Szczegielniak, Adam2016-04-112005Szczegielniak, Adam. 2005. "Relativization That You Did." MIT Occasional Papers in Linguistics Vol. 24.http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:26517269This 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.en-USResearch Paper or Report2012-06-292016-04-11