Relativization that you did

Citation:

Szczegielniak, Adam. 2005. Relativization that you did. Harvard. Cambridge, MA: MIT Occasional Papers in Linguistics vol. 24, MIT Occasional Papers in Linguistics 24. Copy at https://tinyurl.com/yc6wfla6
Relativization that you did

Abstract:

This work address the puzzle why VP ellipsis where the subject plus an auxiliary/modal
/negation (non bare-VP ellipsis) is not possible in relatives derived via operator
movement, whereas VP ellipsis where only the subject remains (bare-VP ellipsis) is
possible in both relatives derived via operator movement as well as head noun movement.
I will argue that Polish and Russian ellipsis data points to the generalization that VPellipsis
is essentially deletion of a topic VP.
In the first part of the thesis, I show that Polish and Russian relative clauses divide into
two types: (i) derived by head noun movement (co/cto-relatives), and (ii) derived by
operator movement and adjunction of the relative to the head noun (który/kotoryjrelatives).
In the second part, I answer why bare-VP ellipsis is only possible in co/cto-relatives, and
non bare-VP ellipsis is possible in both types of relatives. I will argue that de-stressing
and subsequent ellipsis requires the establishment of Topic and Focus in overt syntax.
The establishment of Topic/Focus interacts with relative clause formation giving rise to
the asymmetry in the availability of both types of VP ellipsis in different kinds of relative
clauses.

This is a revision of my 2004 PhD thesis at Harvard

Website

Publisher: MIT Working Papers in Linguistics
Last updated on 04/27/2014