Ellipsis in tautologous conditionals: the contrast condition on ellipsis

Richard Stockwell

Abstract


I compare two theories to account for the novel observation that ellipsis is ungrammatical in tautologous conditionals, e.g. If John is wrong, then he is *(wrong).  One theory attributes the ungrammaticality to a contrast failure in ellipsis parallelism (Rooth 1992a,b); the other to triviality at a more abstract, logical level (Gajewski 2009). The ellipsis parallelism theory prevails on further data, joining Griffiths (to appear) in arguing that contrast plays a role in ellipsis licensing. Contrast is further shown to be sensitive to intensionality.


Full Text:

PDF

References


Abrusan, Marta. 2014. Weak island semantics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Alxatib, Sam, Peter Pagin & Uli Sauerland. 2013. Acceptable contradictions: pragmatics or semantics? A reply to Cobreros et al. Journal of Philosophical Logic 42. 619–634.

Barros, Matthew. 2014. Sluicing and identity in ellipsis: Rutgers University dissertation.

Barwise, Jon & Robin Cooper. 1981. Generalized quantifiers and natural language. Linguistics and Philosophy 4. 159–219.

Chung, Sandra, William Ladusaw & James McCloskey. 1995. Sluicing and logical form. Natural Language Semantics 3(3). 239–282.

Elbourne, Paul. 2001. E-type anaphora as NP-deletion. Natural Language Semantics 9. 241–288.

Evans, Gareth. 1980. Pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry 11. 337–362.

Fox, Danny. 1999. Focus, parallelism and accommodation. In Proceedings of SALT IX, 70–90. Ithaca, NY: CLC Publications.

Fox, Danny. 2000. Economy and semantic interpretation. Cambridge, MA: MIT press.

Fox, Danny. 2002. Antecedent-contained deletion and the copy theory of movement. Linguistic Inquiry 33. 63–96.

Gajewski, Jon. 2002. L-analyticity and natural language. Ms., MIT.

Gajewski, Jon. 2009. L-triviality and grammar. Handout of a talk at University of Connecticut Logic Group, 27th February.

Griffiths, James. to appear. Beyond MaxElide: An investigation of A’-movement from elided phrases. Linguistic Inquiry.

Hamblin, Charles L. 1973. Questions in Montague English. Foundations of Language 10. 41–53.

Hardt, Daniel. 1993. Verb phrase ellipsis: Form, meaning, and processing: University of Pennsylvania dissertation.

Hirsch, Aron. 2017. An inflexible semantics for cross-categorial operators: MIT dissertation.

Horn, Laurence. 1981. A pragmatic approach to certain ambiguities. Linguistics and Philosophy 4(3). 321–358.

Karttunen, Lauri. 1977. Syntax and semantics of questions. Linguistics and Philosophy 1(1). 3–44.

Kotek, Hadas. 2016. Movement and alternatives don’t mix: A new look at wh-intervention effects. Paper presented at the 47th annual meeting of the North East Linguistic Society (NELS 47), University of Massachusetts, Amherst, 14-16 October.

Kratzer, Angelika. 1998. Scope or pseudoscope? Are there wide-scope indefinites? In Susan Rothstein (ed.), Events and grammar, 163–196. Dordrecht: Springer.

Merchant, Jason. 2008. Variable island repair under ellipsis. In Kyle Johnson (ed.), Topics in ellipsis, 132–153. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Moulton, Keir. 2009. Natural selection and the syntax of clausal complementation: University of Massachussetts Amherst dissertation.

Roberts, Craige. 1996. Information structure in discourse: Towards an integrated formal theory of pragmatics. In Jae-Hak Yoon & Andreas Kathol (eds.), Papers in semantics, vol. 49 Ohio State University Working Papers in Linguistics, Department of Linguistics, The Ohio State University.

Rooth, Mats. 1992a. A theory of focus interpretation. Natural Language Semantics 1. 75–116.

Rooth, Mats. 1992b. Ellipsis redundancy and reduction redundancy. In Berman & Hestvik (eds.), Proceedings of the Stuttgart Ellipsis Workshop, SFB 340.

Ross, John R. 1967. Constraints on variables in syntax: MIT dissertation.

Russell, Bertrand. 1905. On denoting. Mind 14(4). 479–493.

Stockwell, Richard. 2017. VP ellipsis with symmetrical predicates. In Andrew Lamont & Katerina Tetzlof (eds.), Proceedings of the forty-seventh annual meeting of the North East Linguistic Society (NELS 47), volume 3, 141–154. GLSA.

Takahashi, Shoichi & Danny Fox. 2005. MaxElide and the re-binding problem. In Efthymia Georgala & Jonathan Howell (eds.), Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory 15 (SALT 15), 223–240.

Tancredi, Christopher. 1992. Deletion, deaccenting and presupposition: MIT dissertation.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3765/salt.v28i0.4426

Copyright (c) 2018 Richard Stockwell