Me too fragments in English and French: a direct interpretation approach
-
Anne Abeillé
und
Jong-Bok Kim
Abstract
Additive fragments, comprising a nominal remnant and an additive adverb (e.g., too, either), are a particular type of stripping. On the basis of new corpus data in English and French, we show that such fragments do not always have a verbal clause as their antecedent, and that when they do, different kinds of mismatch are possible between a verbal equivalent and the actual fragment. This challenges most approaches based on syntactic reconstruction. We also show that their interpretation is more flexible than previously thought, since they can be used for interrogative, exclamatory, or ordering purposes. We distinguish between their contrastive (non-coreferent) use (A: John left. B: Me too.) and emphatic (coreferent) use (A: John left. B: HIM too!). We propose a direct interpretation analysis that resorts to no syntactic reconstruction of a verbal clause. The proposed analysis, developed within the framework of construction-based HPSG, allows us to capture not only their properties sharing with other fragments (short answers and negative stripping) but also their unique constructional properties.
References
Abeillé, Anne. 2005. Les syntagmes conjoints et leurs fonctions syntaxiques. Langages 160. 42–66.10.3406/lgge.2005.2642Suche in Google Scholar
Abeillé, Anne, Danièle Godard & Jean-Marie Marandin. 2014a. French questioning declaratives. In PhilipHofmeister & ElisabethNordcliff (eds.), The core and the periphery: Data driven perspectives on syntax inspired by Ivan A. Sag, 129–161. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Suche in Google Scholar
Abeillé, Anne, Gabriela Bîlbîie & François Mouret. 2014b. A Romance perspective on gapping constructions. In HansBoas & FranciscoGonzálvez-Garca (eds.), Romance perspectives on Construction Grammar, 227–267. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/cal.15.07abeSuche in Google Scholar
Ahn, Dorothy. 2015. The semantics of additive either. Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 19. 20–35.Suche in Google Scholar
Amsili, Pascal, Emilia Ellsiepen & Grégoire Winterstein. 2016. Optionality in the use of too: The role of reduction and similarity. Revista da Abralin (Associaçã o Brasileira de Lingúistica) 1(15). 229–252. https://doi.org/10.5380/rabl.v1i15.46144.Suche in Google Scholar
Anand, Pranav, Daniel Hardt & James McCloskey. 2021. The Santa Cruz sluicing data set. Language 97(1). e68–e88. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2021.0009.Suche in Google Scholar
AnderBois, Scott. 2014. The semantics of sluicing: Beyond truth-conditions. Language 90. 887–926. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2014.0110.Suche in Google Scholar
Beyssade, Claire & Jean-Marie Marandin. 2006. The speech act assignment problem revisited: Disentangling speaker’s commitment from speaker’s call on addressee. In Olivier Bonami & Patricia Cabredo Hofherr (eds.), Empirical issues in syntax and semantics, vol. 6, 37–68. Paris: Presses Universitaires de Paris Sorbonne.Suche in Google Scholar
Bîlbîie, Gabriela & Israel de la Fuente. 2019. Can gapping be embedded? Experimental evidence from Spanish. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics 4(1). 1–39. Special issue Experimental Approaches to Ellipsis.10.5334/gjgl.782Suche in Google Scholar
Bîlbîie, Gabriela, Israel de la Fuente & Anne Abeillé. 2021. L’ellipse verbale enchâssée dans les langues romanes. Langages 223(3). 61–80.10.3917/lang.223.0061Suche in Google Scholar
Bonami, Olivier & Danièle Godard. 2008. Lexical semantics and pragmatics of evaluative adverbs. In Louise & Chris (eds.), Adverbs and adjectives: Syntax, semantics, and discourse, 274–304. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780199211616.003.0011Suche in Google Scholar
Culicover, Peter W. & Ray S. Jackendoff. 2005. Simpler syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199271092.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Davies, Mark. 2008. The Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA). Available at: https://www.english-corpora.org/coca/.Suche in Google Scholar
Depiante, Marcela Andrea. 2000. The syntax of deep and surface anaphora: A study of null complement anaphora and stripping/bare argument ellipsis. Mansfield: University of Connecticut dissertation.Suche in Google Scholar
Ginzburg, Jonathan. 2012. The interactive stance: Meaning for conversation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199697922.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Ginzburg, Jonathan. 2019. Exclamative sluices: Evidence for semantically-based ellipsis resolution. Paper presented at Sinn und Bedeutung 2019. Osnabrück.Suche in Google Scholar
Ginzburg, Jonathan & Ivan A. Sag. 2000. Interrogative investigations: The form, meaning and use of English interrogatives (CSLI Lecture Notes 123). Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Suche in Google Scholar
Godard, Danièle. 2004. French negative dependency. In FrancisCorblin & Henriëttede Swart (eds.), Handbook of French semantics, 381–391. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Suche in Google Scholar
Hankamer, Jorge & Ivan A. Sag. 1976. Deep and surface anaphora. Linguistic Inquiry 7(3). 391–428.Suche in Google Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney & Geoffrey Pullum. 2002. The Cambridge grammar of the English language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781316423530Suche in Google Scholar
Jacobson, Pauline. 2016. The short answer: Implications for direct compositionality (and vice versa). Language 92(2). 331–375. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2016.0038.Suche in Google Scholar
Johnson, Kyle. 2009. Gapping is not (VP)-Ellipsis. Linguistic Inquiry 40. 289–328. https://doi.org/10.1162/ling.2009.40.2.289.Suche in Google Scholar
Johnson, Kyle. 2018. Gapping and stripping. In Jeroenvan Creanen & TanjaTemmerman (eds.), The Oxford handbook of ellipsis, 562–604. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198712398.013.24Suche in Google Scholar
Kaplan, Jeff. 1984. Obligatory too in English. Language 60(3). 510–518. https://doi.org/10.2307/413989.Suche in Google Scholar
Kehler, Andrew. 2019. Ellipsis and discourse. In Jeroenvan Craenenbroeck & TanjaTemmerman (eds.), Handbook of ellipsis, 314–341. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198712398.013.13Suche in Google Scholar
Kim, Jong-Bok. 2015. Syntactic and semantic identity in Korean sluicing: A direct interpretation approach. Lingua 166(B). 260–293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2015.08.005.Suche in Google Scholar
Kim, Jong-Bok & Anne Abeillé. 2019. Why-stripping in English. Linguistic Research 36. 365–387. https://doi.org/10.17250/khisli.36.3.201912.002.Suche in Google Scholar
Kim, Jong-Bok & Ivan A. Sag. 2002. Negation without head-movement. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 20(2). 339–412. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1015045225019.10.1023/A:1015045225019Suche in Google Scholar
Kim, Jungsoo. 2021. A corpus study of English negative stripping and its theoretical consequences. Korean Journal of English Language and Linguistics 21. 912–935.Suche in Google Scholar
Merchant, Jason. 2001. The syntax of silence: Sluicing, islands, and the theory of ellipsis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780199243730.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Merchant, Jason. 2003. Remarks on stripping. Manuscript. Chicago: University of Chicago.Suche in Google Scholar
Merchant, Jason. 2005. Fragments and ellipsis. Linguistics and Philosophy 27(6). 661–738. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-005-7378-3.Suche in Google Scholar
Miller, Philip. 2021. Les pronoms personnels faibles. In AnneAbeillé & DanièleGodard (eds.), La grande grammaire du français, 1008–1024. Arles: Actes Sud.Suche in Google Scholar
Miller, Philip & Barbara Hemforth. 2014. Verb phrase ellipsis with nominal antecedents. Manuscript. Paris: Université Paris Cité.Suche in Google Scholar
Miller, Philip & Geoffrey K. Pullum. 2014. Exophoric VP ellipsis. In PhilipHofmeister & ElisabethNorcliffe (eds.), The core and the periphery: Data-driven perspectives on syntax inspired by Ivan A. Sag, 5–32. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Suche in Google Scholar
Miller, Philip H. & Ivan A. Sag. 1997. French clitic movement without clitics or movement. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 15(3). 573–639. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1005815413834.10.1023/A:1005815413834Suche in Google Scholar
Morgan, Jerry. 1989. Sentence fragments revisited. In BradleyMusic, RandolphGraczyk & CarolineWiltshire (eds.), CLS 25: Papers from the 25th annual regional meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, 228–241. Chicago, IL: Chicago Linguistic Society.Suche in Google Scholar
Nykiel, Joanna & Jong-Bok Kim. 2021. Ellipsis. In StefanMüller, Anne, Abeillé, Robert, D. Borsley & Jean-PierreKoenig (eds.), Head-driven phrase structure grammar: The handbook (Empirically Oriented Theoretical Morphology and Syntax), 843–883. Berlin: Language Science Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Nykiel, Joanna & Jong-Bok Kim. 2022. Fragments and structural identity on a direct interpretation approach. Journal of Linguistics 58(1). 73–109. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0022226720000420.Suche in Google Scholar
Rodrigues, Cillene, Andrew Nevins & Luis Vicente. 2009. Cleaving the interactions between sluicing and preposition stranding. In DanièleTorck & LeoWetzels (eds.), Romance languages and linguistic theory 2006, 175–198. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/cilt.303.11rodSuche in Google Scholar
Roussarie, Laurent. 2021. Les adverbes associatifs. In AnneAbeillé & DanièleGodard (eds.), La grande grammaire du français, 957–968. Arles: Actes Sud.Suche in Google Scholar
Rullmann, Hotze. 2003. Additive particles and polarity. Journal of Semantics 20(4). 329–401. https://doi.org/10.1093/jos/20.4.329.Suche in Google Scholar
Sag, Ivan A. 1997. English relative clause constructions. Journal of Linguistics 33(2). 431–483. https://doi.org/10.1017/s002222679700652x.Suche in Google Scholar
Smirnova, Anastasiia & Anne Abeillé. 2021. Question particles ça and donc in French: A corpus study. Linguistic Research 38(2). 237–267.Suche in Google Scholar
Weir, Andrew. 2014. Fragments and clausal ellipsis. University of Massachusetts, Amherst dissertation.Suche in Google Scholar
Winterstein, Grégoire & Henk Zeevat. 2012. Empirical constraints on accounts of too. Lingua 122. 1787–1800. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2012.08.003.Suche in Google Scholar
Wurmbrand, Susi. 2017. Stripping and topless complements. Linguistic Inquiry 48(2). 341–366. https://doi.org/10.1162/ling_a_00245.Suche in Google Scholar
© 2022 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- Editorial
- Introduction: Special issue on empirical approaches to elliptical constructions
- Articles
- Explaining ellipsis without identity*
- Experimentally testing the interpretation of multiple sluicing and multiple questions in Hungarian
- Multiple sluicing and islands: a cross-linguistic experimental investigation of the clausemate condition
- Pseudogapping in English: a direct interpretation approach
- Me too fragments in English and French: a direct interpretation approach
- Complementizer deletion in embedded gapping in Spanish
- An experimental perspective on embedded gapping in Persian
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- Editorial
- Introduction: Special issue on empirical approaches to elliptical constructions
- Articles
- Explaining ellipsis without identity*
- Experimentally testing the interpretation of multiple sluicing and multiple questions in Hungarian
- Multiple sluicing and islands: a cross-linguistic experimental investigation of the clausemate condition
- Pseudogapping in English: a direct interpretation approach
- Me too fragments in English and French: a direct interpretation approach
- Complementizer deletion in embedded gapping in Spanish
- An experimental perspective on embedded gapping in Persian
