on (anti-)connectivity effects1

sentences. These data lead to the conclusion that anti-connectivity effects cannot be used as evidence against a syntax-based approach to specificational sentences and binding, that the analysis of specificational sentences should include both a syntactic and a semantic device, and that the syntactic analysis of specificational sentences should rely crucially on their information structure. I present and adopt Heycock & Kroch's (2002) analysis for specificational sentences, in which connectivity effects result from the assembling of ground and focus. The fact that connectivity effects are also exhibited by verb-object-subject word order in French and Spanish, which is marked for the ground-focus partition, is presented as an important piece of inde

[1]  D. Bolinger.  Pronouns in Discourse , 1979 .

[2]  Karen Lahousse.  NP subject inversion in French: two types, two configurations , 2006 .

[3]  Manfred Krifka,et al.  Scope Inversion under the Rise-Fall Contour in German , 1998, Linguistic Inquiry.

[4]  Karen Lahousse.  Specificational sentences and word order in Romance: A functional analysis , 2007 .

[5]  Daniel Büring,et al.  The Great Scope Inversion Conspiracy , 1995 .

[6]  Liliane Haegeman,et al.  Introduction to Government and Binding Theory , 1991 .

[7]  A. Kratzer.  Scope or Pseudoscope? Are there Wide-Scope Indefinites? , 1998 .

[8]  Yael Sharvit,et al.  Connectivity in Specificational Sentences , 1999 .

[9]  Alexander Grosu,et al.  On the Status of the So-Called Right Roof Constraint. , 1973 .

[10]  Pauline Jacobson,et al.  Binding Connectivity in Copular Sentences , 1994 .

[11]  Katarzyna Dziwirek,et al.  Copula Inversion Puzzles in English and Russian , 2005 .

[12]  P. Schlenker.  Clausal Equations (A Note on the Connectivity Problem) , 2002 .

[13]  Mark Steedman,et al.  Information Structure and the Syntax-Phonology Interface , 2000, Linguistic Inquiry.

[14]  Georgette Ioup,et al.  Some universals for quantifier scope , 1975 .

[15]  Line Mikkelsen,et al.  Reanalyzing the definiteness effect: evidence from Danish , 2002 .

[16]  T. Reinhart.  Anaphora and semantic interpretation , 1983 .

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

[18]  André Meinunger,et al.  Pseudoclefts and ellipsis , 2000 .

[19]  Nomi Erteschik-Shir.  Focus Structure and Scope , 1999 .

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

[21]  W. O'grady,et al.  Functional Syntax: Anaphora, Discourse, and Empathy , 1987 .

[22]  Irene Heim,et al.  Semantics in generative grammar , 1998 .