On the Nonexistence of Verb-Stranding VP-Ellipsis

2020 ◽  
Vol 51 (2) ◽  
pp. 341-365 ◽  
Author(s):  
Idan Landau

An increasingly popular analysis of object gap sentences in many languages derives them in two steps: (a) V-raising out of VP, and (b) VP-ellipsis of the remnant, stranding the verb (V-stranding VP-ellipsis, VSVPE). For Hebrew, Hindi, Russian, and Portuguese, I show this analysis to be inadequate. First, it undergenerates elliptical objects in various environments, and second, it overgenerates nonexisting adjunct-including readings. For all the problematic data, simple argument ellipsis provides a unified explanation. The absence of VSVPE in languages that do allow V-raising and Aux-stranding VP-ellipsis raises an intriguing problem for theories addressing the interaction of head movement and ellipsis.

Author(s):  
Emily Walker Manetta

Verb-stranding verb phrase ellipsis (VPE), when a verb is stranded outside of the VP-sized ellipsis site in which it originated, has been identified in a number of languages (Irish, McCloskey 1991; Hebrew, Doron 1991, Goldberg 2005; Greek, Merchant 2018; Uzbek, Gribanova 2019, i.a.), and has been invoked productively in analyses investigating the position to which verbs move and the timing of verb movement in the grammar. Recently, Landau (2018, 2019, to appear) proposes a phase-based negative licensing condition on head-stranding ellipsis that precludes verb-stranding VPE altogether. He claims that apparent verb-stranding VPE must be reanalyzed either as Argument Ellipsis (Oku 1998; Kim 1999; Takahashi 2008), or a clause-sized ellipsis that strands main verbs (Gribanova 2017). This article approaches this debate through an analysis of head movement and head-stranding ellipsis in the Indic verb-second (V2) language Kashmiri, arguing that Landau’s phase-based approach encounters empirical challenges in accounting for variation in the presentation of ellipsis in V2 languages and requires an unconventional approach to V2, at odds with recent accounts of Kashmiri V2 (Bhatt 1999; Munshi and Bhatt 2009; Manetta 2011) and mainstream views of V2 generally (e.g. Holmberg 1986; Travis 1991; Vikner 1995; Zwart 1997). While the present article argues in favor of the standard account of ellipsis (Merchant 2001, 2008), we affirm the important contribution of Landau’s work in identifying challenges facing any account of head-stranding ellipsis licensing. At issue is the larger question of whether and how verb-stranding ellipses can be used to better understand head movement.


2020 ◽  
Vol 51 (2) ◽  
pp. 319-340
Author(s):  
Chung-hye Han ◽  
Kyeong-min Kim ◽  
Keir Moulton ◽  
Jeffrey Lidz

Null object (NO) constructions in Korean and Japanese have received different accounts: as (a) argument ellipsis ( Oku 1998 , S. Kim 1999 , Saito 2007 , Sakamoto 2015 ), (b) VP-ellipsis after verb raising ( Otani and Whitman 1991 , Funakoshi 2016 ), or (c) instances of base-generated pro ( Park 1997 , Hoji 1998 , 2003 ). We report results from two experiments supporting the argument ellipsis analysis for Korean. Experiment 1 builds on K.-M. Kim and Han’s (2016) finding of interspeaker variation in whether the pronoun ku can be bound by a quantifier. Results showed that a speaker’s acceptance of quantifier-bound ku positively correlates with acceptance of sloppy readings in NO sentences. We argue that an ellipsis account, in which the NO site contains internal structure hosting the pronoun, accounts for this correlation. Experiment 2, testing the recovery of adverbials in NO sentences, showed that only the object (not the adverb) can be recovered in the NO site, excluding the possibility of VP-ellipsis. Taken together, our findings suggest that NOs result from argument ellipsis in Korean.


Author(s):  
Peter W. Culicover ◽  
Ray Jackendoff

Same-Except is a fundamental domain-general cognitive relation in which entities in proximity to one another are judged to be the Same, Except for some part or property where they differ. This relation can be attested in non-linguistic modalities such as vision, audition, and taste, and it plays an important role in non-linguistic categorization. The chapter shows that this relation is expressed linguistically by means of a wide range of devices, including (a) lexical expressions such as same and except, (b) contrastive stress, (c) anaphora (e.g. definite and indefinite NP anaphora and VP anaphora), (d) ellipsis (e.g. bare argument ellipsis, sluicing, gapping, and VP-ellipsis), and (e) fixed expressions such as vice versa. This approach thereby unifies the semantics of all these phenomena under a common account that is based on a domain-general cognitive principle. The approach is compared with accounts of ellipsis based on syntactic copying or deletion, showing that both approaches have their difficulties.


1999 ◽  
Vol 58 (3) ◽  
pp. 170-179 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara S. Muller ◽  
Pierre Bovet

Twelve blindfolded subjects localized two different pure tones, randomly played by eight sound sources in the horizontal plane. Either subjects could get information supplied by their pinnae (external ear) and their head movements or not. We found that pinnae, as well as head movements, had a marked influence on auditory localization performance with this type of sound. Effects of pinnae and head movements seemed to be additive; the absence of one or the other factor provoked the same loss of localization accuracy and even much the same error pattern. Head movement analysis showed that subjects turn their face towards the emitting sound source, except for sources exactly in the front or exactly in the rear, which are identified by turning the head to both sides. The head movement amplitude increased smoothly as the sound source moved from the anterior to the posterior quadrant.


This project is regarding the Motion controlled wheelchair for disabled. We are going to control motorized wheelchair using a head band having motion sensor and Arduino as controller. Problem: “often disabled who cannot walk find themselves being burden for their families or caretakers just for moving around the house. Disabled who are paralysed below head, who may not have functioning arms cannot control joystick controlled electric wheelchair.” This project is to solve their problem using a motion sensor to control their wheelchair. We are aiming towards building a more affordable, unique, low maintenance and available for all kind of head-controlled wheel chair.


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

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document