Questioning Assumptions for Scope Parallelism in Sluicing

It is generally accepted that sluicing ameliorates numerous syntactic violations by not producing a problematic portion of a sentence. This paper examines the apparent opposit phenomena in sluicing where acceptability of a given sentence deteriorates by not producing some part of it. Criticizing previous analyses of unacceptable sluicing with implicit correlates over selective islands, this paper proposes that scope parallelism in Chuns Ladusaw, and McClosky (1995) and Romero (1998) works but it does so in a different way from what they propose. By demonstrating counterexamples to assumptions for applying scope parallelism to sluicing, this paper argues that application of parallelism should not be limited to the cases where the remnant has wide scope and where the implicit indefinite correlate has narrow scope. Rather, it applies to coordinate constructions in general where there is no sluicing at all.