To construct the sentenceBeethoven like(s) Schubert(ignoring tense^197 ), we unify the indices numbered 3 in (1) with the
indices numbered 5 in (2), and similarly the 4s with the 6s. Note that phonology has no 3 and 4 indices, so nothing in
the words alone tells us in what order they are pronounced. Rather, the linear order in phonology comes from the
general interface rule that lines up phonological and syntactic linear order (Chapter 5, example (15)).
The doubly indexed nodes in (3) are notationally equivalent to the intersecting dashed lines in section11.8.2: these are
nodes that unify the open variable in the material above with the material below, which satisfies the variable.
An overallcondition on the well-formedness of a sentence is that all its open variables must be satisfied. For instance,
if only one of the variables in (1) is satisfied, we get the ungrammatical Beethoven like(s)or like(s) Schubert.^198
Argument satisfaction is not confined to arguments of verbs. For instance, the nounbridehas a semantic argument,
optionally expressed in syntax. If it is expressed, the general linking conditions between syntax and conceptual
structure result in the following two possibilities:
380 SEMANTIC AND CONCEPTUAL FOUNDATIONS
(^197) Theinterested readercanincorporatethetensebyusingthelexicalentriesfor regular and irregular verbsinsection6.2. Themismatchbetween thesyntacticand conceptual
position of tense, mentioned in section 1.6, complicates matters a bit.
(^198) We set aside the imperative sentenceLike Schubert, which is grammatical. In imperatives, the conceptual variable is satisfied by you and is not required to link to syntax or
phonology. Mechanisms for accomplishing this.are available in theories such as HPSG and LFG, and I won't go into them here. Such an analysis may be moregenerally
applicable to“pro-drop”languages such as Italian and Spanish, in whichany contextually understood subject can be left unexpressed in syntax and phonology, and still
more generally to languages like Korean, where all syntactic arguments are optional (section 5.8). The theory does not require us to represent unexpressed semantic
arguments as empty NPs, as demanded in syntactocentric architectures.