On the interaction of P-stranding and Sluicing in Bulgarian

I will suggest that the interaction between preposition stranding, case morphology, and sluicing in the Bulgarian of – at least – some speakers strongly supports an account of sluicing under which (a) the intuitively missing part of the question is syntactically represented, (b) the missing part of the sentence is elided under semantic rather than syntactic identity with the antecedent, and (c) the pronounced wh-phrase has to fit in a specific sense to be discussed into the antecedent. Assumptions (a) and (b) constitute Merchant’s (1999, 2001) approach to sluicing. As pointed out by Lasnik (2001, 2005), (a) and (b) by themselves do not derive important, well-established, central properties of sluicing. Assumption (c) is intended to fix this gap in Merchant’s account. The conjunction of (a), (b), and (c) makes novel predictions not shared by competing accounts of sluicing like a Lasnik-style syntactic identity account or a Culicover-and-Jackendoff-style account with no syntax at the ellipsis site. The Bulgarian data presented here show