On the Derivational Ambiguity of Cleft Constructions in English
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This paper argues that the extraposition account cannot be a proper option for the derivation of English clefts. This point is clarified by showing that the extraposition account cannot provide satisfactory explanations for the empirical problems involving the unavailability of predicational copular sentences for clefts, scope ambiguity facts, the behavior of idiom chunks, the wh-blocking phenomena, and VP-ellipsis. Inversely, these empirical problems suggest that the raising account is the proper option for the derivation of English clefts since they receive satisfactory explanations under the raising account. Although this reasoning is in line with Pinkham and Hankamer (1975), this paper does not agree with them on the following two points; the range of derivationally ambiguous clefts and another derivational option for them. Based on their finding on subextraction facts, they suggest that English DP-clefts may be derived by the way of the extraposition account or by the way of the raising analysis. But contra their suggestion, this paper claims that, besides DP-clefts, some instances of PP-clefts are also derivationally ambiguous. Additionally, this paper also argues that not the extraposition account but the (null) operator-movement account should be adopted as another viable option for the derivationally ambiguous English clefts.
Abstract
This paper argues that the extraposition account cannot be a proper option for the derivation of English clefts. This point is clarified by showing that the extraposition account cannot provide satisfactory explanations for the empirical problems involving the unavailability of predicational copular sentences for clefts, scope ambiguity facts, the behavior of idiom chunks, the wh-blocking phenomena, and VP-ellipsis. Inversely, these empirical problems suggest that the raising account is the proper option for the derivation of English clefts since they receive satisfactory explanations under the raising account. Although this reasoning is in line with Pinkham and Hankamer (1975), this paper does not agree with them on the following two points; the range of derivationally ambiguous clefts and another derivational option for them. Based on their finding on subextraction facts, they suggest that English DP-clefts may be derived by the way of the extraposition account or by the way of the raising analysis. But contra their suggestion, this paper claims that, besides DP-clefts, some instances of PP-clefts are also derivationally ambiguous. Additionally, this paper also argues that not the extraposition account but the (null) operator-movement account should be adopted as another viable option for the derivationally ambiguous English clefts.
참고문헌 (27)
- Akmajian,Adrian, "On deriving cleft sentences from pseudo-cleft sentences", Linguistic Inquiry, 1, pp.149~168 (1970)
- Baltin,Mark, "Strict bounding. In The logical problem of language acquisition", pp.257~295 (1981), MIT Press
- Bošković,Željko, "Pseudoclefts", Studia Linguistica, 51, pp.235~277 (1997)
- Chomsky,Noam, "On wh-movement. In Formal syntax", pp.71~132 (1977), Academic Press
- Davidse,Kristin, "A constructional approach to clefts", Linguistics, 38, pp.1101~1131 (2000)
- Declerck,Renaat, "Predicational clefts", Lingua, 61, pp.9~45 (1983)
- Delahunty,Gerald, "Topics in the syntax and semantics of English cleft sentences", 박사, pp.1982
- Emonds,Joseph, "A transformational approach to English syntax: root, structure preserving, and local transformations" (1976), Academic Press
- Gundel,Jeanette, "Where do cleft sentences come from?", Language, 53, pp.34~59 (1977)
- Halvorsen,Per-Kristian, "The syntax and semantics of cleft constructions", 박사, pp.1978
- Heggie,Lorie, "The Syntax of Copular Structure", 박사, pp.1988
- Heggie,Lorie, "The range of null operators: evidence from clefting", Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 11, pp.45~84 (1993)
- Higgins,Roger, "The pseudo-cleft construction in English", 박사, pp.1973
- Jespersen,Otto, "A modern English grammar on historical principles. Part III: Syntax. Second Volume" (1927), Carl Winters
- Kayne,Richard, "The antisymmetry of syntax" (1994), MIT Press
- Kiss,Katalin, "Identificational focus versus information focus", Language, 74, pp.245~273 (1998)
- Kiss,Katalin, "The English cleft construction as a focus phrase. In Boundaries of morphology and syntax", pp.217~229 (1999), Benjamins
- Lambrecht,Kund, "A framework for the analysis of cleft constructions", Linguistics, 39, pp.463~516 (2001)
- Nakamura,Masaru, "Sokubaku Kankei" (1996), Hitsuji Shobou
- Percus,Orin, "Prying open the cleft", Proceedings of NELS, 27, pp.337~351 (1997)
- Pinkham, Jessie, "Deep and shallow clefts. Papers from the Eleventh Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society", pp.429~450 (1975), Chicago Linguistic Society
- Reeve,Matthew, "Relatives and pronouns in the English cleft construction", UCL Working Papers in Linguistics, 19, pp.157~182 (2007)
- Rochemont,Michael, "Focus in generative grammar" (1986), John Benjamins
- Schachter,Paul, "Focus and relativization", Language, 49, pp.19~46 (1973)
- Takeda,Eiko, "The cleft construction under the minimalist approach", Journal of the Nagoya Women’s College, 48, pp.235~248 (2002)
- Williams,Edwin, "Thematic structure in syntax" (1994), MIT Press
- Wirth,Jessica, "The derivation of cleft sentences in English", Glossa, 12, pp.58~81 (1978)