{"title":"西班牙语嵌入语隙中的补语缺失","authors":"Max Bonke, Sophie Repp","doi":"10.1515/tlr-2022-2096","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Gapping in embedded environments may occur in two configurations: (i) the whole coordination containing both conjuncts is embedded (= embedded gapping, EG), (ii) the second (i.e. elliptical) clause is embedded within its own conjunct (= single conjunct embedded gapping, SCEG). Languages seem to differ in their restrictions on these two structures: EG in some languages does not allow for a complementizer in the elliptical conjunct, while it does in other languages. SCEG is outright unacceptable in some languages but acceptable in other languages. Overall, languages seem to fall into two groups such that one group allows a complementizer in the elliptical conjunct of EG and generally allows SCEG, whereas the other group allows neither. We present four experiments in Spanish on the acceptability of the complementizer que ‘that’ in the elliptical conjunct in EG. Our results suggest that que in Spanish EG is overall subject to similar restrictions as SCEG gapping: There are different degrees of degradation depending on the (type of) embedding verb without outright unacceptability. While the relevant property has been argued to be factivity for SCEG, we argue that it is not the factivity of the embedding verb as such that drives acceptability, but assertion embedding. We outline a theoretical proposal building on existing accounts of structural ambiguity in gapping, the truncation of complement CPs under some verbs including factives, and the general flexibility of the semantic/pragmatic categories factivity and assertion.","PeriodicalId":46358,"journal":{"name":"Linguistic Review","volume":"39 1","pages":"525 - 555"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Complementizer deletion in embedded gapping in Spanish\",\"authors\":\"Max Bonke, Sophie Repp\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/tlr-2022-2096\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Gapping in embedded environments may occur in two configurations: (i) the whole coordination containing both conjuncts is embedded (= embedded gapping, EG), (ii) the second (i.e. elliptical) clause is embedded within its own conjunct (= single conjunct embedded gapping, SCEG). Languages seem to differ in their restrictions on these two structures: EG in some languages does not allow for a complementizer in the elliptical conjunct, while it does in other languages. SCEG is outright unacceptable in some languages but acceptable in other languages. Overall, languages seem to fall into two groups such that one group allows a complementizer in the elliptical conjunct of EG and generally allows SCEG, whereas the other group allows neither. We present four experiments in Spanish on the acceptability of the complementizer que ‘that’ in the elliptical conjunct in EG. Our results suggest that que in Spanish EG is overall subject to similar restrictions as SCEG gapping: There are different degrees of degradation depending on the (type of) embedding verb without outright unacceptability. While the relevant property has been argued to be factivity for SCEG, we argue that it is not the factivity of the embedding verb as such that drives acceptability, but assertion embedding. We outline a theoretical proposal building on existing accounts of structural ambiguity in gapping, the truncation of complement CPs under some verbs including factives, and the general flexibility of the semantic/pragmatic categories factivity and assertion.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46358,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Linguistic Review\",\"volume\":\"39 1\",\"pages\":\"525 - 555\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Linguistic Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/tlr-2022-2096\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Linguistic Review","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/tlr-2022-2096","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
摘要
嵌入式环境中的间隙可能发生在两种情况下:(i)包含两个连接词的整个配位被嵌入(=嵌入式间隙,EG); (ii)第二个(即椭圆)子句被嵌入到它自己的连接词中(=单个连接词嵌入间隙,SCEG)。不同语言对这两种结构的限制似乎不同:有些语言的EG不允许在省略连词中使用补语,而另一些语言则允许。SCEG在某些语言中是完全不可接受的,但在其他语言中是可以接受的。总的来说,语言似乎分为两类:一类允许在EG的椭圆连词中使用补语,通常允许SCEG,而另一类则不允许。我们提出了四个实验在西班牙语的补语que ' that '在EG的椭圆连词的可接受性。我们的研究结果表明,西班牙语EG中的que总体上受到与SCEG缺口类似的限制:根据嵌入动词的(类型)有不同程度的退化,但不会完全不可接受。虽然相关属性被认为是SCEG的实体性,但我们认为,驱动可接受性的不是嵌入动词的实体性,而是断言嵌入。我们概述了一个理论建议,建立在现有的缺口结构歧义,一些动词下的补语CPs的截断,包括事实,以及语义/语用范畴的一般灵活性,事实和断言。
Complementizer deletion in embedded gapping in Spanish
Abstract Gapping in embedded environments may occur in two configurations: (i) the whole coordination containing both conjuncts is embedded (= embedded gapping, EG), (ii) the second (i.e. elliptical) clause is embedded within its own conjunct (= single conjunct embedded gapping, SCEG). Languages seem to differ in their restrictions on these two structures: EG in some languages does not allow for a complementizer in the elliptical conjunct, while it does in other languages. SCEG is outright unacceptable in some languages but acceptable in other languages. Overall, languages seem to fall into two groups such that one group allows a complementizer in the elliptical conjunct of EG and generally allows SCEG, whereas the other group allows neither. We present four experiments in Spanish on the acceptability of the complementizer que ‘that’ in the elliptical conjunct in EG. Our results suggest that que in Spanish EG is overall subject to similar restrictions as SCEG gapping: There are different degrees of degradation depending on the (type of) embedding verb without outright unacceptability. While the relevant property has been argued to be factivity for SCEG, we argue that it is not the factivity of the embedding verb as such that drives acceptability, but assertion embedding. We outline a theoretical proposal building on existing accounts of structural ambiguity in gapping, the truncation of complement CPs under some verbs including factives, and the general flexibility of the semantic/pragmatic categories factivity and assertion.
期刊介绍:
The Linguistic Review aims at publishing high-quality papers in syntax, semantics, phonology, and morphology, within a framework of Generative Grammar and related disciplines, as well as critical discussions of theoretical linguistics as a branch of cognitive psychology. Striving to be a platform for discussion, The Linguistic Review welcomes reviews of important new monographs in these areas, dissertation abstracts, and letters to the editor. The editor also welcomes initiatives for thematic issues with guest editors. The Linguistic Review is a peer-reviewed journal of international scope.