Specializations > Morphosyntax

Dynamic Syntax

<< < (2/2)

Matt Longhorn:
I found this site, that seems a touch like the Relevance Theory Online Bibliography that Dr Yus maintains but for Dynamic Syntax

http://www.dynamicsyntax.org/publications

They give a link to one of the books that is free on ResearchGate
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/298544659_Dynamics_of_Language_An_Introduction

Matt Longhorn:
I am confused. I am going back over the book I linked to above, and writing up notes and starting to learn the rules and terms rather than just reading to understand. On page 37 it looks like they have flipped the top tree node from a designation of Y to X on the tree growth, and similarly flipped the designations on the daughters. Is there an obvious reason for this

(2.14) Introduction (Rule)
{. . . {. . .?Ty(Y ). . . ♦} . . . }
{. . . {. . .?Ty(Y ), ?<↓0>Ty(X), ?<↓1>Ty(X → Y ), . . . ♦} . . . }

(2.15) Introduction (Treegrowth)
?T y(X), ♦ → ?Ty(X), ?<↓0>Ty(Y ), ?<↓1>Ty(Y → X), ♦

Also, does anyone know of any good ios keyboards that I can use on my ipad to type the logic symbols?

Matt Longhorn:
Sorry, another question.
Page 34-35, I am getting confused re. the numbering here

In figure 10, is the number 0 next to the first up arrow indicative of the current node being an argument node, rather than describing anything about the mother node that it relates to? If so, this seems to be the reverse from figure 2.11 where the number annotating the down arrows seems to relate to the position of the daughter node as an argument (left) or functor (right) node

Also, according to 2.11d =, it looks like this is being read bottom up - this seems to be different from 2.10b?