Voice Mismatch and Syntactic Identity

2011 ◽  
Vol 42 (3) ◽  
pp. 470-490 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hidekazu Tanaka

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.

2015 ◽  
pp. 451
Author(s):  
Scott AnderBois

Since Merchant 2001, it has been widely agreed that the licensing condition on Sluicing is at least partly semantic in nature. This paper argues that the relevant semantic condition is one of symmetric entailment over a semantics which includes not only truth-conditional information, but also issues in the sense of Groenendijk & Roelofsen 2009. One kind of evidence for the proposal comes from expressions like doubly-negated inde?nites and implicit passive agents which do not license Sluicing despite truth-conditional equivalence to overt inde?nites. In addition to these facts, the paper examines novel data which show that Sluicing is not licensed by even overt inde?nites inside of appositive relative clauses, arguing that these facts (and related facts regarding VP-Ellipsis) follow from the account together with an independently motivated semantics for appositives.


2010 ◽  
Vol 20 ◽  
pp. 451 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott AnderBois

Since Merchant 2001, it has been widely agreed that the licensing condition on Sluicing is at least partly semantic in nature. This paper argues that the relevant semantic condition is one of symmetric entailment over a semantics which includes not only truth-conditional information, but also issues in the sense of Groenendijk & Roelofsen 2009. One kind of evidence for the proposal comes from expressions like doubly-negated inde?nites and implicit passive agents which do not license Sluicing despite truth-conditional equivalence to overt inde?nites. In addition to these facts, the paper examines novel data which show that Sluicing is not licensed by even overt inde?nites inside of appositive relative clauses, arguing that these facts (and related facts regarding VP-Ellipsis) follow from the account together with an independently motivated semantics for appositives.


2018 ◽  
Vol 49 (3) ◽  
pp. 559-576 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pauline Jacobson

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.


2016 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 93-110
Author(s):  
So-Jee Kim ◽  
Sae Youn Cho
Keyword(s):  

2004 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 256-280 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xosé Rosales Sequeiros

This article explores second language (L2) learners’ interpretation of reflexive anaphora in VP-Ellipsis by critiquing the work of Ying (2003), who applies Relevance Theory to explain elliptical anaphora. It argues against four claims made in his analysis: that L2 learners apply maximal relevance in anaphoric interpretation; that a procedural account of the impact of referential sentences on VP-ellipsis disambiguation is appropriate; that an account of anaphoric interpretation preferences should be based on processing cost; and that differences in experimental results between intermediate and advanced L2 learners are due to the use of different comprehension strategies (see Sperber, 1994). Instead, it argues: that it is not maximal but rather optimal relevance that is at work; that the key in disambiguating anaphora in VP-elliptical sentences is the achievement of an optimally relevant interpretation; that the role of contextual assumptions in anaphora resolution is to enable L2 learners to derive enough contextual effects to make it worth their effort and, in doing so, identifying (as a side effect) what they take to have been the intended referent; and that what is crucial in the use of comprehension strategies is not processing effort, but rather consistency with the second principle of relevance. Overall, all these factors provide the basis for an alternative and more comprehensive explanation of the experimental results discussed by Ying.


2008 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 169-179 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason Merchant
Keyword(s):  

Syntax ◽  
2003 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 52-83 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claire Foley ◽  
Zelmira Nunez del Prado ◽  
Isabella Barbier ◽  
Barbara Lust

2015 ◽  
pp. 239
Author(s):  
Daniel Hardt ◽  
Nicholas Asher ◽  
Julie Hunter

This paper compares two views on the status of indices in syntactic and logical representations: on a {\it structural view}, indices are syntactic formants on a par with node labels and phrase bracketings, and are thus a part of the logical forms that are derived from syntactic representations. On the {\it process view}, an index is not a syntactic object at all, but rather, an indication of the output of a resolution process. In this paper we argue that a recent body of data provides a clear empirical basis for distinguishing between these two views of indices. We argue that cases of sloppy VP ellipsis pose insurmountable problems for the structural view of indices, while these problems do not arise for the process view. Furthermore, we show that this resolution process is constrained by the semantics of various discourse relations.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document