Article published in:Linguistics in the Netherlands 2020
Edited by Elena Tribushinina and Mark Dingemanse
[Linguistics in the Netherlands 37] 2020
► pp. 23–37
Deletion or selective spell-out?
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.
- 1.1The movement-and-deletion approach (MDA)
- 1.2The selective spell-out approach (SSA)
- 1.3The in-situ approach (ISA)
- 1.4Organization of the remainder of the paper
- 2.Why the in-situ approach fails?
- 3.Why the selective spell-out approach is superior?
- 4.The distribution of German discourse particles
- 5.Appendix: Two issues related to the Dutch discourse particle dan
Published online: 27 October 2020
Bayer, Josef, and Hans-Georg Obenauer
Bhattacharya, Tanmoy, and Andrew Simpson
Broekhuis, Hans, and Norbert Corver
2019 Syntax of Dutch. Coordination and Ellipsis. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press. https://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/25972.
Den Dikken, Marcel
Kayne, Richard S.