Wider die Klammerparadoxie: Kombinatorische Illusionen beim Adjektivbezug auf NN-Komposita

This paper dealswith so-called “bracketing paradoxes” composed of an adjective and an NN compound, such as German katholisches Kirchenoberhaupt ‘catholic church.head’. In these constructions, the adjectivalmodifier seems to relate to the nominal non-head, thereby challenging the principle of compositionality. After summarizing some core empirical observations by Bergmann (1980) and reviewing relevant theoretical approaches (Larson 1998; Egg 2006; Beard 1991), the paper develops a novel formal semantic account that unmasks the alleged bracketing paradoxes as combinatorial illusions. The analysis developed here differs from Larson-style solutions in taking the adjective as point of departure (rather than the noun) and in adhering strictly to classic composition (rather than liberalizing the syntax-semantics interface). In short, there is no grammatically licensed linking of the adjectival modifier to the non-head of a nominal compound. What gives the impression of a syntax-semantics mismatch is a blending of compositional and pragmatic processes: Semantic composition warrants that the adjectival predicate is always linked to the referential argument of the nominal head. But, depending on the internal semantics of the adjective, semantic underspecificationmay emerge in the course of composition and call for a pragmatic specification of the adjectival predicate’s ultimate target. A general pragmatic parsimonity condition ensures that referents introduced by linguistic material will be chosen as best, “cheapest” target candidates whenever possible. This is why the nonhead argument is identified as a preferred ultimate target for the adjectival predicate. This is spelled out in detail for relational adjectives on the one hand (e. g. katholisches Kirchenoberhaupt) and qualitative adjectives on the other hand (e. g. gehobene Preisklasse ‘upper price.class’). One of themerits of the advocated analysis is that it can account straightforwardly for the blocking of well-known caricature examples (e. g. *vierstöckiger Hausbesitzer ‘four-storeyed house.owner’) and it provides an explanation for the reduced acceptability of borderline cases such as ?ambulanter Versorgungsauftrag ‘ambulant supply.mandate’. *Kontakt: Claudia Maienborn, Deutsches Seminar, Universität Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany, E-Mail: claudia.maienborn@uni-tuebingen.de Open Access. © 2020 Maienborn, publiziert von De Gruyter. Dieses Werk ist lizensiert unter einer Creative Commons Namensnennung 4.0 International Lizenz.