Revisiting rebinding: an alternative to MaxElide
Author(s) -
James E. Griffiths
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
nordlyd
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 1503-8599
pISSN - 0332-7531
DOI - 10.7557/12.4193
Subject(s) - ellipsis (linguistics) , constraint (computer aided design) , reflexivity , parallelism (grammar) , alternation (linguistics) , linguistics , computer science , epistemology , reduction (mathematics) , distribution (mathematics) , mathematics , mathematical economics , sociology , artificial intelligence , philosophy , social science , mathematical analysis , geometry
Using Takahashi & Fox (2005) as an exemplar, this paper argues that analyses of English ellipsis that make recourse to a MaxElide constraint (or a theoretical reduction thereof) are misguided, and that one must look past MaxElide to explain the distribution of acceptability in the elliptical rebinding constructions that MaxElide was originally invoked to explain. A novel analysis is outlined which attributes the unacceptability observed in the rebinding dataset to an inability to satisfy a more restrictive, reflexive version of Takahashi & Fox's (ibid.) Parallelism condition on ellipsis recoverability.
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom