Two routes to predicate ellipsis in Spanish: the clitic versus focus strategy

Alejo Alcaraz

doi:10.1515/tlr-2025-2012

Article

Two routes to predicate ellipsis in Spanish: the clitic versus focus strategy

Alejo Alcaraz

Published/Copyright: August 4, 2025

Published by

Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Author Information Explore this Subject

From the journal The Linguistic Review Volume 42 Issue 3

Abstract

This paper documents and analyzes a predicate ellipsis alternation found in contemporary Spanish, addressing some challenges it poses for current theories of ellipsis licensing with the Minimalist Program. Spanish predicate ellipsis occurs in two variants: (i) lo-insertion, where an overt proform (the neuter clitic lo) attaches to the auxiliary preceding the silent gap, and (ii) lo-omission, where predicate ellipsis is licensed under polarity focus (typically marked on the stranded auxiliary). Both variants arise from ellipsis of the main predicate – and its arguments – and are licensed by the same restricted class of auxiliaries. To account for their shared distribution, this paper argues that predicate ellipsis stems from a single [E]-feature, in both the lo-insertion and the lo-omission context. Concretely, the presence of a clitic (in lo-insertion) and its absence under polarity focus (in lo-omission) are analyzed as two alternative strategies to satisfy the semantic requirements of a single [E]-feature, without encoding these contexts for ellipsis directly in [E]’s syntax. This analysis is further extended to predicate ellipsis constructions in Germanic languages, which employ strategies for predicate anaphora akin to both lo-insertion and lo-omission, albeit with a different distribution.

Keywords: VP ellipsis; small clauses; neuter pronouns; deep anaphora; surface anaphora; A’-movement

Corresponding author: Alejo Alcaraz, Universidad del País Vasco/Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea (EHU), Universidad Autónoma de Madrid (UAM), Madrid, Spain, E-mail: alejo.alcaraz@uam.es

Funding source: University of the Basque Country (EHU), the Ministry of Universities (Spain), and the European Union – Next Generation EU

Award Identifier / Grant number: MARS21/02

Funding source: Hizkuntzalaritza Teorikorako Taldea HiTT (Basque Government)

Award Identifier / Grant number: IT1537-22

Acknowledgement

I am grateful for the comments and discussions offered by members of IKER (UMR-5478) – especially Aritz Irurtzun, Maia Duguine, and Urtzi Etxeberria – as well as by all members of the HiTT group (EHU): Myriam Uribe-Etxebarria, Vidal Valmala, Laura Vela-Plo, Javi Ormazabal, Denis Ott, Juan Romero, Gorka Elordieta, Arantzazu Elordieta, just to name a few. This paper also benefits from the insightful feedback of two anonymous reviewers. All remaining errors are my own.

Research funding: This research has received financial support through a Margarita Salas postdoctoral scholarship [Code: MARS21/02], funded by the University of the Basque Country (EHU), the Ministry of Universities (Spain), and the European Union – Next Generation EU, and by the IT1537-22 Research Group Hizkuntzalaritza Teorikorako Taldea HiTT (Basque Government).

References

Aelbrecht, Lobke. 2010. The syntactic Licensing of ellipsis. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.10.1075/la.149Search in Google Scholar

Authier, J. Marc. 2023. French predicate anaphora, comparatives, and ellipsis. Probus 35(1). 213–250. https://doi.org/10.1515/probus-2022-0017.Search in Google Scholar

Authier, J. Marc & Lisa A. Reed. 2009. French tough-movement revisited. Probus 21(1). 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1515/prbs.2009.001.Search in Google Scholar

Baker, Mark. 2003. Lexical categories: Verbs, nouns, and adjectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511615047Search in Google Scholar

Baker, Mark, Kyle Johnson & Ian Roberts. 2018 [1989]. Passive arguments raised. Diachronic and comparative syntax, 261–295. London & New York: Routledge.10.4324/9781315310572-8Search in Google Scholar

Bennett, Ryan, Emily Elfner & James McCloskey. 2019. Prosody, focus, and ellipsis in Irish. Language 95(1). 66–106. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2019.0012.Search in Google Scholar

Bentzen, Kristine, Jason Merchant & Peter Svenonius. 2013. Deep properties of surface pronouns: Pronominal predicate anaphors in Norwegian and German. The Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 16. 97–125. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10828-013-9057-z.Search in Google Scholar

Bowers, John. 1993. The syntax of predication. Linguistic Inquiry 24(4). 591–656.Search in Google Scholar

Bresnan, Joan. 1971. A non-source for comparatives. Linguistic Inquiry 2(1). 117–124.Search in Google Scholar

Brillman, Ruth. 2017. Tough constructions in the context of English infinitives. Massachusetts Institute of Technology dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Brunetti, Lisa. 2004. A unification of focus. Padua: Unipress.Search in Google Scholar

Büring, Daniel. 2016. Intonation and meaning. Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199226269.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Burzio, Luigi. 1986. Italian syntax: A government-binding approach. Dordrecht: Reidel.10.1007/978-94-009-4522-7Search in Google Scholar

Casielles-Suárez, Eugenia. 2004. The syntax-Information structure interface: Evidence from Spanish and English. Routledge.10.4324/9780203501719Search in Google Scholar

Chomsky, Noam. 1977. On wh-movement. In Peter Culicover, Tom Wasow & Adrian Akmajian (eds.). Formal syntax, 71–132. New York: Academic Press.Search in Google Scholar

Chomsky, Noam. 1981. Lectures on government and binding: The Pisa lectures. Studies in generative grammar, no. 9. Dordrecht & Cinnaminson, N.J: Foris Publications.Search in Google Scholar

Chomsky, Noam & Howard Lasnik. 1993. The theory of principles and parameters. Syntax: An international handbook of contemporary research. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110095869.1.9.506Search in Google Scholar

Chung, Sandra. 2013. Syntactic identity in sluicing: How much and why. Linguistic Inquiry 44(1). 1–44.10.1162/LING_a_00118Search in Google Scholar

Cinque, Guglielmo. 1990. Types of A-Dependencies. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar

Cinque, G. 1999. Adverbs and functional heads: A cross-linguistic perspective. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780195115260.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Cinque, Guglielmo & Paola Benincà. 2018. Notes on infinitival relatives in Italian. Structuring variation in romance linguistics and beyond in honour of Leonardo M. Savoia, 73–84. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.10.1075/la.252.04cinSearch in Google Scholar

Cyrino, Sonia & Gabriela Matos. 2002. VP ellipsis in European and Brazilian Portuguese: A comparative analysis. Journal of Portuguese Linguistics 1(2). https://doi.org/10.5334/jpl.41.Search in Google Scholar

Depiante, Marcela. 2000. The syntax of deep and surface anaphora: A study of null complement anaphora and stripping/bare argument ellipsis. Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Fiengo, Robert & Robert May. 1994. Indices and identity. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar

Folli, Raffaella & Heidi Harley. 2004. On obligatory obligation: The composition of Italian causatives. Romance, Op 47. 87–113.Search in Google Scholar

Gengel, Kirsten. 2013. Pseudogapping and ellipsis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199665303.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Giurgea, Ion & Elena Soare. 2010. Modal non-finite relatives in Romance. Mood and Modality in Romance. Modal Interpretation, Mood Selection, and Mood Alternation. 67–94. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110234343.1.67.Search in Google Scholar

González Rodríguez, Raquel. 2009. La polaridad positiva en español. Madrid: Universidad Complutense de Madrid dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Griffiths, J. 2019. Beyond MaxElide: An investigation of Ā-movement from elided phrases. Linguistic Inquiry 50(3). 571–607.10.1162/ling_a_00317Search in Google Scholar

Grinder, John & Paul M. Postal. 1971. Missing antecedents. Linguistic Inquiry 269. 312.Search in Google Scholar

Gutiérrez-Bravo, Rodrigo. 2002. Structural markedness and syntactic structure: A study of word order and the left periphery in Mexican Spanish. Santa Cruz, CA: UCSC dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Hankamer, Jorge & Ivan Sag. 1976. Deep and surface anaphora. Linguistic Inquiry 7(3). 391–428.Search in Google Scholar

Hicks, Glyn. 2009. Tough-constructions and their derivation. Linguistic Inquiry 40(4). 535–566. https://doi.org/10.1162/ling.2009.40.4.535.Search in Google Scholar

Houser, Michael J., Line Mikkelsen & Maziar Toosarvandani. 2011. A defective auxiliary in Danish. Journal of Germanic Linguistics 23(3). 245–298. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1470542711000043.Search in Google Scholar

Ionova, Anastasiia. 2020. The unbearable lightness of clitics. LOT dissertation series. Amsterdam: LOT. Available at: https://hdl.handle.net/1887/83258.Search in Google Scholar

Kennedy, Christopher. 2002. Comparative deletion and optimality in syntax. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 20(3). 553–621.10.1023/A:1015889823361Search in Google Scholar

Kratzer, Angelika. 1996. Severing the external argument from its verb. Phrase structure and the lexicon. Dordrecht: Kluwer.10.1007/978-94-015-8617-7_5Search in Google Scholar

Laka, Itziar. 1990. Negation in syntax: On the nature of functional categories and projections. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Lasnik, Howard. 1995. Verbal morphology: Syntactic structures meets the minimalist program. Evolution and revolution in linguistic theory: Essays in honor of Carlos Otero. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Lobeck, Anne. 1995. Ellipsis: Functional heads, licensing, and identification. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780195091816.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

López, Luis. 1999. VP-ellipsis in English and Spanish and the features of auxiliaries. Probus 11(2). 263–297.10.1515/prbs.1999.11.2.263Search in Google Scholar

López, Luis. 2009. A derivational syntax for information structure, Vol. 23. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199557400.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

López, Luis & Susanne Winkler. 2000. Focus and topic in VP-anaphora constructions. Linguistics 38(4). 623–626. https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.2000.001.Search in Google Scholar

Martins, Ana M. 1994. Enclisis, VP-deletion and the nature of Sigma. Probus 6. 173–205. https://doi.org/10.1515/prbs.1994.6.2-3.173.Search in Google Scholar

Merchant, Jason. 2001. The syntax of silence: Sluicing, islands, and the theory of ellipsis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780199243730.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Merchant, Jason. 2005. Fragments and ellipsis. Linguistics and Philosophy 27. 661–738. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-005-7378-3.Search in Google Scholar

Merchant, Jason. 2008a. An asymmetry in voice mismatches in VP-ellipsis and pseudogapping. Linguistic Inquiry 39(1). 169–179. https://doi.org/10.1162/ling.2008.39.1.169.Search in Google Scholar

Merchant, Jason. 2008b. Variable Island repair under ellipsis. In Kyle Johnson (ed.). Topics in ellipsis, 132–153. Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511487033.006Search in Google Scholar

Merchant, Jason. 2013. Diagnosing ellipsis. Diagnosing Syntax 1. 537–542.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199602490.003.0026Search in Google Scholar

Montalbetti, Mario & Mamoru Saito. 1983. On certain tough differences between Spanish and English. North East Linguistics Society 13(1). 16.Search in Google Scholar

Potsdam, Eric. 1997. English verbal morphology and VP ellipsis. North East Linguistics Society 27(1). 26.Search in Google Scholar

Reglero, Laura. 2007. On Spanish comparative subdeletion constructions. Studia Linguistica 61(2). 130–169. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9582.2007.00133.x.Search in Google Scholar

Rizzi, Luigi. 1982. Negation, wh-movement, and the null subject parameter. In Issues in Italian syntax, 117–185. Dordrecht: Foris.10.1515/9783110883718.117Search 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.10.1007/978-94-011-5420-8_7Search 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

Rouveret, Alain. 2012. VP ellipsis, phases and the syntax of morphology. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 30. 897–963. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-011-9151-3.Search in Google Scholar

Saab, Andrés. 2009. Hacia una teoría de la identidad parcial en las elipsis. Buenos Aires: University of Buenos Aires dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Saab, Andrés. 2022. Bleeding restructuring by ellipsis: New hopes for a motivated verbal ellipsis parameter. Ms., Universidad de Buenos Aires. Available at: https://ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/006717.Search in Google Scholar

Saab, Andrés & Laura Stigliano. 2023. On an undocumented type of predicate ellipsis in Spanish and its consequences for the theory of ellipsis licensing. In Roberta Pires de Oliveira & Cilene Rodrigues (eds.), Trending topics in Romance linguistics. [Special issue]. Isogloss: Open Journal of Romance Linguistics 9(4)/7. 1–34.10.5565/rev/isogloss.354Search in Google Scholar

Sag, Ivan & Jorge Hankamer. 1984. Toward a theory of anaphoric processing. Linguistics and Philosophy. 325–345. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00627709.Search in Google Scholar

Schuyler, Tamara. 2001. Wh-movement out of the site of VP-ellipsis. In Séamas Mac Bhloscaidh (ed.), Syntax and semantics at Santa Cruz, vol. III, 1–20. Santa Cruz, CA: University of California, Linguistics Research Center.Search in Google Scholar

Schwarzschild, Roger. 1999. GIVENness, AvoidF and other constraints on the placement of accent. Natural Language Semantics 7(2). 141–177.10.1023/A:1008370902407Search in Google Scholar

Vela-Plo, Laura. 2020. Drawing comparisons: A syntactic and semantic approach to Basque, Spanish and English inequality comparative structures. Vitoria-Gasteiz: Universidad del País Vasco EHU dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Villa-García, Julio. 2016. TP-ellipsis with a polarity particle in multiple-complementizer contexts in Spanish: On topical remnants and focal licensors. Borealis – An International Journal of Hispanic Linguistics 5(2). 135–172. https://doi.org/10.7557/1.5.2.3781.Search in Google Scholar

Villa-García, Julio & Raquel González Rodríguez. 2020. On the Contrasts between sí ‘yes’ and sí que ‘yes that’ in Spanish and the Structure of the Complementizer Phrase Domain. Studies in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics 13(2). 451–484. https://doi.org/10.1515/shll-2020-2037.Search in Google Scholar

Vinka, Mikael & Christian Waldmann. 2014. Doing it in Swedish doesn’t mean you’ve done it. In NELS 44: The 44th Meeting of the North East linguistic society. University of Connecticut, Storrs, October 18–20, 2013. 243–254. GLSA, University of Massachusetts.Search in Google Scholar

Zagona, Karen. 1982. Government and proper Government of verbal projections. Washington, D.C.: Washington University dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Zagona, Karen. 1988. Proper government of antecedentless VP in English and Spanish. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 6. 95–128. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01791593.Search in Google Scholar

Zubizarreta, Maria Luisa. 1998. Prosody, focus, and word order. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2025-08-04

Published in Print: 2025-10-27

You are currently not able to access this content.

Articles in the same Issue

https://doi.org/10.1515/tlr-2025-2012

Keywords for this article

VP ellipsis; small clauses; neuter pronouns; deep anaphora; surface anaphora; A’-movement