Search

A bound pronoun in the subject position of a finite embedded clause renders the clause boundary relatively transparent to relations ordinarily confined to monoclausal, control, and raising configurations. For example, too/ enough-movement structures involving a finite clause boundary are degraded in sentences like * This book is too long [for John to claim [that Bill read ___ in a day]] but improved when the finite clause has a bound pronominal subject as in ? This book is too long [for John1 to claim [that he1 read ___ in a day]]. This bound pronoun effect holds across a wide range of phenomena including too/ enough-movement, tough-movement, gapping, comparative deletion, antecedent-contained deletion, quantifier scope interaction, multiple questions, pseudogapping, reciprocal binding, and multiple sluicing; we confirm the effect via a sentence acceptability experiment targeting some of these phenomena. Our account has two crucial ingredients: (a) bound pronouns optionally enter the derivation with unvalued ϕ-features and (b) phases are defined in part by convergence, so that under certain conditions, unvalued features void the phasal status of CP and extend the locality domain for syntactic operations.

This paper is concerned with how NP/DP or PP survives as a remnant in English pseudogapping when an intransitive verb plus a preposition is used in a postcedent clause. In this regard, this paper makes two major claims: first, the criterion for reanalysis vs. non-reanalysis of the intransitive verb and preposition depends on semantic properties, and second, focus movement cum-deletion mechanism yields the remnant of NP/DP or PP.

In this paper, we propose an analysis of pseudogapping in Hybrid Type-Logical Categorial Grammar (Hybrid TLCG; Kubota 2010,Kubota and Levine 2012). Pseudogapping poses a particularly challenging problem for previous analyses in both the transformational and nontransformational literature. The flexible notion of constituency countenanced in categorial grammar in general (including Hybrid TLCG) enables a simple analysis of pseudogapping that overcomes the problems for previous approaches. In addition, we show that Hybrid TLCG offers a useful platform for comparing different types of CG (and analytic ideas embodied in them) within a single framework with a linguist-friendly notation. In the context of an analysis of pseudogapping, this enables us to compare the adequacies of two types of treatments of discontinuous pseudogapping. We believe that this type of cross-framework comparison of different analytic ideas is useful for the purpose of testing the predictions of different types of analyses that can respectively be formulated in only one or the other of the more conservative types of CG.

The main aim of this article is to argue that Japanese allows verb-stranding verb phrase ellipsis (VVPE). For this purpose, I examine data involving null adjuncts, and propose a new generalization about the distribution of null adjuncts, which can easily be accounted for if VVPE is available in Japanese. Furthermore, I demonstrate that null adjunct sentences with overt objects are subject to the same constraint as pseudogapping sentences in English are. Given that pseudogapping is a particular instance of VP-ellipsis (Jayaseelan, in Linguist Anal 20:64–81, 1990; Lasnik, in Papers on minimalist syntax, MIT working papers in linguistics, 1995, Fragments: Studies in ellipsis and gapping, 1999), this strongly suggests that null adjunct sentences involve VP-ellipsis.

This contribution considers how dependency grammars (DGs) view ellipsis phenomena. For the most part, comprehensive explorations of particular ellipsis phenomena are rare in the tradition of DG, but when ellipsis is examined, there is a tendency to posit the existence of null material/nodes to accommodate aspects of ellipsis. One recent development in the DG tradition that is particularly relevant to the analysis of ellipsis is the catena unit. A catena is a word or combination of words that are linked together by dependencies. Most ellipsis phenomena are eliding catena, whereby these catenae are often not constituents. Given the catena unit, a more economical approach to ellipsis has become possible, one that does not need to resort to movement to vacate the remnant from the encompassing constituent before that encompassing constituent is elided.

One of the fundamental tenets of (most versions of) Categorial Grammar is that the syntax and semantics work ‘in tandem’: the syntax proves expressions well-formed while the semantics assigns them a meaning. Under this view (termed Direct Compositionality), it is difficult at best to state a rule deleting or silencing material under identity with some other overt linguistic material in the discourse context, which suggests that the common wisdom that there is ‘silent linguistic material’ is incorrect. This chapter explores an alternative way to view VP-ellipsis without silent linguistic material. Using conventions developed in earlier work within variable-free semantics and Direct Compositionality, it is shown that such an approach extends immediately to Antecedent Contained Deletion (which is just a special case of ‘transitive verb phrase ellipsis’) as well as to pseudogapping. The chapter also briefly explores the analysis of fragment answers to questions without invoking silent linguistic material, and shows that some of the apparent challenges to this view are in fact not real challenges.

Timothy Osborne has surveyed a very large number of published introductions to grammatical analysis, all of which share the assumption that syntactic argumentation is to be conducted without reference to the meanings, uses and contexts of the example sentences. The purpose of Osborne’s article is to examine how well syntactic tests identify subphrasal strings as constituents. The aim of this discussion note is not to engage directly with this issue but to consider, from the viewpoint of Functional Discourse Grammar (FDG), the validity of the autonomous syntax assumption shared by Osborne and the authors whose work he considers. The note dwells on the hidden presence of functional and interactive notions in a methodology based on syntactic ‘tests’ and it is suggested that the difficulties encountered by that methodology (notably with regard to coordination) can be resolved insightfully by FDG with its four levels of analysis.

This paper develops a Case/case-theoretic account for what Merchant (2008) calls voice mismatch in ellipsis constructions of English. Merchant (ibid.) reports that VIP ellipsis as an elision of smaller size VP allows voice mismatch, but Pseudogapping and Sluicing as an elision of bigger size vP/TP do not. However, Tanaka (2011) argues against Merchant`s dichotomy in voice mismatch between VP ellipsis and Pseudogapping, reporting that voice mismatch in both types of ellipsis is permissible or not while interacting with what Kehler (2000) calls discourse coherence relations between ellipsis and antecedent clauses. Departing from Kehler`s (2000) insight, we suggest that vP undergoes ellipsis in a resemblance discourse relation, but VP does so in a cause / effect discourse relation. Given the asymmetry in the size of ellipsis in tandem with discourse relations, we argue that since Accusative as well as Nominative Case is checked outside VP, the VP to be elided can meet the identity condition on ellipsis with its antecedent VP as the object element in the former and the subject one in the latter or vice versus have not been Case-checked yet, thus being identical in terms of Case-feature at the point of derivation building a VP.

This paper considers the anaphoric status of the pro-form fer-ho (do it) in Catalan [This paper contains some ideas included in Busquets (2005)]. I discuss some anaphoric properties of fer-ho as DEEP ANAPHORA. I also compare these properties to those of other types of anaphora, like VPE and pseudogapping (PG). I show that its interpretation is strongly constrained by information and discourse structure.

According to Merchant’s (2008) MaxElide, ellipsis must target the biggest deletable constituent when it contains an A’-trace. This straightforwardly accounts for the well-known contrast between the matrix IP-ellipsis and the matrix VP-ellipsis in Sluicing environment. However, it is observed that targeting certain types of embedded VP induces a much improved status, giving an illusion that a MaxElide violation is ameliorated. In this paper, I argue that it is indeed an illusion by claiming that the improved status arises since MaxElide alone, but not (a version of) Parallelism, is violated. This entails that when both MaxElide and Parallelism are violated, an cumulative effect arises, inducing much severe degradedness. We argue that the severe degradedness of the matrix VP-ellipsis represents such a case.

Gapping and its related constructions have been defying a satisfactory analysis. Especially, scope relations and the very nature of coordination in Gapping have been challenging to a successful formulation of clause structure. Recently, Kim (2013) proposes an analysis of Gapping in Korean based on multidominance phrase structure. In this article, we will show a fundamental conceptual problem and some empirical potential problems with this analysis. As an alternative, we will support a Johnson-style analysis based on the ATP movement plus VP ellipsis for both English and Korean Gapping, which involves low VP coordination.

Verb Phrase Ellipsis, in particular, is taken to be very rare in languages other than English. However, recent literature has pointed out that a Verb Phrase Ellipsis-like construction does in fact exist in other languages, but may be masked due to the fact that the main verb raises to INFL in such languages, a process known as Verb Stranding Verb Phrase Ellipsis (VSVPE). This paper addresses two main issues: 1) whether such a construction in Hebrew patterns with VPE in English or with Pseudogapping; via an examination of voice mismatch tolerance following Merchant (2013) 2) After establishing that Hebrew is a VSVPE language and controlling for external variables such as independent object drop, this paper tests which constituent in particular is targeted in the ellipsis process. It is concluded that VSVPE languages target vP for ellipsis, not VP, nor PP, as opposed to recent accounts. In other words, they pattern with Pseudogappig in including higher constituents (vP, not VP) in the ellipsis) more than they do with VPE. Other Verb-Raising to INFL languages are predicted to behave similarly with respect to which constituent is targeted for ellipsis.

This squib argues against Merchant’s (2008) analysis of voice mismatches in VP-deletion and pseudogapping by pointing out that it makes a false prediction when extended to sentences in which more than one VP-deletion operation applies.

Elided VPs and their antecedent VPs can mismatch in voice, with passive VPs being elided under apparent identity with active antecedent VPs, and vice versa. Such voice mismatches are not allowed in any other kind of ellipsis, such as sluicing and other clausal ellipses. These latter facts appear to indicate that the identity relation in ellipsis is sensitive to syntactic form, not merely to semantic form. The VPellipsis facts fall into place if the head that determines voice is external to the phrase being elided, here argued to be vP; such an account can only be framed in approaches that allow syntactic features to be separated from the heads on which they are morphologically realized. Alternatives to this syntactic, articulated view of ellipsis and voice either undergenerate or overgenerate.

This paper introduces a novel unit of syntactic analysis, the catena (Latin for chain; plural catenae). The catena is defined in a dependency-based grammar as a word or a combination of words that is continuous with respect to dominance. According to this definition, any dependency tree or any subtree (complete or partial) of a dependency tree qualifies as a catena. The paper demonstrates that idioms are stored as catenae and that the elided material of ellipsis mechanisms (e.g., answer fragments, gapping, stripping, VP ellipsis, pseudogapping, sluicing, and comparative deletion) is a catena. Constituents are always catenae, but many catenae are not constituents. Based on the flexibility and utility of the catena concept, the claim is put forth and defended that the catena is the fundamental unit of syntax, not the constituent.

On the basis of an asymmetry between VP-deletion and pseudogapping, Merchant (2008a) concludes that ellipsis is conditioned by syntax. This article demonstrates that both pseudogapping and VP-deletion potentially allow voice mismatch. The unacceptable cases of voice mismatch in these constructions are attributed to a discourse factor (Kehler 2000, 2002). Nevertheless, since sluicing does not allow voice mismatch (Merchant 2001, 2007) even in the same context that allows voice mismatch in VP-ellipsis, Merchant's (2007, 2008a) conclusion is still valid. A syntactic condition on ellipsis is proposed, based on a semantic condition from Takahashi and Fox 2005. Kehler's discourse explanation is phrased in a revised format.

This paper investigates the contrast between VP and TP deletion/Sluicing in regard to repair by ellipsis, which has recently been one of the most puzzling aspects of ellipsis. Lasnik (2001) indicates that unlike TP deletion which amnesties island violations induced by wh-movement, in VP deletion the elided VP has to be a simple one when extraction takes place out of it. The situation is more striking as the extraction can be Wh-movement which can typically move long distance in syntactic derivation. Fox and Lasnik (2003) provide a principled analysis for impossible extraction from elided complex VP in contrast to possibile extraction from elided island-involving TP, but here we seek a better one. To this end we first examine extraction out of elided VP to its periphery, then extraction out of elided VP to clausal edge, and finally extraction out of elided complex VP. We show that movement of the survivor out of elided VP in a simple clause can proceed via object shift, heavy NP shift or quantifier raising that English grammar has in its resources. However, extraction out of elided complex VP is prohibited owing to the well-known parallelism condition on deletion.

Pseudogapping is no misnomer. Despite their many tempting similarities, gapping and pseudogapping are distinct constructions. Pseudogapping is a special instance of VP-ellipsis, while gapping, I argue, is a special instance of across-the-board movement. Squeezing gapping into across-the-board movement has its own discomforts, however, which I suggest can be remedied by retailoring our syntax to include string-based output constraints. I sketch one such alteration that involves apparent Left Branch Condition violations.

L’A. propose une analyse des pseudogapping comme une sorte d'ellipse. Cette analyse tient compte d'une nouvelle observation concernant la distribution des quatificateurs dans ces constructions.

Pseudogapping is often treated as a combination of movement and ellipsis in current generative work. After reviewing a number of arguments against this type of analysis, I argue for an interpretive approach to pseudogapping, following Miller (1990). On the basis of corpus data and informant judgments, I then proceed to outline two factors, syntactic context and remnant type, which affect the acceptability of pseudogapping. The effects of the two factors are gradient and cumulative, in the sense of Keller (2000).

Fragmentary utterances such as ‘short’ answers and subsentential XPs without linguistic antecedents are proposed to have fully sentential syntactic structures, subject to ellipsis. Ellipsis in these cases is preceded by A′-movement of the fragment to a clause-peripheral position; the combination of movement and ellipsis accounts for a wide range of connectivity and anti-connectivity effects in these structures. Fragment answers furthermore shed light on the nature of islands, and contrast with sluicing in triggering island effects; this is shown to follow from an articulated syntax and the PF theory of islands. Fragments without linguistic antecedents are argued to be compatible with an ellipsis analysis, and do not support direct interpretation approaches to these phenomena.

English Pseudogapping constructions share some surface similarities with both Gapping and Verb Phrase Ellipsis (VPE). Levin (1978, 1979 [main text]) concludes, however, that Pseudogapping is transformationally unrelated to both Gapping and VPE. We argue that this conclusion is only partially correct. Gapping and Pseudogapping are transformationally related in that they both involve the application of verb movement, in particular sideward movement of the main verb. We take Johnson's (1994) ATB Movement analysis of Gapping as an important precedent in this regard, and we draw from proposals of Nunes (2001) and Nunes and Uriagereka (2000) for the possibility of sideward movement out of coordinate structures and adjunct clauses. After pursuing the sideward movement approach to Pseudogapping (and ultimately Gapping as well), we outline some important empirical differences between Pseudogapping and VPE that we think raise substantial problems for any analysis that treats Pseudogapping and VPE on a par (e.g., Jayaseelan 1990, Lasnik 1995, 1999a, 1999b). We present evidence for a fundamental syntactic difference between Pseudogapping and VPE, and conclude that the VPE analysis of Pseudogapping cannot be maintained.

This paper argues that Principle A is not `an anywhere principle',contrary to Belletti and Rizzi (1988) and much subsequent work, but must apply relatively late in derivations, perhaps at the end of each phase (Chomsky 2000). Evidence comesprincipally from the analysis of pseudo-gapping, in which the ellipsis remnant isextracted to a position outside of the VP which deletes. Anaphors cannot appear asellipsis remnants when the antecedent is within the deleted material. The interaction ofanaphora and ellipsis is mirrored by restrictions on scrambling of anaphors in Dutchobject scrambling, and a unified analysis is proposed. The paper draws implicationsfor other theories of constituency, such as Phillips (1996), as well as for the A-status of the ellipsis remnant, contra Jayaseelan (1999). Given that the ellipsis remnant is focused, focus cannot be explicitly represented in syntactic representations, but rathermust be interpretive in nature.

Boeckx and Stjepanovic (2001) claim to have evidence from the analysis of pseudogapping that head movement is best viewed as occurring, not in the overt syntax, but in the PF component. In this squib I will show that all the movements that are needed in the analysis of pseudogapping are phrasal, hence that the analysis of pseudogapping says nothing about the place of head movement in the grammar

Piñon, Christopher (ed.); International audience; This paper presents the results of a large-scale investigation of the use of NP-remnant pseudogapping (PG) in the COCA corpus. Discourseconditions on the use of noncomparative and comparative PG are discussed. It is shown that the data raise problems for mainstream gener ative analyses involving remnant-raising and an alternative interpretive analysis is suggested. The question of whether PG is a subcase of VPE is discussed.

It is shown that postulating a Focus Phrase above vP enables us to explain such diverse phenomena as the Malayalam question word's position contiguous to V, the ‘remnant’ in English pseudogapping, the clause-final ‘floated’ focus marker in English, and the position of the ‘cleft focus’ in English and Malayalam clefts. Assuming a Kaynean view of the underlying structure of SOV languages, we argue that the ‘canonical’ positions to which the verb's internal arguments are moved in these languages are above this Focus Phrase. Postulating an iterable Topic Phrase above the Focus Phrase (and above the ‘canonical’ positions in SOV languages) enables us to account for the definiteness/specificity constraints on clause-internal scrambling in Malayalam, German and Dutch, and on object shift in Scandinavian. Finally, it is shown that all the functions attributed to an ‘outer’ Spec position of vP are better fulfilled by the Topic/Focus positions above vP that we postulated.

Comparatives are among the most extensively investigatedconstructions in generative grammar, yet comparativesinvolving attributive adjectives have received a relativelysmall amount of attention. This paper investigates a complexarray of facts in this domain that shows that attributivecomparatives, unlike other comparatives, are well-formed onlyif some type of ellipsis operation applies within thecomparative clause. Incorporating data from English, Polish,Czech, Greek, and Bulgarian, we argue that these facts supporttwo important conclusions. First, violations of Ross's LeftBranch Condition that involve attributive modifiers should notbe accounted for in terms of constraints on LF representations(such as the Empty Category Principle), but rather in terms ofthe principle of Full Interpretation at the PF interface. Second,ellipsis must be analyzed as deletion of syntactic material fromthe phonological representation. In addition, we present newevidence from pseudogapping constructions that favors anarticulated syntax of attributive modification in which certaintypes of attributive modifiers may occur outside DP.

Procrastinate (Chomsky 1993) favors covert movement; therefore, when movement is overt, it must have been forced to operate “early” by some special requirement, one that Chomsky codes into “strong features.” I compare Chomsky's three successive theories of strong features and argue that two ellipsis phenomena, pseudogapping and sluicing, provide evidence bearing on the nature of strong features. I argue that movement or ellipsis can rescue a derivation with a strong feature, and I conclude that PF crash is relevant either directly, as in Chomsky 1993, or indirectly, as in the theory presented in Chomsky 1995a augmented by the multiple-chain theory of pied-piping (especially as interpreted by Ochi (1998)).

In this paper, we propose an analysis of pseudogapping in Hybrid Type-Logical Categorial Grammar (Hybrid TLCG; Kubota 2010,Kubota and Levine 2012). Pseudogapping poses a particularly challenging problem for previous analyses in both the transformational and nontransformational literature. The flexible notion of constituency countenanced in categorial grammar in general (including Hybrid TLCG) enables a simple analysis of pseudogapping that overcomes the problems for previous approaches. In addition, we show that Hybrid TLCG offers a useful platform for comparing different types of CG (and analytic ideas embodied in them) within a single framework with a linguist-friendly notation. In the context of an analysis of pseudogapping, this enables us to compare the adequacies of two types of treatments of discontinuous pseudogapping. We believe that this type of cross-framework comparison of different analytic ideas is useful for the purpose of testing the predictions of different types of analyses that can respectively be formulated in only one or the other of the more conservative types of CG.