Publication:
Relativization That You Did

Thumbnail Image

Date

2005

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.

Research Projects

Organizational Units

Journal Issue

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

Endorsement

Review

Supplemented By

Referenced By

Related Stories