Pseudogapping, Parallelism, and the Scope of Focus

Gary Thoms

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Abstract

    In this paper I defend a particular analysis of pseudogapping in which the focused remnant is moved by leftward A′-movement (Jayaseelan, Gengel). Noting the superficial similarity between pseudogapping and stripping, I show that pseudogapping is much more restricted than we would expect if it were just another version of stripping, failing to apply across clause boundaries and allowing a much narrower range of remnants. I provide an analysis of these restrictions in terms of Parallelism, arguing that the difference between pseudogapping and stripping is keyed to the different ways in which their correlates may take scope. The proposal accounts for the exceptional behavior of pseudogapping in comparatives, and it leads us to the conclusion that there exists a set of movement operations that occur only in the context of ellipsis.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    Pages (from-to)286-307
    Number of pages22
    JournalSyntax
    Volume19
    Issue number3
    DOIs
    StatePublished - Sep 1 2016

    Fingerprint

    Parallelism
    Clause
    Ellipse

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Language and Linguistics
    • Linguistics and Language

    Cite this

    Pseudogapping, Parallelism, and the Scope of Focus. / Thoms, Gary.

    In: Syntax, Vol. 19, No. 3, 01.09.2016, p. 286-307.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Thoms, Gary. / Pseudogapping, Parallelism, and the Scope of Focus. In: Syntax. 2016 ; Vol. 19, No. 3. pp. 286-307.
    @article{03e2385f80ce474dac708d9d0f174b8d,
    title = "Pseudogapping, Parallelism, and the Scope of Focus",
    abstract = "In this paper I defend a particular analysis of pseudogapping in which the focused remnant is moved by leftward A′-movement (Jayaseelan, Gengel). Noting the superficial similarity between pseudogapping and stripping, I show that pseudogapping is much more restricted than we would expect if it were just another version of stripping, failing to apply across clause boundaries and allowing a much narrower range of remnants. I provide an analysis of these restrictions in terms of Parallelism, arguing that the difference between pseudogapping and stripping is keyed to the different ways in which their correlates may take scope. The proposal accounts for the exceptional behavior of pseudogapping in comparatives, and it leads us to the conclusion that there exists a set of movement operations that occur only in the context of ellipsis.",
    author = "Gary Thoms",
    year = "2016",
    month = "9",
    day = "1",
    doi = "10.1111/synt.12122",
    language = "English (US)",
    volume = "19",
    pages = "286--307",
    journal = "Syntax",
    issn = "1368-0005",
    publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
    number = "3",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Pseudogapping, Parallelism, and the Scope of Focus

    AU - Thoms, Gary

    PY - 2016/9/1

    Y1 - 2016/9/1

    N2 - In this paper I defend a particular analysis of pseudogapping in which the focused remnant is moved by leftward A′-movement (Jayaseelan, Gengel). Noting the superficial similarity between pseudogapping and stripping, I show that pseudogapping is much more restricted than we would expect if it were just another version of stripping, failing to apply across clause boundaries and allowing a much narrower range of remnants. I provide an analysis of these restrictions in terms of Parallelism, arguing that the difference between pseudogapping and stripping is keyed to the different ways in which their correlates may take scope. The proposal accounts for the exceptional behavior of pseudogapping in comparatives, and it leads us to the conclusion that there exists a set of movement operations that occur only in the context of ellipsis.

    AB - In this paper I defend a particular analysis of pseudogapping in which the focused remnant is moved by leftward A′-movement (Jayaseelan, Gengel). Noting the superficial similarity between pseudogapping and stripping, I show that pseudogapping is much more restricted than we would expect if it were just another version of stripping, failing to apply across clause boundaries and allowing a much narrower range of remnants. I provide an analysis of these restrictions in terms of Parallelism, arguing that the difference between pseudogapping and stripping is keyed to the different ways in which their correlates may take scope. The proposal accounts for the exceptional behavior of pseudogapping in comparatives, and it leads us to the conclusion that there exists a set of movement operations that occur only in the context of ellipsis.

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84979742729&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84979742729&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1111/synt.12122

    DO - 10.1111/synt.12122

    M3 - Article

    VL - 19

    SP - 286

    EP - 307

    JO - Syntax

    JF - Syntax

    SN - 1368-0005

    IS - 3

    ER -