从句省略

Q2 Arts and Humanities
H. Broekhuis, Josef Bayer
{"title":"从句省略","authors":"H. Broekhuis, Josef Bayer","doi":"10.1075/avt.00035.bro","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article compares two alternatives to the standard movement-and-deletion approach to clausal ellipsis, which postulates deletion of TP after the remnants of ellipsis are (sometimes exceptionally) A′-moved into the left periphery of the clause. One alternative is the in-situ approach, which denies the involvement of movement in the derivation of clausal ellipsis; it claims that clausal ellipsis can apply to any run-of-the-mill syntactic structure and simply deletes the familiar/given information from the propositional domain of the clause. Another alternative is the selective spell-out approach; it denies the involvement of deletion and states that the remnants undergo regular A′-movement into the specifiers of specific semantically relevant functional projections (CP, FocusP, NegP, etc.), which are subsequently selected for spell-out. This article argues that the selective spell-out approach is superior to the two deletion approaches.","PeriodicalId":35138,"journal":{"name":"Linguistics in the Netherlands","volume":"37 1","pages":"23-37"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clausal ellipsis\",\"authors\":\"H. Broekhuis, Josef Bayer\",\"doi\":\"10.1075/avt.00035.bro\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract This article compares two alternatives to the standard movement-and-deletion approach to clausal ellipsis, which postulates deletion of TP after the remnants of ellipsis are (sometimes exceptionally) A′-moved into the left periphery of the clause. One alternative is the in-situ approach, which denies the involvement of movement in the derivation of clausal ellipsis; it claims that clausal ellipsis can apply to any run-of-the-mill syntactic structure and simply deletes the familiar/given information from the propositional domain of the clause. Another alternative is the selective spell-out approach; it denies the involvement of deletion and states that the remnants undergo regular A′-movement into the specifiers of specific semantically relevant functional projections (CP, FocusP, NegP, etc.), which are subsequently selected for spell-out. This article argues that the selective spell-out approach is superior to the two deletion approaches.\",\"PeriodicalId\":35138,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Linguistics in the Netherlands\",\"volume\":\"37 1\",\"pages\":\"23-37\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-10-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Linguistics in the Netherlands\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1075/avt.00035.bro\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Linguistics in the Netherlands","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/avt.00035.bro","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要本文比较了小句省略的标准移动和删除方法的两种替代方法,该方法假定在省略的残余(有时是例外的)A′-移动到小句的左边缘后删除TP。一种替代方法是原位法,它否认运动参与了小句省略的推导;它声称小句省略可以应用于任何普通的句法结构,并简单地从小句的命题域中删除熟悉/给定的信息。另一种选择是选择性拼写方法;它否认了删除的参与,并指出残余物经历了规则的A′-移动,进入特定语义相关功能投射(CP、FocusP、NegP等)的说明符,随后选择这些说明符进行拼写。本文认为,选择性拼写方法优于两种删除方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Clausal ellipsis
Abstract This article compares two alternatives to the standard movement-and-deletion approach to clausal ellipsis, which postulates deletion of TP after the remnants of ellipsis are (sometimes exceptionally) A′-moved into the left periphery of the clause. One alternative is the in-situ approach, which denies the involvement of movement in the derivation of clausal ellipsis; it claims that clausal ellipsis can apply to any run-of-the-mill syntactic structure and simply deletes the familiar/given information from the propositional domain of the clause. Another alternative is the selective spell-out approach; it denies the involvement of deletion and states that the remnants undergo regular A′-movement into the specifiers of specific semantically relevant functional projections (CP, FocusP, NegP, etc.), which are subsequently selected for spell-out. This article argues that the selective spell-out approach is superior to the two deletion approaches.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Linguistics in the Netherlands
Linguistics in the Netherlands Arts and Humanities-Language and Linguistics
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
25
期刊介绍: Linguistics in the Netherlands is a series of annual publications, sponsored by the Dutch Linguistics Association (Algemene Vereniging voor Taalwetenschap) and published by John Benjamins Publishing Company since Volume 8 in 1991. Each volume contains a careful selection through peer review of papers presented at the annual meeting of the society. The aim of the annual meeting is to provide members with an opportunity to report on their work in progress. Each volume presents an overview of research in different fields of linguistics in the Netherlands containing articles on phonetics, phonology, morphology, syntax and semantics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信