z-logo
Premium
QR Out of a Tensed Clause: Evidence from Antecedent‐Contained Deletion
Author(s) -
Syrett Kristen
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
ratio
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.475
H-Index - 29
eISSN - 1467-9329
pISSN - 0034-0006
DOI - 10.1111/rati.12107
Subject(s) - antecedent (behavioral psychology) , ellipsis (linguistics) , non finite clause , linguistics , verb phrase ellipsis , raising (metalworking) , verb phrase , quantifier (linguistics) , coreference , relative clause , computer science , constraint (computer aided design) , covert , argument (complex analysis) , phrase , dependent clause , locality , verb , mathematics , artificial intelligence , psychology , philosophy , sentence , resolution (logic) , modal verb , noun phrase , developmental psychology , biochemistry , geometry , noun , chemistry
This paper presents an argument based on evidence from experiments featuring A ntecedent‐ C ontained D eletion ( ACD ) sentences situated in carefully‐manipulated discourse contexts, that covert movement is not grammatically constrained by tense. ACD is a form of V erb P hrase E llipsis in which ellipsis is embedded in its antecedent. Under an account appealing to Q uantifier R aising, the quantificational phrase containing the ellipsis site raises to a VP ‐external position, allowing the VP to become the antecedent. When ACD is embedded in a non‐finite clause, such sentences are ambiguous, since multiple VPs can serve as an antecedent. However, when ACD is embedded in a finite clause, the range of interpretations has been claimed to be restricted, because of an independent ‘clause‐bounded’ movement constraint on Quantifier Raising. However, there are exceptions to this generalization. I present evidence from an experimental investigation of finite‐clause‐embedded ACD sentences, relying on C ecchetto (2004), to demonstrate that under the right discourse conditions, the supposedly unavailable M atrix reading surfaces robustly, at a percentage that is surprising if the constraint were rooted in the grammar. I argue that these results call into question the source of this locality restriction, and propose that it has nothing to do with an arbitrary grammatical constraint on movement.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here