The Interfaces: Deriving and Interpreting Omitted Structures (Linguistik Aktuell Linguistics Today)

409 Pages·2003·14.31 MB·English

by  Kerstin Schwabe

TheInterfaces
Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today
Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today (LA) provides a platform for original
monograph studies into synchronic and diachronic linguistics. Studies in LA
confrontempiricalandtheoreticalproblemsasthesearecurrentlydiscussedin
syntax,semantics,morphology,phonology,andsystematicpragmaticswiththe
aim to establish robust empirical generalizations within a universalistic
perspective.
SeriesEditor
WernerAbraham
UniversityofVienna
AdvisoryEditorialBoard
GuglielmoCinque(UniversityofVenice)
GüntherGrewendorf(J.W.Goethe-University,Frankfurt)
LilianeHaegeman(UniversityofLille,France)
HubertHaider(UniversityofSalzburg)
ChristerPlatzack(UniversityofLund)
IanRoberts(CambridgeUniversity)
KenSafir(RutgersUniversity,NewBrunswickNJ)
LisadeMenaTravis(McGillUniversity)
StenVikner(UniversityofAarhus)
C.Jan-WouterZwart(UniversityofGroningen)
Volume61
TheInterfaces:Derivingandinterpretingomittedstructures
EditedbyKerstinSchwabeandSusanneWinkler
The Interfaces
Deriving and interpreting
omitted structures
Edited by
Kerstin Schwabe
ZAS,Berlin
Susanne Winkler
UniversityofTübingen
JohnBenjaminsPublishingCompany
Amsterdam(cid:1)/(cid:1)Philadelphia
TM ThepaperusedinthispublicationmeetstheminimumrequirementsofAmerican
8
NationalStandardforInformationSciences–PermanenceofPaperforPrinted
LibraryMaterials,ansiz39.48-1984.
LibraryofCongressCataloging-in-PublicationData
Theinterfaces:derivingandinterpretingomittedstructures/editedbyKerstinSchwabe,
SusanneWinkler.
p. cm.(LinguistikAktuell/LinguisticsToday,issn0166–0829;v.61)
Includesbibliographicalreferencesandindexes.
1.Grammar,Comparativeandgeneral--Ellipsis.2.Grammar,Comparativeand
general--Syntax. 3. Semantics. I. Schwabe, Kerstin. II. Winkler, Susanne, 1960- III.
Linguistikaktuell;Bd.61.
P291.3 I58 2003
415-dc21 2002034217
isbn90(cid:1)272(cid:1)2784(cid:1)5(Eur.)/1(cid:1)58811(cid:1)330(cid:1)2(US)(Hb;alk.paper)
©2003–JohnBenjaminsB.V.
Nopartofthisbookmaybereproducedinanyform,byprint,photoprint,microfilm,orany
othermeans,withoutwrittenpermissionfromthepublisher.
JohnBenjaminsPublishingCo.·P.O.Box36224·1020meAmsterdam·TheNetherlands
JohnBenjaminsNorthAmerica·P.O.Box27519·Philadelphiapa19118-0519·usa
Table of contents
Exploringtheinterfacesfromtheperspectiveofomittedstructures 1
SusanneWinklerandKerstinSchwabe
I. TowardstheexplorationofPF-deletionaccounts
Ellipsisandsyntacticrepresentation 29
ChristopherKennedy
Subject-auxiliaryinversionincomparativesandPFoutputconstraints 55
JasonMerchant
Antecedent-containmentandellipsis 79
ChrisWilder
Backgroundmatchinginrightnoderaisingconstructions 121
KatharinaHartmann
II. Fromthecomputationalsystemtothesyntax-semanticsinterface
Mergecopy 155
CaterinaDonati
Phrasestructureparadoxes,movementandellipsis 177
WinfriedLechner
Unpronouncedheadsinrelativeclauses 205
UliSauerland
Variationatthesyntax-semanticsinterface:Evidencefromgapping 227
LuisLópezandSusanneWinkler
 Tableofcontents
III. Thesemanticcomponentanditsconnectiontofocusand
discoursestructure
Ellipsisandthestructureofdiscourse 251
DanielHardt
Correlaterestrictionanddefinitenesseffectinellipsis 263
MaribelRomero
F-markingandspecificityinsluicingconstructions 301
KerstinSchwabe
ThesemanticsofJapanesenullpronounsanditscross-linguisticimplications 321
SatoshiTomioka
Omissionimpossible?Topicandfocusinfocalellipsis 341
PetraGretsch
References 367
Nameindex 389
Subjectindex 395
Exploring the interfaces from the
perspective of omitted structures*
SusanneWinklerandKerstinSchwabe
. Introduction
The investigation of the structure and the precise nature of the interfaces which
connectthesoundandthemeaningcomponentstothecorecomputationalsystem
hasbeenlocatedatthecenteroftheresearchincontemporarygenerativelinguis-
tics. Traditionally, the interfaces comprise the syntax-semantics and the syntax-
phonology interfaces. In recent years, however, the scope of investigation has
beenconsiderablyexpandedbyasking howthesyntax-semantics andthesyntax-
phonology interfaces connect with the discourse and the information structural
component. The prevailing questions are: What exactly counts as evidence, and
whatcountsasanargumentforaparticularset-upoftheinterfaces?Thisiswhere
theenterpriseofthisbookbegins:theinvestigationofellipticalphenomenapro-
videscrucialdataforthetheoriesthatareconcernedwiththearchitectureofthe
interfaces,becauseellipsislacksformandstillhasmeaning.Thetheoriesofellip-
sis in this volume are concerned with questions of the representation and inter-
pretationofellipsisandthefunctionsofinformationstructure.Themostcrucial
questionis:Howdothesyntax-phonology,thesyntax-semantics,andtheinforma-
tionstructuralcomponentinteractinthecontextofellipsis?Althoughtheresearch
inthis area has grown toincorporateagreater variety ofdata,it has becomein-
creasinglyclearthatmanyquestionsaboutthearchitectureofgrammarcannotbe
answeredbyfollowingastrict syntactic,semantic,phonological,ordiscourseac-
count.Thetheoreticalcomplexityofthestudyofinterfacesandtherapidchanges
inleadingtheorieslikethePrinciplesandParametersFramework(Chomsky1981)
andtheMinimalistProgram(Chomsky1995)requirethatsyntacticians,semanti-
cists,andphonologistscollaborateintheexplorationoftheinterfaces.Collabora-
tionisneededintheinvestigationsofthewholerangeofavailabledata,including
evidencefromfocusandintonationaldata.Thedevelopmentofacomprehensive
theoryofmeaningwhichalsoincorporatesinsightsfromthestudyofinformation
 SusanneWinklerandKerstinSchwabe
structure is essential for a comprehensive theory of ellipsis. The chapters in this
volumebring together the expertise of semanticists and syntacticians with long-
standing interests in the syntax-semantics-phonology interfaces and particularly
theirinterrelatednesswithfocusandinformationstructure.
IntheclassicviewsetoutbyChomsky(seeChomsky1965,1995,2000,2001),
the syntactic component of the grammar (also called the computational system)
accounts for the matching of sound and meaning (see Jackendoff 1998;Platzack
2000;Lópezinpreparation,foroppositeviews).Underthisconception,oneofthe
mostcentralissueshasbeentofindanexplanationofhowitispossibleforspeakers
and listeners to interpret ellipsis in the absence of form, in some sense or other,
suchasinthecaseofVPellipsesinEnglish,asin(1),orinthecaseofgappingin
German,asexemplifiedby(2).
(1) a. Johnvotedforhimselfandhislawyerdidtoo.
b. Johnvotedforhimself,becausenobodyelsedid.
(2) DieHellahatmirgeschrieben, dasssiesichlangweiltohnemich;
theHellahasmewritten thatsheherselfis-boredwithoutme;
ichmichauch.
Imyselftoo
‘Hellahaswrittenthatsheisboredwithoutme;metoo.’
Inthisrespectthemereoccurrenceofellipsisisachallengetoourunderstanding
of the architecture of grammar (in current syntactic terms as in (3)), where the
most powerful constraint (the former Projection Principle) is that grammatical
information cannot simply be lost on its way from the computationalsystem to
theinterfaces,in(3)referredtoasphonologicalform(PF)andlogicalform(LF).
(3)
Part of the answer to the question of how words or phrases can be understood
without beingpronounced(orotherwise referred to)already liesinthe waythat
weassumeellipticalmaterialisrepresentedandwhere.Withinthecurrenttheory
ofgrammar,threeprevailingresearchparadigmscanbeisolated:thephonological
deletiontheory,theso-calledsyntax-firstapproach,andthesemantictheory.The
phonologicaldeletiontheoryassumes that elliptical material isfully syntactically
represented, butdeleted at a certain point in the derivation of the sentence. The
syntax-firstapproachinvestigatesthecomputationalsystemproperandaimsatan
answertothequestionofwhetherellipsiscanbereducedtomovementorotherin-
dependentlyexistingsyntacticprocesses.Althoughthestartingpointofanysyntax-
Exploringtheinterfacesfromtheperspectiveofomittedstructures 
firstmethodologyis,asthenamesays,essentiallysyntactic,thegoalistofindout
exactlywhichpartsoftheanalysisofomittedstructuresmustbehandedovertothe
interfaces.Thesemantictheoryassumesthatsemanticmechanismsgoverningthe
recoveryofmeaningsfromdiscoursecanbeputtoworkintheanalysisofelliptical
constructions(e.g.,theproformtheory).
Closely connected to the question of how ellipsis is represented is the ques-
tion of how information structure and focus contribute to the interpretation of
ellipsis. Assuming the grammatical model in (3), it is difficult to see how and
exactly where the information structural component and the theory of focus
shouldcomeintoplay.Therearebasically fourdifferentapproaches thataddress
the integration of the information structural component in the theory of gram-
mar:Thefirstapproachisessentiallysyntacticandassumesthatfocusmovement,
like wh-movement, is interpreted at the syntax-semantics interface (see Platzack
2000;Uriagereka1999).Thesecondisanessentiallysemanticapproachandfinds
its instantiation either in Rooth’s (1992b) theory of Alternative Semantics or in
Schwarzschild’s(1999)theoryofGivenness,bothofwhichoperateattheseman-
ticcomponent ofgrammar. The thirdapproachassumes thatthesemantic com-
ponentinterfaceswithinformationstructure(e.g.,Vergnaud&Zubizarreta1992;
Zubizarreta 1998; see Winkler & Göbbel 2000). Vallduví (1992), finally, assumes
that the information structural component is an interface separate from PF and
LF,possiblyalsolocatedoutsidethegrammaticalmodelproper(seealsoVallduví
&Vilkuna1998).
The contributions in this volume fall into three groups. The groups are ar-
rangedaccordingtotheirtheoreticalpointofviewandaccordingtotheinterface
problemthat they investigate and solve. The papers in thefirst group(Kennedy,
Hartmann, Merchant, and Wilder) pursue a PF-deletion account. Kennedy’s pa-
perstartsoutbydirectlyaddressingthequestionofhowmuchsyntax,howmuch
phonologyandsemanticsareinvolvedinellipsis.Onthebasisoftheinteractionof
ellipsiswithseveraldifferentgrammaticalconstraintsheproposesthatelidedcon-
stituentshavesyntacticstructurethatisdeletedatPF.AtPF,deletionisunderstood
asaninstructiontobypassmorpho-phonologicalinstantiationinthesenseofWa-
sow(1972).ThepapersbyMerchant,Wilder,andHartmanndiscussdifferenttypes
ofellipticalconstructions(comparativedeletion,antecedent-containeddeletionand
right node raising) and show that their specific behavior can only be adequately
accountedforunderaPF-deletionaccount.
Thesecondgroup(Donati,Lechner,Sauerland,López&Winkler)exploresthe
possibilitythat certainkindsofellipsis shouldbeanalyzed usingthewell-known
machineryofsyntacticdisplacement.Donatiinvestigatestheideathatmovement
and ellipsis may turn out to be the same operation. Lechner addresses a simi-
lar problem. He suggests that VP-fronting and VP-deletion are essentially the
same,andthattheirapparentdifferencesarederivablefromprinciplesofeconomy.