P-omission in ellipsis in Spanish: Evidence for syntactic identity

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura Stigliano
Keyword(s):  
Syntactic Identity

Case mismatching in Icelandic clausal ellipsis

2019 ◽  
Vol 56 (2) ◽  
pp. 399-439
Author(s):  
JIM WOOD ◽  
MATTHEW BARROS ◽  
EINAR FREYR SIGURÐSSON
Keyword(s):  
Hybrid Identity ◽  
Case Marking ◽  
Syntactic Approach ◽  
Syntactic Identity

In this article, we take a detailed look at clausal ellipsis in Icelandic, a hitherto understudied phenomenon. We focus on case-matching and case-mismatching facts in fragment responses. We argue that although case matching is the norm, constrained instances of case mismatching strongly suggest that there must be silent structure in the ellipsis site, and some syntactic identity condition. We outline these patterns in detail, and provide an analysis that assumes a post-syntactic approach to case marking, and a hybrid identity condition along the lines of Chung (2013).

The λ-calculus is ω-incomplete

1974 ◽  
Vol 39 (2) ◽  
pp. 313-317 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. D. Plotkin
Keyword(s):  
The Other ◽  
Free Variables ◽  
Syntactic Identity ◽  
Image Position

The ω-rule in the λ-calculus (or, more exactly, the λK-β, η calculus) isIn [1] it was shown that this rule is consistent with the other rules of the λ-calculus. We will show the rule cannot be derived from the other rules; that is, we will give closed terms M and N such that MZ = NZ can be proved without using the ω-rule, for each closed term Z, but M = N cannot be so proved. This strengthens a result in [4] and answers a question of Barendregt.The language of the λ-calculus has an alphabet containing denumerably many variables a, b, c, … (which have a standard listing e1, e2, …), improper symbolsλ, ( , ) and a single predicate symbol = for equality.Terms are defined inductively by the following:(1) A variable is a term.(2) If M and N are terms, so is (MN); it is called a combination.(3) If M is a term and x is a variable, (λx M) is a term; it is called an abstraction.We use ≡ for syntactic identity of terms.If M and N are terms, M = N is a formula.BV(M), the set of bound variables in M, and FV(M), its free variables, are defined inductively byA term M is closed iff FV(M) = ∅.

Syntactic identity and ellipsis

2011 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hidekazu Tanaka
Keyword(s):  
Syntactic Identity

scholarly journals Syntactic identity, Parallelism and accommodated antecedents

Lingua ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 166 ◽  
pp. 172-198 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gary Thoms
Keyword(s):  
Syntactic Identity

Voice Mismatch and Syntactic Identity

2011 ◽  
Vol 42 (3) ◽  
pp. 470-490 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hidekazu Tanaka
Keyword(s):  
Semantic Condition ◽  
Vp Ellipsis ◽  
Syntactic Identity

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.

Head-Based Syntactic Identity in Sluicing

2019 ◽  
Vol 50 (2) ◽  
pp. 253-283 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deniz Rudin
Keyword(s):  
Concrete Application ◽  
Syntactic Identity ◽  
Syntactic Differences ◽  
Verbal Complex

This article puts forward two distinct arguments regarding the condition on identity between antecedent and ellipsis site that governs the grammaticality of sluices. The first argument is that the viability of a requirement of syntactic identity has been too hastily dismissed. Such a condition is viable if syntactic identity is not assessed over the entire deleted constituent, but instead is assessed head-by-head for each head stranded in the ellipsis site. This allows syntactic differences associated with material that has moved out of the ellipsis site to not affect the calculation of syntactic identity. The second argument is that the bestiary of possible mismatches under sluicing can be given a uniform syntactic characterization: all and only material originating outside of the verbal complex can be mismatched under sluicing. The restriction of identity conditions to the verbal complex is implementable in many (but not all) approaches to ellipsis identity; I provide a concrete application of it to the proposed head-based syntactic identity condition.

Some People Think There Is Neg Raising, and Some Don’t: Neg Raising Meets Ellipsis

2018 ◽  
Vol 49 (3) ◽  
pp. 559-576 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pauline Jacobson
Keyword(s):  
Polarity Reversal ◽  
Syntactic Process ◽  
Vp Ellipsis ◽  
Syntactic Identity ◽  
New Evidence

The interaction of Neg raising (NR) with VP-ellipsis (VPE) shows that if NR is a rule of grammar, then the conditions on VPE must be exact syntactic identity and must be insensitive to major semantic differences between the so-called antecedent and the meaning understood at the ellipsis site. In particular, the conditions on ellipsis must be so blind to the semantics that they allow a polarity reversal between the antecedent and the understanding at the ellipsis site. But the behavior of indexicals shows quite clearly that meaning is what counts for the understanding of VPE, not form. This in turn provides new evidence against a syntactic process of NR.

Syntactic Identity in Sluicing: How Much and Why

2013 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-44 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandra Chung
Keyword(s):  
Argument Structure ◽  
The Other ◽  
Implicit Argument ◽  
Syntactic Identity ◽  
Abstract Case ◽  
The One ◽  
Semantic Identity ◽  
New Evidence

Research on sluicing has not yet reached consensus on whether the identity condition on this ellipsis construction is syntactic or semantic. Evidence from Chamorro and English is presented that over and above semantic identity, sluicing requires limited syntactic identity. The limited syntactic identity condition involves argument structure on the one hand and abstract Case on the other. This approach is shown to account for a range of novel and familiar sluicing patterns in the two languages. It also provides new evidence for the idea that the Chamorro antipassive is an implicit argument construction.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document