Scrambling (linguistics)
Scrambling is a syntactic phenomenon wherein sentences can be formulated using a variety of different word orders without a substantial change in meaning.
When using discourse phrasal categories, what would typically be notated as "CP" becomes ForceP which will specify the clausal type (i.e., declarative, interrogative, etc.).
This movement has been proposed to be driven by the structural constraint 'EPP' (extended projection principle), which selects for a phrasal category as its specifier.
Scrambling is most common in morphologically rich languages with overt case markers, which help to keep track of how entities relate to a verb.
Japanese relies heavily on case markers to determine the roles of constituents, allowing word order to be flexible without ambiguity.
As you can see, in this table, despite the ordering of the agent (i.e., one who carries out action) 'Mary' and the patient (i.e., thing being acted upon) "cake" changing, there is not difference in their core meaning.
The canonical sentence "Mary cake eats" would still be an appropriate answer, but the scrambled configuration emphasizes the "new" information.
Studies (Yamashita, 1997)[5] show that scrambled sentences in Japanese do not impose a processing penalty, unlike in some other languages.
Case markers enable the parser to immediately assign syntactic roles, reducing reliance on word order.
This indicates that: 1) Arguments are not strictly hierarchically ordered; 2) Constituents attach directly to the clause, with case markers providing necessary cues for syntactic and semantic interpretation.
The following examples from German illustrate typical instances of scrambling: dassthatdertheMannmandertheFrauwomandietheBohnenbeansgabgavedass der Mann der Frau die Bohnen gabthat the man the woman the beans gave'that the man gave the woman the beans'These examples illustrate scrambling in the midfield of a subordinate clause in German.
All six clauses are acceptable, whereby the actual order that appears is determined by pragmatic considerations such as emphasis (i.e., Focus and Topic).
In this regard, definite pronouns are frequent candidates to undergo scrambling: weilbecausemichmedietheKinderkidsoftoftenärgernbotherweil mich die Kinder oft ärgernbecause me the kids often bother'because the kids often bother me'obwhetherunsusjemandsomeonehelfenhelpwirdwillob uns jemand helfen wirdwhether us someone help will'whether someone will help us'The canonical position of the object in German is to the right of the subject (i.e., SOV).
'The past participle erwähnt has been topicalized in this sentence, but its object, the pronoun das, appears on the other side of the finite verb.
That is, one cannot scramble a constituent out of one clause into another in all cases: Grammatical Sentence Sieshehathasgesagt,saiddassthatwirwedasthatmachendosollten.shouldSie hat gesagt, dass wir das machen sollten.she has said that we that do should'She said that we should do that.
'Ungrammatical Sentence*Sieshehathasdasthatgesagt,said,dassthatwirwemachendosollten.should*Sie hat das gesagt, dass wir machen sollten.she has that said, that we do shouldThe first example has canonical word order.
Scrambling in Persian play a significant role in organizing information structure, especially in topicalization and contrasive focus.
Czech's lack of overt articles or fixed positions for noun phrases allows for flexible word order.
The EPP property ensures that these specific constituents are moved overtly to the left periphery (CP phase).
Classical Latin and Ancient Greek were known for a more extreme type of scrambling known as hyperbaton, defined as a "violent displacement of words".
'The two nouns (subject and object) are placed side-by-side, with both corresponding adjectives extraposed on the opposite side of the verb, in a non-embedding fashion.
'What slender Youth bedew'd with liquid odors // Courts thee on (many) Roses in some pleasant cave, // Pyrrha ...?
'[12]Glossed interlinearly, the lines are as follows: Quiswhich.NOM.M.SGmultāmany.ABL.F.SGgracilisslender.NOM.M.SGtēyou.ACC.SGpuerboy.NOM.M.SGininrōsārose.ABL.F.SGQuis multā gracilis tē puer in rōsāwhich.NOM.M.SG many.ABL.F.SG slender.NOM.M.SG you.ACC.SG boy.NOM.M.SG in rose.ABL.F.SGperfūsusinfused.NOM.M.SGliquidīsliquid.ABL.M.PLurgeturges.3SGodōribusodors.ABL.M.PLperfūsus liquidīs urget odōribusinfused.NOM.M.SG liquid.ABL.M.PL urges.3SG odors.ABL.M.PLgrātōpleasant.ABL.N.SGPyrrhaPyrrha.VOC.F.SGsubunderantrō?cave.ABL.N.SGgrātō Pyrrha sub antrō?pleasant.ABL.N.SG Pyrrha.VOC.F.SG under cave.ABL.N.SGBecause of the case, gender and number marking on the various nouns, adjectives and determiners, a careful reader can connect the discontinuous and interlocking phrases Quis ... gracilis ... puer, multā ... in rōsā, liquidīs ... odōribus in a way that would be impossible in English.
Many supporters of this theory defend their stance with the argument that there is little solid evidence as to what the trigger for any supposed movement is, although many theorize that an EPP feature of some variety could be the answer.
Some claim that base-generation fares better here also, as the different orders that constituents may show are supposedly dependent on a base generation operation "merge".
At present, the general consensus is that what exactly is going on in scrambling is still unknown, but that movement is the dominant theory with some possible "enrichment" from base-generation operations.
[13] John 'Haj' Ross, who was the first to begin formulating research on scrambling, made the initial suggestion that this was a clause-bound operation.
This was the first indication that scrambling is not a uniform operation across all languages, and its varying degrees of movement or word order change are heavily language-dependent.
A theory of syntax that rejects the subject-predicate division of traditional grammar (Sentence → NP+VP) and assumes relatively flat structures (that lack a finite VP constituent) will acknowledge no discontinuity in this example.
This fact means that scrambling is generally acknowledged as one of the primary discontinuity types (in addition to topicalization, wh-fronting, and extraposition).
