Gaps, ghosts and gapless relatives in spoken English

Christopher Collins, Andrew Radford

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Abstract

    This paper looks at the syntax of so-called gapless relative clauses in spoken English. §1 contrasts gap relatives (like that italicised in ‘something which I said’, in which there is a gap internally within the relative clause associated with the relativised constituent) with gapless relatives (like that italicised in ‘They were clowning around, which I didn't really care until I found out they had lost my file’, in which there is no apparent gap within the relative clause). In §2, we note that a number of recent analyses take which to function as a subordinating conjunction in gapless relatives, but we argue against this view and provide evidence that the wh-word in such clauses is indeed a relative pronoun. In §3, we argue that the relative pronoun in gapless relatives serves as the object of a ‘silent’ preposition. In §4, we present an analysis under which a preposition can be silent when it undergoes a type of deletion operation called Ghosting. §5 discusses gapless relatives which have a Topic-Comment interpretation, and argues for an extended Ghosting analysis under which a TP containing a predicate of saying associated with the ghosted preposition is also ghosted. Our overall conclusion is that supposedly ‘gapless’ relatives are more properly analysed as containing a gap created by relativization of the object of a ghosted preposition.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    Pages (from-to)191-235
    Number of pages45
    JournalStudia Linguistica
    Volume69
    Issue number2
    DOIs
    StatePublished - 2015

    Fingerprint

    syntax
    Ghost
    Spoken English
    interpretation
    Prepositions
    evidence
    Relative Clauses
    Relative Pronouns
    File
    Subordinating Conjunction
    Syntax
    Clause
    Relativization
    Constituent

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Language and Linguistics
    • Linguistics and Language
    • History and Philosophy of Science

    Cite this

    Gaps, ghosts and gapless relatives in spoken English. / Collins, Christopher; Radford, Andrew.

    In: Studia Linguistica, Vol. 69, No. 2, 2015, p. 191-235.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Collins, Christopher ; Radford, Andrew. / Gaps, ghosts and gapless relatives in spoken English. In: Studia Linguistica. 2015 ; Vol. 69, No. 2. pp. 191-235.
    @article{43995fb843fe4944b457440f5aa1626e,
    title = "Gaps, ghosts and gapless relatives in spoken English",
    abstract = "This paper looks at the syntax of so-called gapless relative clauses in spoken English. §1 contrasts gap relatives (like that italicised in ‘something which I said’, in which there is a gap internally within the relative clause associated with the relativised constituent) with gapless relatives (like that italicised in ‘They were clowning around, which I didn't really care until I found out they had lost my file’, in which there is no apparent gap within the relative clause). In §2, we note that a number of recent analyses take which to function as a subordinating conjunction in gapless relatives, but we argue against this view and provide evidence that the wh-word in such clauses is indeed a relative pronoun. In §3, we argue that the relative pronoun in gapless relatives serves as the object of a ‘silent’ preposition. In §4, we present an analysis under which a preposition can be silent when it undergoes a type of deletion operation called Ghosting. §5 discusses gapless relatives which have a Topic-Comment interpretation, and argues for an extended Ghosting analysis under which a TP containing a predicate of saying associated with the ghosted preposition is also ghosted. Our overall conclusion is that supposedly ‘gapless’ relatives are more properly analysed as containing a gap created by relativization of the object of a ghosted preposition.",
    author = "Christopher Collins and Andrew Radford",
    year = "2015",
    doi = "10.1111/stul.12033",
    language = "English (US)",
    volume = "69",
    pages = "191--235",
    journal = "Studia Linguistica",
    issn = "0039-3193",
    publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
    number = "2",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Gaps, ghosts and gapless relatives in spoken English

    AU - Collins, Christopher

    AU - Radford, Andrew

    PY - 2015

    Y1 - 2015

    N2 - This paper looks at the syntax of so-called gapless relative clauses in spoken English. §1 contrasts gap relatives (like that italicised in ‘something which I said’, in which there is a gap internally within the relative clause associated with the relativised constituent) with gapless relatives (like that italicised in ‘They were clowning around, which I didn't really care until I found out they had lost my file’, in which there is no apparent gap within the relative clause). In §2, we note that a number of recent analyses take which to function as a subordinating conjunction in gapless relatives, but we argue against this view and provide evidence that the wh-word in such clauses is indeed a relative pronoun. In §3, we argue that the relative pronoun in gapless relatives serves as the object of a ‘silent’ preposition. In §4, we present an analysis under which a preposition can be silent when it undergoes a type of deletion operation called Ghosting. §5 discusses gapless relatives which have a Topic-Comment interpretation, and argues for an extended Ghosting analysis under which a TP containing a predicate of saying associated with the ghosted preposition is also ghosted. Our overall conclusion is that supposedly ‘gapless’ relatives are more properly analysed as containing a gap created by relativization of the object of a ghosted preposition.

    AB - This paper looks at the syntax of so-called gapless relative clauses in spoken English. §1 contrasts gap relatives (like that italicised in ‘something which I said’, in which there is a gap internally within the relative clause associated with the relativised constituent) with gapless relatives (like that italicised in ‘They were clowning around, which I didn't really care until I found out they had lost my file’, in which there is no apparent gap within the relative clause). In §2, we note that a number of recent analyses take which to function as a subordinating conjunction in gapless relatives, but we argue against this view and provide evidence that the wh-word in such clauses is indeed a relative pronoun. In §3, we argue that the relative pronoun in gapless relatives serves as the object of a ‘silent’ preposition. In §4, we present an analysis under which a preposition can be silent when it undergoes a type of deletion operation called Ghosting. §5 discusses gapless relatives which have a Topic-Comment interpretation, and argues for an extended Ghosting analysis under which a TP containing a predicate of saying associated with the ghosted preposition is also ghosted. Our overall conclusion is that supposedly ‘gapless’ relatives are more properly analysed as containing a gap created by relativization of the object of a ghosted preposition.

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84922567842&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84922567842&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1111/stul.12033

    DO - 10.1111/stul.12033

    M3 - Article

    AN - SCOPUS:84922567842

    VL - 69

    SP - 191

    EP - 235

    JO - Studia Linguistica

    JF - Studia Linguistica

    SN - 0039-3193

    IS - 2

    ER -