Non-finite VP ellipsis, Clefts, and Phase
1
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The present paper proposes that the well-known difference between ECM to vs. control to distinction with respect to VP ellipsis can be nicely explained under the theory of dynamic phasehood as it relates to ellipsis. Previous research tried to derive the ECM to vs. control to distinction with VP ellipsis either with syntactic agreement or with non-syntactic notions like prosody. Although the present paper does not have much to say about the latter, the former analysis is shown to be deficient and under-motivated. The proposed analysis of this paper can account for two more related observations: the multiple auxiliary effect and the relationship between verb types and extraction out of VP ellipsis. In a nutshell, the dynamic phasehood-based solution is shown to provide a better explanation of the difference of the two instances of infinitival to and be fruitfully extended to cover further empirical domain.
Abstract
The present paper proposes that the well-known difference between ECM to vs. control to distinction with respect to VP ellipsis can be nicely explained under the theory of dynamic phasehood as it relates to ellipsis. Previous research tried to derive the ECM to vs. control to distinction with VP ellipsis either with syntactic agreement or with non-syntactic notions like prosody. Although the present paper does not have much to say about the latter, the former analysis is shown to be deficient and under-motivated. The proposed analysis of this paper can account for two more related observations: the multiple auxiliary effect and the relationship between verb types and extraction out of VP ellipsis. In a nutshell, the dynamic phasehood-based solution is shown to provide a better explanation of the difference of the two instances of infinitival to and be fruitfully extended to cover further empirical domain.
참고문헌 (23)
- Aelbrecht, Lobke, "The syntactic licensing of ellipsis" (2010), John Benjamins
- Assmann, Muriel, "Focus constraints on ellipsis: An unalternative account", Ms, pp.2018
- Bošković, Željko, "Now I’m a phase, now I’m not a phase: On the variability of phases with extraction and ellipsis", Linguistic Inquiry, 45, pp.27~89 (2014)
- Chomsky, Noam, "The minimalist program" (1995), MIT Press
- Chomsky, Noam, "Foundational issues in linguistic theory: Essays in honor of Jean Roger Vergnaud" (2008), MIT Press
- den Dikken, Marcel, "Phase extension: Contours of a theory of the role of head movement in phrasal extraction", Theoretical Linguistics, 33, pp.1~41 (2007)
- den Dikken, Marcel, "The Blackwell companion to syntax" (2007), Blackwell
- Griffiths, James, "Contrast and island sensitivity in clausal ellipsis", Syntax, 17, pp.89~234 (2014)
- Griffiths, James, "Beyond MaxElide: An investigation of A-movement from elided phrases", Ms, pp.2017
- Grimshaw, Jane, "Words and structure", pp.1~74 (2005), CSLI
- 김선웅, "A Syntactic Approach to the Mismatch in VP-ellipsis", 영어학, 17(2), pp.211~233 (2017), 한국영어학회[DOI]
- 이정식, "Licensing VP-ellipsis in English Infinitival Clauses", 현대문법연구, (44), pp.33~50 (2006), 현대문법학회
- Lobeck, Anne C, "Ellipsis: Functional heads, licensing, and identification" (1995), Oxford University Press
- Martin, Roger, "Minimalist theory of PRO and control", Doctoral, pp.1996
- Martin, Roger, "Null Case and the Distribution of PRO", Linguistic Inquiry, 31, pp.141~166 (2001)
- Merchant, Jason, "Topics in ellipsis", pp.132~153 (2008), Cambridge University Press
- Reeve, Matthew, "Clefts", Doctoral, pp.2010
- Reeve, Matthew, "Clefts and their relatives" (2012), John Benjamins
- Conditions on ellipsis licensing: Evidence from gapping and cleft ellipsis, "Reeve, Matthew", UCL, 144~175, pp.UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 25 (2013)
- Rooth, Mats, "A theory of focus interpretation", Natural Language Semantics, 1, pp.75~116 (1992)
- Ross, John Robert, "Nouniness" (1972), MIT Press
- Takahashi, Shoichi, "MaxElide and the re-binding problem", Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory, 15, pp.223~240 (2005)
- Wurmbrand, Susi, "Stripping and topless complements", Linguistic Inquiry, 48(2), pp.341~366 (2017)[DOI]