scholarly journals A Note on VP-ellipsis Regarding Get-passives in English

2012 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 867-874
Author(s):  
Kim,Sun-Woong
Keyword(s):  
Vp Ellipsis

VP-ellipsis, Stripping, and the Functions of the Delimiter –to in Korean

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

Operator-variable binding in the initial state: A cross-linguistic study of VP ellipsis structures in Chinese and English

1996 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-34 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fangfang Guo ◽  
Claire Foley ◽  
Yu-Chin Chien ◽  
Chi-Pang Chiang ◽  
Barbara Lust
Keyword(s):  
Initial State ◽  
Variable Binding ◽  
Linguistic Study ◽  
Vp Ellipsis ◽  
Chinese And English ◽  
Operator Variable

Interpretation of reflexive anaphora in second language VP-ellipsis: Relevance Theory and paradigms of explanation

2004 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 256-280 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xosé Rosales Sequeiros
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Relevance Theory ◽  
Experimental Results ◽  
Comprehension Strategies ◽  
Processing Cost ◽  
L2 Learners ◽  
Vp Ellipsis ◽  
Processing Effort ◽  
Maximal Relevance ◽  
The Impact

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.

An Asymmetry in Voice Mismatches in VP-Ellipsis and Pseudogapping

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

Knowledge of Variable Binding in VP-Ellipsis: Language Acquisition Research and Theory Converge

Syntax ◽  
2003 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 52-83 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claire Foley ◽  
Zelmira Nunez del Prado ◽  
Isabella Barbier ◽  
Barbara Lust
Keyword(s):  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Variable Binding ◽  
Vp Ellipsis

scholarly journals VP ellipsis without indices

2015 ◽  
pp. 239
Author(s):  
Daniel Hardt ◽  
Nicholas Asher ◽  
Julie Hunter
Keyword(s):  
Empirical Basis ◽  
Resolution Process ◽  
Process View ◽  
The Status ◽  
Discourse Relations ◽  
Vp Ellipsis ◽  
Node Labels

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.

scholarly journals When is a Verb not a Verb?

Nordlyd ◽  
10.7557/12.11 ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Carson Schütze
Keyword(s):  
Central Issue ◽  
High Position ◽  
Vp Ellipsis ◽  
Categorial Status ◽  
Entire Distribution

Changes are proposed to the categorial status traditionally accorded to Aux-related and verbal elements in the clause, and the new taxonomy is applied in implementing the old insight that <em>be</em> should be analyzed as the default, semantically empty verb. The central issue is when a verb-like element does (not) count as categorially a V for distributional purposes. The major proposals are: 1) to remove <em>be</em> and <em>have</em> from the category Aux and treat them as Vs; 2) to separate out participles from genuine tensed and bare verbs; 3) to group <em>do</em> with modals, rather than with <em>have</em> and <em>be</em>, into a category Mood that also includes a null indicative morpheme. This scheme is used to account for the entire distribution of the forms of <em>be</em> just by treating it as V with no properties. <em>Be</em> fulfills two requirements that cannot always be met by contentful verbs: first, it satisfies the syntactico-semantic need for Tense to c-command a clause-mate V (the “V Requirement”); second, it satisfies the morphosyntactic need for participial affixes ( <em>-ing, -en</em>) to have hosts. It is shown how the former requirement derives the exceptionally high position of finite <em>be</em> by base-generating it above negation etc., rather than raising it across. VP-ellipsis data provide independent support for this treatment. Finally, some tentative suggestions are offered for how the V Requirement might be derived from deeper principles, while still allowing for the fact that it is apparently not fully enforced in languages with null copulas.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document