Force mismatch in clausal ellipsis

References

Ahn, Hee-Don & Sungeun Cho. 2021. On the distribution of missing arguments and adjuncts under the pro approach. Language Research 1. 111–142. https://doi.org/10.30961/lr.2021.57.1.111.Suche in Google Scholar

Alcázar, Asier & Mario Saltarelli. 2014. The syntax of imperatives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511794391Suche in Google Scholar

Anand, Pranav, Daniel Hardt & James McCloskey. 2021. The Santa Cruz sluicing data set. Language 97. e68–e88. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2021.0009.Suche in Google Scholar

Anand, Pranav, Daniel Hardt & James McCloskey. 2022. The domain of formal matching in sluicing. UCSC Ms.10.1162/ling_a_00495Suche in Google Scholar

AnderBois, Scott. 2011. Issues and alternatives. UCSC PhD Dissertation.Suche in Google Scholar

Barbiers, Sjef. 2007. On the periphery of imperative and declarative clauses in Dutch and German. In Wim van der Wurff (ed.), Imperative clauses in generative grammar: Studies in honour of Frits Beukema, 95–112. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/la.103.03barSuche in Google Scholar

Barros, Matthew. 2014. Sluicing and identity in ellipsis. Rutgers University PhD Dissertation.Suche in Google Scholar

Barros, Matthew & Hadas Kotek. 2019. Ellipsis licensing and redundancy reduction: A focus-based approach. Glossa 4(1). 100, 1–36. https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.811.Suche in Google Scholar

Bhatt, Rajesh & Veneeta Dayal. 2020. Polar question particles: Hindi-Urdu kya:. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 38. 1115–1144. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-020-09464-0.Suche in Google Scholar

Biezma, María. 2009. Alternative vs. polar questions: The cornering effect. In Satoshi Ito Cormany & David Lutz (eds.), Proceedings of SALT 19, 37–54. Ithaca: Cornell Linguistics Club.10.3765/salt.v19i0.2519Suche in Google Scholar

Biezma, María & Kyle Rawlins. 2012. Responding to Alternative and polar questions. Linguistics and Philosophy 35. 361–406.10.1007/s10988-012-9123-zSuche in Google Scholar

Bolinger, Dwight. 1978. Yes-no questions are not alternative questions. In Henry Hiz (ed.), Questions, 87–105. Dordrecht: Reidel.10.1007/978-94-009-9509-3_3Suche in Google Scholar

Borer, Hagit. 1984. Restrictive relatives in modern Hebrew. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 2. 219–260. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00133282.Suche in Google Scholar

Bošković, Željko. 2011. Rescue by PF deletion, traces as (non)interveners, and the that-trace effect. Linguistic Inquiry 42. 1–44. https://doi.org/10.1162/ling_a_00027.Suche in Google Scholar

Brucart, José María. 1987. La Elisión Sintáctica en Español. Barcelona: Bellaterra.Suche in Google Scholar

Cheng, Hsu-Te. 2013. Argument ellipsis, classifier phrases, and the DP parameter. UCONN PhD Dissertation.Suche in Google Scholar

Chomsky, Noam. 1965. Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.10.21236/AD0616323Suche in Google Scholar

Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The minimalist program. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Chung, Sandra. 2006. Sluicing and the lexicon: The point of no return. In Rebecca T. Cover & Yuni Kim (eds.), Proceedings of BLS 31, 73–91. Berkeley: University of California, Berkeley Linguistics Society.10.3765/bls.v31i1.896Suche in Google Scholar

Chung, Sandra. 2013. Syntactic identity in sluicing: How much and why. Linguistic Inquiry 44. 1–44. https://doi.org/10.1162/ling_a_00118.Suche in Google Scholar

Chung, Sandra, William A. Ladusaw & James McCloskey. 1995. Sluicing and logical form. Natural Language Semantics 3. 239–282. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01248819.Suche in Google Scholar

Cyrino, Sonia & Gabriela Matos. 2006. Null complement anaphora in romance: Deep or surface anaphora? In Jenny Doetjes & Paz González (eds.), Romance languages and linguistic theory 2004, 95–120. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/cilt.278.06cyrSuche in Google Scholar

Depiante, Marcela A. 2001. On null complement anaphora in Spanish and Italian. Probus 13. 193–221. https://doi.org/10.1515/prbs.2001.003.Suche in Google Scholar

Depiante, Marcela A. 2019. Null complement anaphora. In Jeoren Van Craenenbroeck & Tanja Temmerman (eds.), The Oxford handbook of ellipsis, 657–680. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198712398.013.28Suche in Google Scholar

Doron, Edit. 1982. On the syntax and semantics of resumptive pronouns. Texas Linguistics Forum 19. 1–48.Suche in Google Scholar

Erteschik-Shir, Nomi. 1992. Resumptive pronouns in islands. In Helen Goodluck & Michael Rochemont (eds.), Island constraints, 89–108. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.10.1007/978-94-017-1980-3_4Suche in Google Scholar

Fujiwara, Yoshiki. 2022. Movement approach to ellipsis. UCONN PhD Dissertation.Suche in Google Scholar

Griffiths, James & Anikó Lipták. 2014. Contrast and island sensitivity in clausal ellipsis. Syntax 17. 189–234. https://doi.org/10.1111/synt.12018.Suche in Google Scholar

Hamblin, Charles L. 1973. Questions in montague English. Foundations of Language 10. 41–53.Suche in Google Scholar

Han, Chung-hye. 2000. Force, negation and imperatives. The Linguistic Review 18. 289–325. https://doi.org/10.1515/tlir.2001.004.Suche in Google Scholar

Hankamer, Jorge & Ivan Sag. 1976. Deep and surface anaphora. Linguistic Inquiry 7. 391–428.Suche in Google Scholar

Higginbotham, James. 1993. Interrogatives. In Ken Hale & Jay Keyser (eds.), The view from building 20: Essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromberger, 195–227. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Karttunen, Lauri. 1977. Syntax and semantics of questions. Linguistics and Philosophy 1. 3–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00351935.Suche in Google Scholar

Keshev, Maayan & Aya Meltzer-Asscher. 2017. Active dependency formation in islands: How grammatical resumption affects online sentence processing. Language 93. 249–269.10.1353/lan.2017.0036Suche in Google Scholar

Keshev, Maayan & Aya Meltzer-Asscher. 2019. A processing-based account of subliminal wh-island effects. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 37. 621–657. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-018-9416-1.Suche in Google Scholar

Kim, Soowon. 1999. Sloppy/strict identity, empty objects and NP ellipsis. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 8. 255–284. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1008354600813.10.1023/A:1008354600813Suche in Google Scholar

Kroll, Margaret. 2019. Polarity reversals under sluicing. Semantics and Pragmatics 12. 18. https://doi.org/10.3765/sp.12.18.Suche in Google Scholar

Landau, Idan. 2009. Against broad subjects in Hebrew. Lingua 119. 89–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2008.08.004.Suche in Google Scholar

Landau, Idan. 2011. Alleged broad subjects in Hebrew: A rejoinder to Doron and Heycock. Lingua 121. 129–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2010.05.002.Suche in Google Scholar

Landau, Idan. 2020a. A scope argument against T-to-C movement in sluicing. Syntax 23. 375–393. https://doi.org/10.1111/synt.12204.Suche in Google Scholar

Landau, Idan. 2020b. Constraining head-stranding ellipsis. Linguistic Inquiry 51. 281–318. https://doi.org/10.1162/ling_a_00347.Suche in Google Scholar

Landau, Idan. 2023. Argument ellipsis as external merge after TRANSFER. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 41. 793–845. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-022-09552-3.Suche in Google Scholar

Landau, Idan. 2023. Type-restricted argument ellipsis and generalized quantifiers. Linguistic Iinquiry. https://doi.org/10.1162/ling_a_00489.Suche in Google Scholar

Lasnik, Howard & Kenshi Funakoshi. 2018. Ellipsis in transformational grammar. In Jeoren van Craenenbroeck & Tanja Temmerman (eds.), The Oxford handbook of ellipsis, 46–74. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198712398.013.3Suche in Google Scholar

Lee, Wooseung. 2014. Argumental gaps in Korean. The Linguistic Association of Korea Journal 22. 1–29.10.24303/lakdoi.2014.22.1.1Suche in Google Scholar

Lipták, Anikó. 2015. Identity in ellipsis: An introduction. Lingua 166. 155–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2015.08.003.Suche in Google Scholar

Marušič, Franc, Petra Mišmaš, Vesna Pleničar & Tina Šuligoj. 2018. Surviving sluicing. In Denisa Lenertová, Roland Meyer, Radek Šimík & Luka Szucsich (eds.), Advances in Slavic linguistics 2016, 193–215. Berlin: Language Science Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Medeiros, David J. 2015. Embedded ancient Greek imperatives: A feature transfer analysis. Syntax 18. 124–156. https://doi.org/10.1111/synt.12028.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. 2019. Ellipsis: A survey of analytical approaches. In Jeroen van Craenenbroeck & Tanja Temmerman (eds.), Handbook of ellipsis, 19–45. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198712398.013.2Suche in Google Scholar

Murguia, Elixabete. 2004. Syntactic identity and locality restrictions on verbal ellipsis. University of Maryland PhD Dissertation.Suche in Google Scholar

Murphy, Andrew. 2016. Subset relations in ellipsis licensing. Glossa 1(1). 44, 1–34. https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.61.Suche in Google Scholar

Park, Myung-Kwan. 2013. The syntax of clausal and verbal pro-form/ellipsis in Korean: Focusing on mit- ‘believe’ and sayngkakha- ‘think’ verbs. Studies in Generative Grammar 23. 221–242. https://doi.org/10.15860/sigg.23.2.201305.221.Suche in Google Scholar

Park, Myung-Kwan & Yongsuk Yoo. 2013. Asymmetry between CP and TP ellipsis and its consequences on extractability: Evidence from Korean. Language Research 49. 205–226.Suche in Google Scholar

Preminger, Omer. 2010. Nested interrogatives and the locus of wh. In Phoevos E. Panagiotidis (ed.), The complementizer phase: Subjects and operators, 200–235. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199584352.003.0009Suche in Google Scholar

Ranero, Rodrigo. 2021. Identity conditions on ellipsis. University of Maryland PhD Dissertation.Suche in Google Scholar

Reinhart, Tanya. 1981. A second COMP position. In Adriana Belletti, Luciana Brandi & Luigi Rizzi (eds.), Theory of markedness in generative grammar, 517–557. Pisa: Scuola Normale Superiore.Suche in Google Scholar

Rizzi, Luigi. 1997. The fine structure of the left periphery. In Liliane Haegeman (ed.), Elements of grammar: Handbook in generative syntax, 281–337. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.10.1007/978-94-011-5420-8_7Suche in Google Scholar

Rizzi, Luigi. 2001. On the position “Int(errogative)” in the left periphery of the clause. In Guglielmo Cinque & Giampaolo Salvi (eds.), Current studies in Italian syntax: Essays offered to Lorenzo Renzi, 287–296. Amsterdam: North-Holland.10.1163/9780585473949_016Suche in Google Scholar

Roelofsen, Floris & Donka F. Farkas. 2015. Polarity particle responsesd as a window into the interpretation of questions and assertions. Language 91. 359–414. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2015.0017.Suche in Google Scholar

Rudin, Deniz. 2019. Head-based syntactic identity in sluicing. Linguisic Inquiry 50. 253–283. https://doi.org/10.1162/ling_a_00308.Suche in Google Scholar

Saab, Andrès. 2008. Hacía una Teoria de la Identidad Parcial en la Ellipsis. University of Buenos Aires PhD Dissertation.Suche in Google Scholar

Saab, Andrès. 2016. Ineffable narratives in Spanish: Another case of overgeneration by e-GIVENness. Probus 28. 367–389. https://doi.org/10.1515/probus-2014-0014.Suche in Google Scholar

Saab, Andrès. 2022. Grammatical silences from syntax to morphology: A model for the timing of ellipsis. In Anikó Lipták & Güliz Güneş (eds.), The derivational timing of ellipsis, 170–224. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780198849490.003.0005Suche in Google Scholar

Saito, Mamoru. 2007. Notes on East Asian argument ellipsis. Language Rsearch 43. 203–227.Suche in Google Scholar

Saito, Mamoru. 2017. Ellipsis. In Masayoshi Shibatani, Shigeru Miyagawa & Hisashi Noda (eds.), Handbook of Japanese syntax, 701–750. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9781614516613-020Suche in Google Scholar

Saito, Mamoru & Duk-Ho An. 2010. A comparative syntax of ellipsis in Japanese and Korean. In Hiroki Maezawa & Azusa Yokogoshi (eds.), Proceedings of the 6th Workshop on Altaic Fornmal Linguistics (WAFL 6), 287–307. Cambridge, MA: MITWPL.Suche in Google Scholar

Sakamoto, Yuta. 2020. Silently structured silent argument. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/la.259Suche in Google Scholar

Sato, Yosuke & Simin Karimi. 2016. Subject-object asymmetries in Persian argumenr ellipsis and the anti-agreement theory. Glossa 1. 1–31.10.5334/gjgl.60Suche in Google Scholar

Sells, Peter. 1987. Binding resumptive pronouns. Linguistics and Philosophy 10. 261–298. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00584129.Suche in Google Scholar

Shlonsky, Ur. 1992. Resumptive pronouns as a last resort. Linguistic Inquiry 23. 443–468.Suche in Google Scholar

Shlonsky, Ur. 2014. Topicalization and focalization: A preliminary exploration of the Hebrew left periphery. In Anna Cardinaletti, Guglielmo Cinque & Endo Yoshio (eds.), On peripheries: Exploring the clause initial and clause final positions, 327–341. Tokyo: Hituzi Syobo.Suche in Google Scholar

Sichel, Ivy. 2014. Resumptive pronouns and competition. Lingiuistic Inquiry 45. 655–693. https://doi.org/10.1162/ling_a_00169.Suche in Google Scholar

Simpson, Andrew, Arumina Choudhury & Mythili Menon. 2013. Argument ellipsis and the licensing of covert nominals in Bangla, Hindi and Malayalam. Lingua 134. 103–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2013.06.007.Suche in Google Scholar

Soltan, Usama. 2020. On null objects in Egyptian Arabic. Brill’s Journal of Afroasiatic Languages and Linguistics 12. 04–259. https://doi.org/10.1163/18776930-01202001.Suche in Google Scholar

Stigliano, Laura. 2022. The silence of syntax: A theory of ellipsis licensing and identity. University of Chicago PhD Dissertation.Suche in Google Scholar

Takahashi, Daiko. 2014. Argument ellipsis, anti-agreement and scrambling. In Mamuro Saito (ed.), Japanese syntax in comparative perspective, 88–116. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199945207.003.0004Suche in Google Scholar

Takahashi, Daiko. 2020. Derivational argument ellipsis. The Linguistic Review 37. 47–74. https://doi.org/10.1515/tlr-2019-2034.Suche in Google Scholar

Temmerman, Tanja. 2019. When the sluice is not alone: On the syntax of WH+non-WH sluicing in Dutch. Presentation at the “Sluicing and Ellipsis at 50” conference, University of Chicago.Suche in Google Scholar

Thoms, Gary. 2013. Lexical mismatches in ellipsis and the identity condition. In Stefan Keine & Shayne Sloggett (eds.), Proceedings of NELS 42, 559–572. Amherst, MA: GLSA Publications.Suche in Google Scholar

van Rooij, Robert & Marie Šafár̆ová. 2003. On polar questions. In Robert Young & Yuping Zhou (eds.), Proceedings of SALT 13, 292–309. Ithaca, NY: Cornell Linguistics Club.10.3765/salt.v13i0.2887Suche in Google Scholar

Vicente, Luis. 2018. Sluicing and its subtypes. In Jeoren van Craenenbroeck & Tanja Temmerman (eds.), The Oxford handbook of ellipsis, 479–503. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198712398.013.22Suche in Google Scholar

Weir, Andrew. 2014. Fragments and clausal ellipsis. UMASS PhD Dissertation.Suche in Google Scholar

Yun, Jiwon. 2013. Wh-indefinites: Meaning and prosody. Cornell University PhD Dissertation.Suche in Google Scholar

Zanuttini, Rafaella. 2008. Encoding the addressee in the syntax: Evidence from English imperative subjects. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 26. 185–218. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-007-9029-6.Suche in Google Scholar