rocha, Mykhailo Romanenko, Rudolf Rosa, Davide Rovati, Valentin Rosca, Olga Rudina, Jack Rueter, Shoval Sadde, Benoît Sagot, Shadi Saleh, Alessio Salomoni, Tanja Samardžić, Stephanie Samson, Manuela Sanguinetti, Dage Särg, Baiba Saulıte, Yanin Sawanakunanon, Nathan Schneider, Sebastian Schuster, Djamé Seddah, Wolfgang Seeker, Mojgan Seraji, Mo Shen, Atsuko Shimada, Hiroyuki Shirasu, Muh Shohibussirri, Dmitry Sichinava, Aline Silveira, Natalia Silveira, Maria Simi, Radu Simionescu, Katalin Simkó, Mária Šimková, Kiril Simov, Aaron Smith, Isabela Soares-Bastos, Carolyn Spadine, Antonio Stella, Milan Straka, Jana Strnadová, Alane Suhr, Umut Sulubacak, Shingo Suzuki, Zsolt Szántó, Dima Taji, Yuta Takahashi, Fabio Tamburini, Takaaki Tanaka, Isabelle Tellier, Guillaume Thomas, Liisi Torga, Trond Trosterud, Anna Trukhina, Reut Tsarfaty, Francis Tyers, Sumire Uematsu, Zdeňka Urešová, Larraitz Uria, Hans Uszkoreit, Andrius Utka, Sowmya Vajjala, Daniel van Niekerk, Gertjan van Noord, Viktor Varga, Eric Villemonte de la Clergerie, Veronika Vincze, Lars Wallin, Abigail Walsh, Jing Xian Wang, Jonathan North Washington, Maximilan Wendt, Seyi Williams, Mats Wirén, Christian Wittern, Tsegay Woldemariam, Tak-sum Wong, Alina Wróblewska, Mary Yako, Naoki Yamazaki, Chunxiao Yan, Koichi Yasuoka, Marat M. Yavrumyan, Zhuoran Yu, Zdeněk Žabokrtský, Amir Zeldes, Manying Zhang & Hanzhi Zhu. 2019. Universal Dependencies 2.5. LINDAT/CLARIN digital library at the Institute of Formal and Applied Linguistics (ÚFAL), Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Charles University. .Search in Google Scholar

Zhang, Niina Ning. 2013. Adpositions. In Rint Sybesma, Wolfgang Behr, Yueguo Gu, Zev Handel & C.-T. James Huang James Myers (eds.), Encyclopedia of Chinese language and linguistics, 116–122. Leiden: Brill.Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2020-11-05
Published in Print: 2020-11-26

© 2020 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston