Gapped coordinations in English: Form, usage, and implications for linguistic theory

Abstract This paper reports the results of a usage-based study of gapping (as in “I ate fish, Bill [ ] rice, and Harry [ ] roast beef”), one of the most extensively studied syntactic constructions in English. Using the British component of the International Corpus of English (ICE-GB) as the database, our investigation demonstrates that gapping is an extremely marginal grammatical construction in English. It is virtually non-existent in interactive speech and has only a very limited presence in certain types of monologues and written registers. Syntactically speaking, gapping favors simple structures, linking and low transitivity verbal elements, and can ostensibly be deemed as copula-derived. From a discourse pragmatic point of view, information flow, social interaction, and stylistic functions are found to be contributing factors to the ways that gapping structures are constituted and used. Our study can thus be taken as evidence that an adequate understanding of the form and discourse functions of syntactic structures is best achieved through examinations of actual language use.

[1]  F. Bartlett,et al.  Remembering: A Study in Experimental and Social Psychology , 1932 .

[2]  Jan Svartvik,et al.  Directions in corpus linguistics : proceedings of Nobel Symposium 82, Stockholm, 4-8 August 1991 , 1992 .

[3]  T. Bever,et al.  Empty categories access their antecedents during comprehension , 1988 .

[4]  Mark Steedman,et al.  Gapping as constituent coordination , 1990 .

[5]  Gerald Gazdar,et al.  Unbounded Dependencies and Coordinate Structure , 1981 .

[6]  Sidney Greenbaum,et al.  A new corpus of English: ICE , 1992 .

[7]  Deborah Tannen,et al.  Talking voices: Repetition in conversation: toward a poetics of talk , 1987 .

[8]  N. Oostdijk,et al.  The Language of Dialogue in Fiction , 1990 .

[9]  Hongyin Tao,et al.  Response to Newmeyer's 'Grammar is Grammar and Usage is Usage' , 2005 .

[10]  Brian Agbayani,et al.  Gapping, pseudogapping and sideward movement , 2004 .

[11]  S. Thompson,et al.  Transitivity, clause structure, and argument structure: Evidence from conversation , 2001 .

[12]  John W. Du Bois The Discourse Basis of Ergativity , 1987 .

[13]  John Robert Ross,et al.  Constraints on variables in syntax , 1967 .

[14]  W. Chafe,et al.  Properties of spoken and written language. , 1987 .

[15]  IVAN A. SAG, GERALD GAZDAR, THOMAS WASOW, AND STEVEN WEISLER COORDINATION AND HOW TO DISTINGUISH , .

[16]  S. Thompson,et al.  Transitivity in Grammar and Discourse , 1980 .

[17]  Gerald Gazdar,et al.  Coordination and how to distinguish categories , 1985 .

[18]  L Frazier,et al.  Processing Coordinate Structures , 2000, Journal of psycholinguistic research.

[19]  Wallace L. Chafe,et al.  The flow of thought and the flow of language , 1977 .

[20]  K Carlson,et al.  The Effects of Parallelism and Prosody in the Processing of Gapping Structures , 2001, Language and speech.

[21]  Frank Wijnen,et al.  Gapping: Electrophysiological evidence for immediate processing of “missing” verbs in sentence comprehension , 2004, Brain and Language.

[22]  Gerald A. Sanders,et al.  IMMEDIATE DOMINANCE AND IDENTITY DELETION , 1972 .

[23]  Andreas Stolcke,et al.  Gapping and Frame Semantics: A fresh look from a cognitive perspective , 1990, COLING.

[24]  Ray Jackendoff,et al.  Gapping and related rules , 1970 .

[25]  John Haiman,et al.  Iconic and Economic Motivation , 1983 .

[26]  Charles F. Meyer,et al.  Coordination ellipsis in spoken and written American English , 1995 .

[27]  R. Carter,et al.  Grammar and the Spoken Language , 1995 .

[28]  Misha Becker Is isn't be , 2004 .

[29]  Ivan A. Sag,et al.  Deletion And Logical Form , 1976 .

[30]  Sidney Greenbaum,et al.  Ellipsis and coordination: Norms and preferences , 1982 .

[31]  Richard Hudson,et al.  Coordination and grammatical relations , 1988, Journal of Linguistics.