Cover not available
Part of
Pseudo-Coordination and Multiple Agreement Constructions
Edited by Giuliana Giusti, Vincenzo Nicolò Di Caro and Daniel Ross
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 274] 2022
► pp. 169–190

Chapter 7
Pseudo-coordination and ellipsis

Expressive insights from Brazilian Portuguese and Polish

ORCID logo | University of Maryland
ORCID logo | Jagiellonian University in Kraków
In this paper, we offer some comments about the syntax of pseudo-coordination in colloquial registers of Brazilian Portuguese and Polish. Focusing on V1-take (and) pseudo-coordination, we suggest that, in both of them, V1-take (and) belongs to the expressive realm of language and we analyze V1-take (and) as an appositive element adjoined to vP in the extended projection of V2. In addition to the meaning of the structure, evidence for the expressive nature of V1-take (and) comes from the fact that it can be ignored for ellipsis purposes in contexts such as verb-echo answers, polarity contrast, verb-doubling and VP-topicalization. Evidence for the positioning of V1-take (and) at the vP edge is provided by distributional patterns, including the placement of adverbs and sentential negation with respect to V1-take (and) and V2. We propose that two minimally different structures are available for pseudo-coordination, depending on whether a coordinator accompanies V1.
Keywords: pseudo-coordination, ellipsis, expressive language, verb-echo answers
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Pseudo-coordination in Brazilian Portuguese and Polish
  • 3.Verb echo answers in Brazilian Portuguese and Polish
  • 4.Pseudo-coordination meets ellipsis
    • 4.1Expressive elements under ellipsis
  • 5.Pseudo-coordination and appositives
  • 6.Main conclusions
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
  • Appendix
Published online: 16 March 2022
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.274.07men
References
Abels, Klaus
2001 The Predicate Cleft Construction in Russian. In Steven Franks & Michael Yadroff (eds). Formal approaches to Slavic linguistics 9. Bloomington, IN: Michigan Slavic Publications. 1–19.Google Scholar
Aboh, Enoch O. & Marina Dyakonova
2009 Predicate doubling and parallel chains. Lingua 119, 1035–1065. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Almeida, Christiane Miranda Buthers de & Maria José de Oliveira
2010 Gramaticalização do verbo PEGAR em construções perifrásticas [PEGAR + (E) + V2] – uma abordagem formal [The grammaticalization of the verb TAKE in periphrastic constructions [TAKE + (AND) + V2] – a formal approach]. Revista de estudos da linguagem 18, 135–164. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Andrason, Alexander
2018 The WZIĄĆ gram in Polish: A serial verb construction, or not? STUF – Language Typology and Universals 71, 577–629. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biberauer, Theresa & Sten Vikner
2017 Having the edge: A new perspective on pseudo-coordination in Danish and Afrikaans. In Nicholas LaCara, Keir Moulton, & Anne-Michelle Tessier (eds). A schrift to fest Kyle Johnson. Linguistics Open Access Publications. 1, 77–90.Google Scholar
Bondaruk, Anna
2009 Constraints on predicate clefting in Polish. In Gerhild Zybatow, Uwe Junghanns, Denisa Lenertová & Petr Biskup (eds). Studies in formal Slavic phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics and information structure. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. 65–79.Google Scholar
2012 Copy deletion in Polish predicate clefting. In Eugeniusz Cyran, Henryk Kardela & Bogdan Szymanek (eds). Sound, structure and sense. Studies in memory of Edmund Gussmann. Lublin: Katolicki Uniwersytet Lubelski. 55–70.Google Scholar
Cardinaletti, Anna & Giuliana Giusti
2003 Motion verbs as functional heads. In Christina Tortora (ed.). The syntax of Italian dialects. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 31–49.Google Scholar
2016 Multiple agreement in southern Italian dialects. Ms., Università Ca’ Foscari Venezia.Google Scholar
Cheng, Lisa Lai-Shen & Luis Vicente
2013 Verb doubling in Mandarin Chinese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 22, 1–37. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Di Caro, Vincenzo Nicolò
2015 Syntactic constructions with motion verbs in some Sicilian dialects: A comparative analysis. BA Thesis, Università Ca’ Foscari Venezia.
2019 Multiple agreement constructions in Southern Italo-Romance: The syntax of Sicilian pseudo-coordination. Ph.D. Dissertation, Università Ca’ Foscari Venezia.
Embick, David
2010 Localism versus globalism in morphology and phonology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Frampton, John & Sam Gutman
2000 Agreement is feature sharing. Ms., Northeastern University.Google Scholar
Gutzmann, Daniel
2015 Use-conditional meaning. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Holmberg, Anders
2016  The syntax of yes and no. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Josefsson, Gunlög
2014 Pseudocoordination in Swedish with gå ‘go’ and the “surprise effect.” Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 93, 26–50.Google Scholar
Kato, Mary Aizawa
2016 Affirmative polar replies in Brazilian Portuguese. In Christina Tortora, Marcel den Dikken, Ignacio Montoya, & Teresa O’Neill (eds), Selected papers from the 43rd Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages, New York, 17–19 April, 2013. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 195–212. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kayne, Richard
1994 The antisymmetry of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Landau, Idan
2006 Chain resolution in Hebrew V(P)-fronting. Syntax 9, 32–66. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ledgeway, Adam
2016 From coordination to subordination: The grammaticalization of progressive and andative aspect in the dialects of Salento. In Fernanda Pratas, Sandra Pereira & Clara Pinto (eds), Coordination and subordination. Form and meaning. Selected papers from CSI Lisbon 2014. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars. 157–184.Google Scholar
Lødrup, Helge
2002 The syntactic structures of Norwegian pseudo-coordinations. Studia Linguistica 56, 121–143. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014 How can a verb agree with a verb? Reanalysis and pseudo-coordination in Norwegian. In Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds), Proceedings of LFG14. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. 367–386.Google Scholar
Manzini, M. Rita, Paolo Lorusso & Leonardo M. Savoia
2017  a/bare finite complements in Southern Italian varieties: Mono-clausal or bi-clausal syntax? Quaderni di Linguistica e Studi Orientali/Working Papers in Linguistics and Oriental Studies 3, 11–59.Google Scholar
Manzini, M. Rita & Leonardo M. Savoia
2007 A unification of morphology and syntax. Investigations into Romance and Albanian dialects. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Martins, Ana Maria
2006 Emphatic affirmation and polarity: Contrasting European Portuguese with Brazilian Portuguese, Spanish, Catalan and Galician. In Jenny Doetjes & Paz González (eds), Romance languages and linguistic theory 2004. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 197–223. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2007 Double realization of verbal copies in European Portuguese emphatic affirmation. In Norbert Corver & Jairo Nunes (eds). The Copy Theory of Movement. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 77–118. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2013 Emphatic polarity in European Portuguese and beyond. Lingua 128, 95–123. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mendes, Gesoel
2018 Verb-stranding clausal ellipsis in Brazilian Portuguese and Polish. Ms., University of Maryland.Google Scholar
Munn, Alan
1987 Coordinate structure and X-bar Theory. McGill Working Papers in Linguistics 4, 121–140.Google Scholar
1993 Topics in the syntax and semantics of coordinate structures. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Maryland.
Nunes, Jairo
2004 Linearization of chains and sideward movement. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Potts, Christopher
2005 The logic of conventional implicatures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2007 The expressive dimension. Theoretical Linguistics 33, 165–197. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Potts, Christopher, Ash Asudeh, Seth Cable, Yurie Hara, Eric McCready, Luis Alonso-Ovalle, Rajesh Bhatt, Christopher Davis, Angelika Kratzer, Tom Roeper & Martin Walkow
2009 Expressives and identity conditions. Linguistic Inquiry 40, 356–366. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rodrigues, Angélica T. Carmo
2006 Eu fui e fiz esta tese: as construções do tipo foi fez no português do Brasil [I went and did this dissertation: the go do constructions]. Ph.D. Dissertation, UNICAMP.
Ross, Daniel
2015 What can Faroese pseudo-coordination tell us about English inflection? LSO Working Papers in Linguistics, University of Wisconsin-Madison 10, 1–18.Google Scholar
2016 Going to surprise: The grammaticalization of itive as mirative. In Jacek Woźny (ed), Online proceedings of Cognitive Linguistics in Wrocław Web Conference 2016. Wrocław: Polish Cognitive Linguistics Association & University of Wrocław.Google Scholar
Ruda, Marta
2013 Wypowiedzi emfatyczne i topikalizacja V(P) z powtórzeniem czasownika jako elipsa VP i realizacja akustyczna dwóch kopii V [Verb doubling emphatic affirmation and V(P) topicalisation as VP ellipsis and acoustic realisation of two copies of V]. Polonica XXXIII, 213–243.Google Scholar
2018 Local operations deriving long-distance relations: Object agreement in Hungarian and the Genitive of Negation in Polish. In Huba Bartos, Marcel den Dikken, Zoltán Bánréti & Tamás Váradi (eds). Boundaries crossed, at the interfaces of morphosyntax, phonology, pragmatics and semantics. Dordrecht: Springer. 133–146. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stefanowitsch, Anatol
1999 The go-and-Verb construction in a cross-linguistic perspective: Image-schema blending and the construal of events. In Dawn Nordquist & Catie Berkenfield (eds), Proceedings of the Second Annual High Desert Linguistics Society Conference 1999. Albuquerque: High Desert Linguistics Society. 123–134.Google Scholar
Trinh, Tue
2009 A constraint on copy deletion. Theoretical Linguistics 35, 183–227. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vicente, Luis
2007 The syntax of heads and phrases: A study of verb (phrase) fronting. Ph.D. Dissertation, Leiden University.
Wiklund, Anna-Lena
2008 Creating surprise in complex predication. Nordlyd 35, 163–187. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009 The syntax of surprise: Unexpected event readings in complex predication. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 84, 181–224.Google Scholar