Publikation: Clausal ellipsis : Deletion or selective spell-out?
Dateien
Datum
Autor:innen
Herausgeber:innen
ISSN der Zeitschrift
Electronic ISSN
ISBN
Bibliografische Daten
Verlag
Schriftenreihe
Auflagebezeichnung
URI (zitierfähiger Link)
DOI (zitierfähiger Link)
Internationale Patentnummer
Link zur Lizenz
Angaben zur Forschungsförderung
Projekt
Open Access-Veröffentlichung
Sammlungen
Core Facility der Universität Konstanz
Titel in einer weiteren Sprache
Publikationstyp
Publikationsstatus
Erschienen in
Zusammenfassung
This article compares two alternatives to the standard movement-and-deletion approach to clausal ellipsis, which postulates deletion of TP after the remnants of ellipsis are (sometimes exceptionally) A′-moved into the left periphery of the clause. One alternative is the in-situ approach, which denies the involvement of movement in the derivation of clausal ellipsis; it claims that clausal ellipsis can apply to any run-of-the-mill syntactic structure and simply deletes the familiar/given information from the propositional domain of the clause. Another alternative is the selective spell-out approach; it denies the involvement of deletion and states that the remnants undergo regular A′-movement into the specifiers of specific semantically relevant functional projections (CP, FocusP, NegP, etc.), which are subsequently selected for spell-out. This article argues that the selective spell-out approach is superior to the two deletion approaches.
Zusammenfassung in einer weiteren Sprache
Fachgebiet (DDC)
Schlagwörter
Konferenz
Rezension
Zitieren
ISO 690
BROEKHUIS, Hans, Josef BAYER, 2020. Clausal ellipsis : Deletion or selective spell-out?. In: Linguistics in the Netherlands. Benjamins. 2020, 37(1), pp. 23-37. ISSN 0929-7332. eISSN 1569-9919. Available under: doi: 10.1075/avt.00035.broBibTex
@article{Broekhuis2020Claus-52949,
year={2020},
doi={10.1075/avt.00035.bro},
title={Clausal ellipsis : Deletion or selective spell-out?},
number={1},
volume={37},
issn={0929-7332},
journal={Linguistics in the Netherlands},
pages={23--37},
author={Broekhuis, Hans and Bayer, Josef}
}RDF
<rdf:RDF
xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
xmlns:bibo="http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/"
xmlns:dspace="http://digital-repositories.org/ontologies/dspace/0.1.0#"
xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"
xmlns:void="http://rdfs.org/ns/void#"
xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#" >
<rdf:Description rdf:about="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/52949">
<dc:creator>Bayer, Josef</dc:creator>
<dcterms:hasPart rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/52949/1/Broekhuis_2-anhownznirs68.pdf"/>
<dc:date rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2021-02-22T08:22:51Z</dc:date>
<dcterms:available rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2021-02-22T08:22:51Z</dcterms:available>
<dc:rights>terms-of-use</dc:rights>
<dspace:hasBitstream rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/52949/1/Broekhuis_2-anhownznirs68.pdf"/>
<dcterms:title>Clausal ellipsis : Deletion or selective spell-out?</dcterms:title>
<void:sparqlEndpoint rdf:resource="http://localhost/fuseki/dspace/sparql"/>
<dcterms:abstract xml:lang="eng">This article compares two alternatives to the standard movement-and-deletion approach to clausal ellipsis, which postulates deletion of TP after the remnants of ellipsis are (sometimes exceptionally) A′-moved into the left periphery of the clause. One alternative is the in-situ approach, which denies the involvement of movement in the derivation of clausal ellipsis; it claims that clausal ellipsis can apply to any run-of-the-mill syntactic structure and simply deletes the familiar/given information from the propositional domain of the clause. Another alternative is the selective spell-out approach; it denies the involvement of deletion and states that the remnants undergo regular A′-movement into the specifiers of specific semantically relevant functional projections (CP, FocusP, NegP, etc.), which are subsequently selected for spell-out. This article argues that the selective spell-out approach is superior to the two deletion approaches.</dcterms:abstract>
<dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/45"/>
<dc:creator>Broekhuis, Hans</dc:creator>
<dspace:isPartOfCollection rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/45"/>
<dc:contributor>Broekhuis, Hans</dc:contributor>
<dcterms:rights rdf:resource="https://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/"/>
<bibo:uri rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/52949"/>
<foaf:homepage rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/"/>
<dc:language>eng</dc:language>
<dc:contributor>Bayer, Josef</dc:contributor>
<dcterms:issued>2020</dcterms:issued>
</rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>