To Be Or Not To Be Elided: VP ellipsis revisited

The main question that this paper addresses is: what happens to non-finite auxiliaries under English VP ellipsis (VPE)? Do they remain overt like finite auxiliaries, or do they disappear together with lexical verbs? Akmajian and Wasow (1975) and Sag (1976) observed the following pattern: non-finite have always stays overt, being is obligatorily elided, and be and been are optionally elided. We provide an analysis for this pattern. As preliminaries for our account we follow Chomsky (1993) and Lasnik (1995b) in assuming that English auxiliaries carry uninterpretable inflectional features which force the auxiliary to raise to the relevant inflectional head for feature checking at PF. As we argue that VPE includes the progressive projections in the ellipsis site, but nothing higher, the have and being data automatically fall out: have is base-generated outside the ellipsis site, so is never elided, whilst being's landing site is inside the ellipsis site, so being is always elided. For be and been, which are base-generated in the ellipsis site and raise out of it to get their inflectional features checked, we take an optional raising approach: in non-elliptical sentences raising is obligatory, otherwise the derivation crashes at PF because of unchecked features. Ellipsis contexts, on the other hand, provide the option of not raising for be and been, because ellipsis then deletes be and been in their base positions, along with their unchecked features, avoiding the PF violation. We extend this account to other phenomena, such as VP fronting, pseudo-clefts and predicate inversion.

[1]  C. Clifton,et al.  Processing Elided Verb Phrases with Flawed Antecedents: the Recycling Hypothesis. , 2006, Journal of memory and language.

[2]  Ivano Caponigro,et al.  Parameterizing Passive Participle Movement , 2003, Linguistic Inquiry.

[3]  Noam Chomsky,et al.  Remarks on Nominalization , 2020, Nominalization.

[4]  W. Lehmann,et al.  An Introduction to Modern Faroese , 1955 .

[5]  Noam Chomsky.  Derivation by phase , 1999 .

[6]  J. Ross.  Auxiliaries as main verbs , 1969 .

[7]  Ian Roberts,et al.  Some notes on VP-fronting and head government , 1990 .

[8]  A. R. Deal.  The Origin and Content of Expletives: Evidence from “Selection” , 2009 .

[9]  Paul Law.  On the passive existential construction , 1999 .

[10]  J. Merchant.  An Asymmetry in Voice Mismatches in VP-Ellipsis and Pseudogapping , 2008, Linguistic Inquiry.

[11]  Kyle Johnson,et al.  What VP Ellipsis Can Do, and What it Can't, but not Why * , 2008 .

[12]  R. Quirk.  A Grammar of contemporary English , 1974 .

[13]  William Harwood,et al.  Rise of the Auxiliaries: a case for auxiliary raising vs. affix lowering , 2014 .

[14]  Eduardo Raposo,et al.  On the Null Object in European Portuguese , 1986 .

[15]  Luis López,et al.  A Derivational Syntax for Information Structure , 2009 .

[16]  Anthony Giddens.  On The Edge , 2001 .

[17]  João Costa,et al.  A multifactorial approach to adverb placement: assumptions, facts, and problems , 2004 .

[18]  Jason Merchant,et al.  Topics in Ellipsis: Variable island repair under ellipsis , 2008 .

[19]  Kirsten Gengel,et al.  Focus and Ellipsis : a generative analysis of pseudogapping and other elliptical structures , 2007 .

[20]  Mark C. Baker.  Building and Merging, not Checking: The Nonexistence of (Aux)-S-V-O Languages , 2002, Linguistic Inquiry.

[21]  L. Haegeman,et al.  Negative Concord and (Multiple) Agree: A Case Study of West Flemish , 2010, Linguistic Inquiry.

[22]  Mark C. Baker,et al.  Thematic Roles and Syntactic Structure , 1997 .

[23]  A. Kroch,et al.  Pseudocleft Connectedness: Implications for the LF Interface Level , 1999, Linguistic Inquiry.

[24]  Karen T. Zagona.  Verb Phrase Syntax: A Parametric Study of English and Spanish , 1988 .

[25]  G. Cinque.  Adverbs and Functional Heads: A Cross-Linguistic Perspective , 1999 .

[26]  Danny Fox,et al.  Cyclic Linearization of Syntactic Structure , 2005 .

[27]  I. Roberts.  Have/Be Raising, Move F, and Procrastinate , 1998, Linguistic Inquiry.

[28]  Stefan Einarsson,et al.  Icelandic : grammar, texts, glossary , 1946 .

[29]  Hedde Zeijlstra,et al.  There is only one way to agree , 2012 .

[30]  Theresa Biberauer,et al.  Parametric Variation: A deletion analysis of null subjects , 2009 .

[31]  Richard S. Kayne.  The English complementizer of , 1997 .

[32]  William Harwood,et al.  Being progressive is just a phase: celebrating the uniqueness of progressive aspect under a phase-based analysis , 2015 .

[33]  Kristin Melum Eide,et al.  A predication operator : Evidence and effects , 1997 .

[34]  Taichi Nakamura,et al.  Voice Mismatches in Sloppy VP-Ellipsis , 2013, Linguistic Inquiry.

[35]  Lobke Aelbrecht,et al.  The Syntactic Licensing of Ellipsis , 2010 .

[36]  Winfried Lechner,et al.  AN INTERPRETIVE EFFECT OF HEAD MOVEMENT 1 , 2005 .

[37]  Jean-Yves Pollock.  Verb movement, universal grammar and the structure of IP , 1989 .

[38]  Ž. Bošković.  Now I’m a Phase, Now I’m Not a Phase: On the Variability of Phases with Extraction and Ellipsis , 2014, Linguistic Inquiry.

[39]  Peter Svenonius,et al.  Extending the extension condition to discontinuous idioms , 2005 .

[40]  Jason Merchant,et al.  Voice and Ellipsis , 2013, Linguistic Inquiry.

[41]  S. Wurmbrand.  The Syntax of Valuation in Auxiliary-participle Constructions , 2012 .

[42]  Kirsten Gengel.  Phases and ellipsis , 2005 .

[43]  M. Koppen,et al.  How to void a phase. Anti-intervention effects with clitic doubling in Dutch dialects , 2012 .

[44]  Sonia Cyrino,et al.  VP ellipsis in European and Brazilian Portuguese: a comparative analysis , 2002 .

[45]  Susi Wurmbrand,et al.  The Domain of Agreement , 2005 .

[46]  Mark C. Baker,et al.  The Syntax of Agreement and Concord , 2008 .

[47]  Noam Chomsky.  Some notes on economy of derivation and representation , 2013 .

[48]  Ian Roberts,et al.  Agreement and Head Movement: Clitics, Incorporation, and Defective Goals , 2010 .

[49]  William Harwood.  Phasage: A Phase-Based Account of English Existential Constructions , 2011 .

[50]  Eric Potsdam,et al.  English Verbal Morphology and VP Ellipsis , 2013 .

[51]  Richard Hudson,et al.  Gerunds without Phrase Structure , 2003 .

[52]  Noam Chomsky,et al.  The Minimalist Program , 1992 .

[53]  J. Legate.  Some Interface Properties of the Phase , 2003, Linguistic Inquiry.

[54]  Marit Julien,et al.  Optional ha in Swedish and Norwegian , 2002 .

[55]  Jason Merchant,et al.  Aleut case matters , 2011 .

[56]  Alain Rouveret,et al.  VP ellipsis, phases and the syntax of morphology , 2012 .

[57]  Elena Anagnostopoulou,et al.  Observations about the form and meaning of the Perfect , 2003 .

[58]  Jeroen Van Craenenbroeck,et al.  The Syntax of Ellipsis: Evidence from Dutch Dialects , 2010 .

[59]  Željko Bošković,et al.  Be careful where you float your quantifiers , 2004 .

[60]  Justin M. Fitzpatrick.  Deletion Through Movement , 2006 .

[61]  Cinque,et al.  Mapping Spatial PPs: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, Volume 6 , 2010 .

[62]  Marc Richards,et al.  Deriving the Edge: What’s in a Phase? , 2011 .

[63]  Anders Holmberg,et al.  The syntax of yes and no in Finnish , 2001 .

[64]  Omer Preminger,et al.  Towards a Unified Account of PersonSplits , 2012 .

[65]  Enoch O. Aboh.  Object Shift, Verb Movement, and Verb Reduplication , 2008 .

[66]  Andrea Moro,et al.  The Raising of Predicates: Predicative Noun Phrases and the Theory of Clause Structure , 1997 .

[67]  Željko Bošković,et al.  Phases beyond Clauses , 2013 .

[68]  Robert Freidin,et al.  Foundational issues in linguistic theory : essays in honor of Jean-Roger Vergnaud , 2008 .

[69]  Kenshi Funakoshi,et al.  On Headless XP-Movement/Ellipsis , 2012, Linguistic Inquiry.

[70]  Jason Merchant,et al.  The syntax of silence : sluicing, islands, and the theory of ellipsis , 2001 .

[71]  Richard S. Kayne.  TOWARD A MODULAR THEORY OF AUXILIARY SELECTION , 1993 .

[72]  L. Aelbrecht,et al.  What ellipsis can do for phases and what it can’t, but not how , 2016 .

[73]  M. Dikken,et al.  Preposition doubling in Flemish and its implications for the syntax of Dutch PPs , 2013 .

[74]  Hedde Zeijlstra,et al.  Negation, Polarity, and Deontic Modals , 2013, Linguistic Inquiry.

[75]  Jeremy Hartman,et al.  The Semantic Uniformity of Traces: Evidence from Ellipsis Parallelism , 2011, Linguistic Inquiry.

[76]  Gereon Müller,et al.  Constraints on Displacement: A phase-based approach , 2011 .

[77]  Anthony Warner,et al.  Ellipsis Conditions and the Status of the English Copula. , 1986 .

[78]  M. Baker,et al.  Passive Arguments Raised , 2018, Diachronic and Comparative Syntax.

[79]  Kleanthes K. Grohmann,et al.  Prolific Domains: On the Anti-Locality of movement dependencies , 2003 .

[80]  Ellen M. Kaisse.  The Syntax of Auxiliary Reduction in English , 1983 .

[81]  Peripheral subjects in two varieties of Portuguese: evidence for a non-unified analysis , 2008 .

[82]  Milan Rezac,et al.  The Interaction of Th/Ex and Locative Inversion , 2006, Linguistic Inquiry.

[83]  Geoffrey K. Pullum,et al.  THE MORPHOLEXICAL NATURE OF ENGLISH TO-CONTRACTION , 1997 .

[84]  Ora Matushansky.  Head Movement in Linguistic Theory , 2006, Linguistic Inquiry.

[85]  Tense, Quantification and Clause Structure in EP and BP. Evidence from a Comparative Study on Sempre , 2004 .

[86]  H. Koopman.  Prepositions, Postpositions, Circumpositions, and Particles , 2010 .

[87]  Andrew Kehler,et al.  Coherence, reference, and the theory of grammar , 2002, CSLI lecture notes series.

[88]  Jong-Bok Kim,et al.  Negation, VP Ellipsis, and VP Fronting in English : A Construction-HPSG Analysis , 2001, PACLIC.

[89]  J. Frampton.  Parasitic gaps and the theory of 'Wh'-chains , 1990 .

[90]  Renaat Declerck,et al.  Studies on Copular Sentences, Clefts and Pseudo-Clefts , 1988 .

[91]  Hedde Zeijlstra,et al.  On the uninterpretability of interpretable features , 2014 .

[92]  Sonia Cyrino,et al.  Local licensers and recovering in VP ellipsis , 2005 .

[93]  Lobke Aelbrecht,et al.  VP-Ellipsis Is Not Licensed by VP-Topicalization , 2012, Linguistic Inquiry.

[94]  Željko Bošković,et al.  On the Locality and Motivation of Move and Agree: An Even More Minimal Theory , 2007 .

[95]  F. R. Higgins,et al.  The Pseudo-Cleft Construction in English , 2015 .

[96]  Noam Chomsky.  A minimalist program for linguistic theory , 1992 .