2020/02/19 by Idan Landau · 1 citation
Arts and Humanities · Computer Science · Psychology · #Natural Language Processing Techniques #Phonetics and Phonology Research #Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
paper · doi:10.1162/ling_a_00346
openalex publication_date 2020/02/19 · crossref created 2020/02/19 · crossref issued 2020/03/01 · crossref published 2020/03/01 · crossref published-print 2020/03/01 · crossref deposited 2024/07/31 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · crossref indexed 2026/07/29 · openalex updated_date 2026/08/01
An increasingly popular analysis of object gap sentences in many languages derives them in two steps: (a) V-raising out of VP, and (b) VP-ellipsis of the remnant, stranding the verb (V-stranding VP-ellipsis, VSVPE). For Hebrew, Hindi, Russian, and Portuguese, I show this analysis to be inadequate. First, it undergenerates elliptical objects in various environments, and second, it overgenerates nonexisting adjunct-including readings. For all the problematic data, simple argument ellipsis provides a unified explanation. The absence of VSVPE in languages that do allow V-raising and Aux-stranding VP-ellipsis raises an intriguing problem for theories addressing the interaction of head movement and ellipsis.