Publication: Relativization That You Did
Open/View Files
Date
2005
Authors
Published Version
Published Version
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
MIT Working Papers in Linguistics
The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you.
Citation
Szczegielniak, Adam. 2005. "Relativization That You Did." MIT Occasional Papers in Linguistics Vol. 24.
Research Data
Abstract
This work address the puzzle why VP ellipsis where the subject plus an auxiliary/modal/negation (non bare-VP ellipsis) is not possible in relatives derived via operator movement, whereas VP ellipsis where only the subject remains (bare-VP ellipsis) is possible in both relatives derived via operator movement as well as head noun movement. I will argue that Polish and Russian ellipsis data points to the generalization that VPellipsis is essentially deletion of a topic VP. In the first part of the thesis, I show that Polish and Russian relative clauses divide into two types: (i) derived by head noun movement (co/cto-relatives), and (ii) derived by operator movement and adjunction of the relative to the head noun (który/kotoryjrelatives). In the second part, I answer why bare-VP ellipsis is only possible in co/cto-relatives, and non bare-VP ellipsis is possible in both types of relatives. I will argue that de-stressing and subsequent ellipsis requires the establishment of Topic and Focus in overt syntax. The establishment of Topic/Focus interacts with relative clause formation giving rise to the asymmetry in the availability of both types of VP ellipsis in different kinds of relative clauses.
Description
Other Available Sources
Keywords
Terms of Use
This article is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material (LAA), as set forth at Terms of Service