2025/12/30 by Rebecca Jarvis · 1 voice
Neuroscience · Psychology · #Action Observation and Synchronization #Embodied and Extended Cognition #Motor Control and Adaptation
paper · doi:10.16995/glossa.18956
openalex created_date 2025/12/30 · openalex publication_date 2025/12/30 · openalex updated_date 2026/05/21
This paper argues for the existence of multiple mechanisms in the grammar that can give rise to resumption in syntactic movement. Empirical motivation for this split comes from extraction patterns in Atchan (Kwa, Côte d’Ivoire), where PP subextraction and subject extraction behave differently: all PP subextraction requires resumption, while subject extraction results in resumption only when a pronoun is extracted. I argue that the first pattern is best captured via a pronunciation requirement or stranding, while cliticization best captures the subject extraction pattern. I thus argue that these resumptive mechanisms are not incompatible, and that they have different empirical coverage.