Home Embedded-complement and discontinuous pseudogapping in Hybrid Type-Logical Grammar: a rejoinder to Kim and Runner (2022)
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Embedded-complement and discontinuous pseudogapping in Hybrid Type-Logical Grammar: a rejoinder to Kim and Runner (2022)

  • Yusuke Kubota and Robert Levine EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: September 22, 2022
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Abstract

In their recent paper on pseudogapping in Construction Grammar/HPSG, Kim and Runner (Kim, Jong-Bok & Jeffrey T. Runner. 2022. Pseudogapping in English: A direct interpretation approach. The Linguistic Review. https://doi.org/10.1515/tlr-2022-2094) suggest that the analysis of pseudogapping in Hybrid Type-Logical Grammar (Hybrid TLG) presented in Kubota and Levine (Kubota, Yusuke & Robert Levine. 2017. Pseudogapping as pseudo-VP ellipsis. Linguistic Inquiry 48(2). 213–257) does not explain certain complex patterns of pseudogapping for which their own proposal does offer an account. Though Kim and Runner’s (2022) remarks on Kubota and Levine (Kubota, Yusuke & Robert Levine. 2017. Pseudogapping as pseudo-VP ellipsis. Linguistic Inquiry 48(2). 213–257) leave room for interpretation, we take it to be reasonably clear that they simply mean that it is difficult to see how such data could be formally accounted for in Kubota and Levine’s proposal. The primary goal of our response is to refute Kim and Runner’s claim on this interpretation. After refuting their claim on this interpretation, we consider a different interpretation of their remarks, one which merely questions the conceptual plausibility of Kubota and Levine’s (2017) broader theoretical architecture. This latter discussion leads to some interesting and important cross-theoretical comparison of different approaches to ellipsis.


Corresponding author: Robert Levine, Department of Linguistics, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA, E-mail:

Acknowledgment

This work is supported by NINJAL Collaborative Research Project “Toward a Computationally-Informed Theoretical Linguistics”.

References

Carpenter, Bob. 1997. Type-logical semantics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/6945.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Dalrymple, Mary, Stuart M. Shieber & Fernando C. N. Pereira. 1991. Ellipsis and higher-order unification. Linguistics and Philosophy 14(4). 399–452. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00630923.Search in Google Scholar

Dowty, David. 2007. Compositionality as an empirical problem. In Chris Barker & Pauline Jacobson (eds.), Direct compositionality, 23–101. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780199204373.003.0002Search in Google Scholar

Kim, Jong-Bok & Jeffrey T. Runner. 2022. Pseudogapping in English: A direct interpretation approach. The Linguistic Review 39. 457–494. https://doi.org/10.1515/tlr-2022-2094.Search in Google Scholar

Kubota, Yusuke & Robert Levine. 2014. Pseudogapping as pseudo-VP ellipsis. In Nicholas Asher & Sergei Soloviev (eds.), Logical Aspects of Computational Linguistics 2014, 122–137. Heidelberg: Springer.10.1007/978-3-662-43742-1_10Search in Google Scholar

Kubota, Yusuke & Robert Levine. 2017. Pseudogapping as pseudo-VP ellipsis. Linguistic Inquiry 48(2). 213–257. https://doi.org/10.1162/ling_a_00242.Search in Google Scholar

Kubota, Yusuke & Robert Levine. 2020. Type-logical syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Available at: https://direct.mit.edu/books/book/4931/Type-Logical-Syntax.10.7551/mitpress/11866.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Miller, Philip. 1990. Pseudogapping and do so substitution. In: Proceedings of Chicago Linguistic Society 26, vol. 1, 293–305. University of Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Search in Google Scholar

Rooth, Mats. 1985. Association with focus. Amherst: University of Massachusetts PhD thesis.Search in Google Scholar

Rooth, Mats. 1992. A theory of focus interpretation. Natural Language Semantics 1(1). 75–116. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02342617.Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2022-09-22
Published in Print: 2022-11-25

© 2022 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 15.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/tlr-2022-2103/html
Scroll to top button