Span Theory Sample Clauses

Span Theory. A crucial element that permits the characterization of φ-Correspondence as heterogenous relations and that distinguishes φ-Correspondence from ABC is the φ-head. Headed constituents are pervasive in linguistics. The concept of head is applied to syllable structure (Xxxxxx 2006, Xxxxx 2002), element theory (Xxxx et al. 1985; and others), stress/tone interaction (xx Xxxx 2002), and autosegmental assimilation (Halle & Vergnaud 1990, Jurgec 2011), as well as being a central concept in the theory of stress (Prince & Xxxxxxxxx, 1993/2004) and in syntax (Xxxxxxx, 1965). XxXxxxxx (2004) is a theory of headed agreement that together with ABC most resembles φ-Correspondence. Span theory is very similar to φ-Correspondence in that the harmonizing feature of these domains is determined by a head, which is freely assigned to some elements by GEN. Nevertheless, two important differences concern the definition of the elements in the agreement relation and the mechanisms that govern the distribution of the heads in the output. Following Hansson (2001/2010), Span Theory can be subcategorized as a “strict locality” theory of assimilation (Xxxxxxxx 1995, Xxxxx 1999). Strict locality theories are defined by two characteristics: a linear span that defines the domain of harmony and the spreading of the harmonizing features to all the segments in the span. Spans consist of a contiguous segmental string, but in surface correspondence, there is no such strict requirement. Segments in the same domain may be separated by other segments, which can even belong to other correspondence relations (e.g., if there are multiple harmonies). Strict locality has in fact been criticized because all segments between the trigger and the target of assimilation must be permeated by the spreading feature (Hansson 2001/2010: 20–23, 210–221).5 5 Locality is a well-known issue in autosegmental theories, where it has been circumvented using a variety of strategies (Xxxxxxxx & Xxxx 1995, Jurgec 2011, among others). Another property of span theory is that all segments in a span are pronounced with the feature value of the head. In contrast, in φ-Correspondence, harmony is only favored by the fact that there are constraints that favor feature identity and that there is a faithfulness constraint that protects the featural content of the head. The head, per se, does not impose any restriction on its domain, it just favors it (more closely resembling X’Xxxxx 2007). The other important difference between Span ...
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to Span Theory

  • Theory Counseling is designed to assist an employee in eliminating a problem so that formal discipline will not be necessary.

  • No Consequential Damages Other than the Liquidated Damages heretofore described and the indemnity obligations set forth in Article 18.1, in no event shall any Party be liable under any provision of this Agreement for any losses, damages, costs or expenses for any special, indirect, incidental, consequential, or punitive damages, including but not limited to loss of profit or revenue, loss of the use of equipment, cost of capital, cost of temporary equipment or services, whether based in whole or in part in contract, in tort, including negligence, strict liability, or any other theory of liability; provided, however, that damages for which a Party may be liable to another Party under separate agreement will not be considered to be special, indirect, incidental, or consequential damages hereunder.

  • No consequential claims Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Article 22, the indemnities herein provided shall not include any claim or recovery in respect of any cost, expense, loss or damage of an indirect, incidental or consequential nature, including loss of profit, except as expressly provided in this Agreement.

  • INDEMNIFICATION RELATING TO THIRD PARTY RIGHTS The Contractor will also indemnify and hold the Authorized Users harmless from and against any and all damages, expenses (including reasonable attorneys' fees), claims, judgments, liabilities and costs that may be finally assessed against the Authorized Users in any action for infringement of a United States Letter Patent, or of any copyright, trademark, trade secret or other third party proprietary right except to the extent such claims arise from the Authorized Users gross negligence or willful misconduct, provided that the State shall give Contractor: (i) prompt written notice of any action, claim or threat of infringement suit, or other suit, (ii) the opportunity to take over, settle or defend such action, claim or suit at Contractor's sole expense, and (iii) assistance in the defense of any such action at the expense of Contractor. If usage shall be enjoined for any reason or if Contractor believes that it may be enjoined, Contractor shall have the right, at its own expense and sole discretion to take action in the following order of precedence: (i) to procure for the Authorized User the right to continue Usage (ii) to modify the service or Product so that Usage becomes non-infringing, and is of at least equal quality and performance; or (iii) to replace said service or Product or part(s) thereof, as applicable, with non-infringing service or Product of at least equal quality and performance. If the above remedies are not available, the parties shall terminate the Contract, in whole or in part as necessary and applicable, provided the Authorized User is given a refund for any amounts paid for the period during which Usage was not feasible. The foregoing provisions as to protection from third party rights shall not apply to any infringement occasioned by modification by the Authorized User of any Product without Contractor’s approval. In the event that an action at law or in equity is commenced against the Authorized User arising out of a claim that the Authorized User's use of the service or Product under the Contract infringes any patent, copyright or proprietary right, and Contractor is of the opinion that the allegations in such action in whole or in part are not covered by the indemnification and defense provisions set forth in the Contract, Contractor shall immediately notify the Authorized User and the Office of the Attorney General in writing and shall specify to what extent Contractor believes it is obligated to defend and indemnify under the terms and conditions of the Contract. Contractor shall in such event protect the interests of the Authorized User and secure a continuance to permit the Authorized User to appear and defend its interests in cooperation with Contractor, as is appropriate, including any jurisdictional defenses the Authorized User may have. This constitutes the Authorized User’s sole and exclusive remedy for patent infringement, or for infringement of any other third party proprietary right.

  • Incidental and Consequential Damages Contractor shall be responsible for incidental and consequential damages resulting in whole or in part from Contractor’s acts or omissions. Nothing in this Agreement shall constitute a waiver or limitation of any rights that City may have under applicable law.

  • Liability for Incidental and Consequential Damages Contractor shall be responsible for incidental and consequential damages resulting in whole or in part from Contractor’s acts or omissions.

  • Consequential Damages Neither party to this Agreement shall be liable to the other party for special, indirect or consequential damages under any provision of this Agreement or for any special, indirect or consequential damages arising out of any act or failure to act hereunder.

  • Liability to Third Parties The Member shall not be liable for the debts, obligations or liabilities of the Company, including under a judgment, decree or order of a court.

  • No Harassment Contractor does not engage in unlawful harassment, including sexual harassment, with respect to any persons with whom Contractor may interact in the performance of this Agreement, and Contractor takes all reasonable steps to prevent harassment from occurring.

  • NO LIABILITY FOR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES In no event shall either Party be liable to the other Party for, and no arbitral panel is authorized to award, any punitive, special, indirect or consequential damages of any kind or character resulting from or arising out of this Agreement, including, without limitation, loss of profits or business interruptions, however they may be caused.

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.