Journal of Universal Language

Sejong University Language Research Institue

J. Univers. Lang. 2010; 11(2):149-177

pISSN: 1598-6381

DOI: https://doi.org/10.22425/jul.2010.11.2.149

Article

A Discourse Analysis Approach to the Sluicing Conundrum

Soo-Yeon Kim¹

¹Sejong University

Copyright ⓒ 2016, Sejong University Language Research Institue. This is an Open-Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Published Online: Jan 01, 2017

Abstract

With a critical review of previous analyses on sluicing construction, this study points out problems with structural analyses on sluicing and demonstrates a way to retrieve putative sources for the elided portion in sluicing, minimizing the complexity of deriving sluicing constructions. This paper focuses on so called connectivity effects that constitute a prima facie piece of evidence of movement of the sluice out of a sentential constituent. Much work has been done to resolve the sluicing conundrum between the connectivity effect and absence of syntactic island violation. This paper argues that employing the Cooper style E-type pronoun in the derivation of the second conjunct of sluicing constructions can account for the conundrum without unnecessary complication of grammar. This paper also shows the necessity of considering relevant discourse that affects the acceptability of sluicing which can be represented as a continuum depending on the prominency of the correlate. Degraded acceptability of sluicing with implicit antecedents is from difficulties in parsing the sluice with non-prominent antecendent.

Keywords: ellipsis; sluicing; E-type anaphora; discourse activation; implicit antecedent; prominency; processing

REFERENCES

Albert, C. 1993. Sluicing and Weak Islands. Ms. University of California, Santa Cruz.

Chomsky, N. 1993. A Minimalist Program for Linguistic Theory, in.

K. Hale and S. J. Keyser (eds.) The View from Building 20 - Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger, 1-52. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

Chomsky, N. & H. Lasnik. 1993. Principles and Parameters Theory, in J. Jacobs, A. von Stechow, W. Sternefeld, & T. Vennemann (eds.) Syntax: An International Handbook of Contemporary Research, 506-70. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Chung, S., et al. 1995. Sluicing and Logical Form. Natural Language Semantics 3, 239-82.

Chung, S. 2006. Sluicing Revisited. LSA Annual Meeting Symposyum on Ellipsis. New Mexico: Albuquerque.

van Craenenbroeck, J. 2007. What Lies Beneath: The Hidden Syntax of Sluicing. Talk given at New York University. Condoravdi, C. & J. Gawron. 1996. The Context-dependency of Implicit Arguments, in M. Kanazawa, C. J. Pinon., & H. de Swart (eds.) Quantifiers, Deduction and Context. Stanford: CSLI. [page numbers are missing].

Culicover, P & Ray. J. 2005. Syntax Made Simple(r). New York: Oxford University Press.

Dalrymple, S., et al. 1991. Ellipsis and Higher-order Unification, Linguistics and Philosophy 14, 399-452.

10.

Evans, G. 1980. Pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry 11, 337-62.

11.

Fiengo, R., & R. May. 1992. The Eliminative Puzzles of Ellipsis. In Proceedings of the Stuttgart Ellipsis Workshop, Steve, B. & A, Hestvik (eds.) Heidelberg, Germany: Arbieitspapiere des Sonderforschungbereichs 340, Bericht Nr. 29.

12.

Fodor, J. A., & J. D. Fodor. 1980. Functional Structure, Quantifiers and Meaning Postulates. Linguistic Inquiry 11, 759-770.

13.

Fortin, C. 2007. Indonesian Sluicing and the P-stranding Generalization. Paper presented at the 14th Annual Meeting of the Austronesian Formal Linguistics Association (AFLA14). Montreal: McGill University.

14.

Fox, D. 2000. Economy and Semantic Interpretation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

15.

Fox, D. & H. Lasnik. 2003. Successive Cyclic Movement and Island Repair: The Difference between Sluicing and VP Ellipsis. Linguistic Inquiry 34, 143-164.

16.

Ginzburg, J. & I, Sag. 2000. Interrogative Investigations: The Form, Meaning, and Use of English Interrogatives. Stanford, CA: Center for the Study of Language and Information.

17.

Hardt, D. & M. Romero. 2004. Ellipsis and the Structure of Discourse. Journal of Semantics 21, 375-414.

18.

Hendricks, P. & H. Hoop. 2001. Optimality Theoretic Semantics. Linguistics and Philosophy 24, 1-32.

19.

Kennedy, C. & J. Merchant. 2000. Attributive Comparative Deletion. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 19, 89-146.

20.

Kim, S.-Y. 2006. E-type Anaphora Will Do. Studies in Generative Grammar 16-4, 665-686.

21.

Kim, S.-Y. 2008. Islands in Sluicing with Implicit Antecedent. Korean Journal of Linguistics 33-4, 589-609.

22.

Kim, S.-Y. 2009. Questioning Assumptions for Scope Parallelism in Sluicing. Studies in Generative Grammar 19-4, 529-548.

23.

Kim, S.-Y. & S. Kuno. 2010. Sluicing with Implicit Indefinites as Antecedents. Ms. Sejong University & Harvard University.

24.

Koopman, H. & D. Sportiche. 1982. Variables and the Bijection Principle. Linguistic Review 2, 139-60.

25.

Kuno, S. 1972. Natural Explanations for Some Syntactic Universals. Mathematical Linguistics and Automatic Translation, Report No. NSF-28 to the National Science Foundation, Harvard University, II-1-85.

26.

Kuno, S. & J. Robinson. 1972. Multiple Wh Questions. Linguistic Inquiry 3, 463-487.

27.

Lakoff, G. 1972. A Note on Vagueness and Ambiguity (a squib). Linguistic Inquiry 1, 357-359.

28.

Lasnik, H. 2001. When Can You Save a Structure by Destroying It? North East Linguistic Society 31, 301-320.

29.

Lasnik, H. 2007. On Ellipsis: the PF Approach to Missing Constituents. University of Maryland Working Papers in Linguistics 15, A. Conroy, C. Jing. C. Nakao, E. Takahashi (eds.), 143-153, College Park, MD.

30.

Lobeck, A. 1991. The Phrase Structure of Ellipsis, in Susan Rothstein (ed.) Perspectives on phrase structure, 81-103. San Diego: Academic Press.

31.

May, R. 1985. Logical Form - Its Structure and Derivation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

32.

Merchant, J. 2001. The Syntax of Silence: Sluicing, Islands, and Identity in Ellipsis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

33.

Merchant, J. 2002. Swiping in Germanic, in C. Jan-Wouter Zwart and W. Abraham (eds.) Studies in Comparative Germanic Syntax, 289-316. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

34.

Merchant, J. 2003. Sluicing, in M. Everaert and H. van Riemsdijk (eds.) The Blackwell Companion to Syntax. London: Wiley Blackwell, 269-289.

35.

Merchant, J. 2004. Fragments and Ellipsis. Linguistics and philosophy 27, 661-738.

36.

van Riemsdijk, H. 1978. A Case Study in Syntactic Markedness: The Binding Nature of Prepositional Phrases. Dordrecht: Foris.

37.

Romero, M. 1998. Focus and Reconstruction Effects in Wh-phrases. Amherst: University of Massachusetts dissertation.

38.

Ross, R. 1969. Guess Who? In Papers from the Fifth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society. Ed. Robert I. Binnick, Alice Davidson, Georgia M. Green, & Jerry L. Morgan, 252-86.

39.

Wasow, T. 1972. Anaphoric Relations in English. Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation.