Typing after syntax. An argument from quotation and ellipsis

Jan Wiślicki

doi:10.1515/rela-2016-0023

Authors

Jan Wiślicki Uniwersytet Warszawski

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1515/rela-2016-0023

Keywords:

quotation, ellipsis, typing, feature valuation

Abstract

The paper, assuming the general framework of Chomsky’s (2013a, 2015b) current version of the Minimalist syntax, investigates the syntax of quotation in light of ellipsis. I show that certain unexpected effects arising for quotational ellipsis are problematic for the standard feature valuation system and, especially, for the theory of phases. I discuss some effects of two possible interpretations of such ellipsis, as well as a constraint following from deviant antecedents, to show that the standard view on the internal syntax of quotational expressions should be reconsidered. The paper offers a new view on feature valuation, as well as the connection between the Narrow Syntax and the C-I interface, defined in terms of recursive typing taking place at the interface.

References

Ackema, P. and A. Neeleman. 2004. Beyond Morphology. Interface Conditions and Word Formation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar

Alexiadou, A., E. Anagnostopoulou and S. Wurmbrand. 2014. Movement vs. Long Distance Agree in Raising: Disappearing Phases and Feature Valuation. Proceedings of the North Eastern Linguistics Society Annual Meeting, vol. 43. 1-12.
Google Scholar

Asher, N. 2015. Types, Meanings and Coercions in Lexical Semantics. Lingua 157. 66-82.
Google Scholar

Barros, M. 2016. Syntactic Identity in Ellipsis, and Deviations Therefrom. The Case of Copular Sources in Sluicing. MS.
Google Scholar

Barros, M. and L. Vicente. 2016. A Remnant Condition for Ellipsis. In: Keong-min Kim et al. (eds.), Proceedings of WCCFL 33, 57-66. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
Google Scholar

Boeckx, C. 2012. Phases Beyond Explanatory Adequacy. In: A. J. Gallego (ed.). Phases. Developing the Framework, 45-66. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Google Scholar

Bošković, Ž. 2016. On Pronouns, Clitic Doubling and Argument Ellipsis: Argument Ellipsis as Predicate Ellipsis. MS.
Google Scholar

Cappelen, H. and E. Lepore. 2007. Language Turned on Itself. The Semantics and Pragmatics of Metalinguistic Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar

Chierchia, G. 1998. Reference to Kinds Across Languages. Natural Language Semantics 6(4): 339-405.
Google Scholar

Chomsky, N. 1986. Barriers. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
Google Scholar

Chomsky, N. 1995. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Google Scholar

Chomsky, N. 2000. Minimalist inquiries: The framework. In: R. Martin et al. (eds.), Step by Step. Essays on Minimalist Syntax in Honor of Howard Lasnik, 89-155. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.
Google Scholar

Chomsky, N. 2007. Approaching UG from Below. In: U. Sauerland and H.-M. Gartner (eds.), Interfaces + Recursion = Language?1-29. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Google Scholar

Chomsky, N. 2008. On Phases. In: R. Freidin, C. Otero and M. Zubizarreta Luisa (eds.), Foundational Issues in Linguistic Theory. Essays in Honor of Jean-Roger Vergnaud, 133-167. The MIT Press.
Google Scholar

Chomsky, N. 2013a. Problems of Projection. Lingua 130. 33-49.
Google Scholar

Chomsky, N. 2013b. The Dewey Lectures 2013: What Kind of Creatures Are We? Lecture II: What Can We Understand? The Journal of Philosophy 110(12). 663-684.
Google Scholar

Chomsky, N. 2014a. Minimal Recursion: Exploring the Prospects. In: T. Roeper and M. Speas (eds,). Recursion: Complexity in Cognition, 1-15. Berlin: Springer.
Google Scholar

Chomsky, N. 2014b. Spring 2014 Syntax Seminar, MIT.
Google Scholar

Chomsky, N. 2015a. A Discussion with Naoki Fukui and Mihoko Zushi. Sophia Linguistica 64. 70-97.
Google Scholar

Chomsky, N. 2015b. Problems of Projection: Extensions. In: E. Di Domenico, C. Hamann and S. Matteini (eds.), Structures, Strategies and Beyond: Studies in Honour of Adriana Belletti, 1-16. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Google Scholar

Davidson, D. 1979. Quotation. Theory and Decision 11(1). 27-40.
Google Scholar

Frampton, J. and S. Gutmann. 2002. Crash-Proof Syntax. In: S. D. Epstein and T. D. Seely (eds.), Derivation and Explanation in the Minimalist Program, 90-105. Malden Massachusetts: Blackwell Publishing.
Google Scholar

Gallego, A. J. 2016. Lexical Items and Feature Bundling. Consequences for Microparametric Approaches to Variation. In: L. Eguren, O. Fernandez-Soriano and A. Mendikoetxea (eds.), Rethinking Parameters, 133-169. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar

Geach, P. T. 1957. Mental Acts. Their Content and Their Objects. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Google Scholar

Grano, T. and H. Lasnik. 2015. How to Neutralize a Finite Clause Boundary: Phase Theory and the Grammar of Bound Pronouns. Ms., Indiana University and University of Maryland.
Google Scholar

Griffiths, J. and A. Liptak. 2014. Contrast and Island Sensitivity in Clausal Ellipsis. Syntax 7(3). 189-234.
Google Scholar

Harwood, W. et al. 2016. Idioms: Phasehood and Projection. MS.
Google Scholar

Ingason, A. K., E. F. Sigurdsson and J. Wood. 2016. Displacement and Subject Blocking in Verbal Idioms: Evidence from Passive-like Constructions in Icelandic. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 96. 26-48.
Google Scholar

Jackendoff, R. and E. Wittenberg. 2014. What You Can Say Without Syntax: Hierarchy of Grammatical Complexity. In: F. J. Newmeyer and L. B. Preston (eds.), Measuring Grammatical Complexity, 65-82. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar

Jakielaszek, J. 2011. Blind Merge. Strengthening the No Tampering Condition. Warszawa: Wydawnictwa Wydziału Polonistyki UW.
Google Scholar

Kupula Roos, M. 2016. External Arguments and Dative Cliticization: Evidence of Selective Spellout of Functional Heads. Syntax 19(3). 192-221.
Google Scholar

Larson, B. 2015. Minimal Search as a Restriction on Merge. Lingua 156. 57-69.
Google Scholar

Larson, R. 2011. Clauses, Propositions, and Phases. In: A. M. Di Sciullo and C. Boeckx (eds.), The Biolinguistic Enterprise. New Perspectives on the Evolution and Nature of the Human Language Faculty, 366-391. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar

Luo, Z. 2010. Type-theoretical Semantics with Coercive Subtyping. Semantics and linguistic theory 20 (SALT20), Vancouver.
Google Scholar

Luo, Z. 2012. Formal Semantics in Modern Type Theories With Coercive Subtyping. Linguistics & Philosophy 35(6). 491-513.
Google Scholar

Parsons, T. 1982. What Do Quotation Marks Name? Frege’s Theory of Quotations and Thatclauses. Philosophical Studies 42(3). 315-328.
Google Scholar

Partee, B. H. 1973. The Syntax and Semantics of Quotation. In: S. Anderson and P. Kiparsky (eds.), A Festschrift for Morris Hale, 410-418. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Google Scholar

Partee, B. and M. Rooth. 1983. Generalized Conjunction and Type Ambiguity. In: R. Bauerle, C. Schwarze and A. von Stechow (eds.), Meaning, Use and Interpretation of Language, 361-383. Berlin: De Gruyter.
Google Scholar

Maier, E. 2008. Breaking Quotations. In: K. Satoh et al. (eds.), New Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, 187-200. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer.
Google Scholar

Maier, E. 2014a. Mixed Quotation: The Grammar of Apparently Transparent Opacity. Semantics and Pragmatics 7. 1-67.
Google Scholar

Maier, E. 2014b. Pure Quotation. Philosophy Compass 9(9). 615-630.
Google Scholar

Maier, E. 2016. A Plea Against Monsters. Grazer Philosophische Studien 93. 363-395.
Google Scholar

Mateu, J. and M. T. Espinal. 2007. Argument Structure and Compositionality in Idiomatic Constructions. The Linguistic Review 24(1). 33-59.
Google Scholar

Mateu, J. and M. T. Espinal. 2010. On Classes of Idioms And Their Interpretation. Journal of Pragmatics 42(5). 1397- 1411.
Google Scholar

Messick, T. and G. Thoms. 2016. Ellipsis, Economy, and the (Non)uniformity of Traces. Linguistic Inquiry 47(2). 306-332.
Google Scholar

Piggott, G. & L. D. Travis. 2013. Adjuncts Within Words and Complex Heads. In: R. Folli, C. Sevdali and R. Truswell (eds.), Syntax and Its Limits, 157-174. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar

Richards, M. D. 2007. On Feature Inheritance: An Argument From the Phase Impenetrability Condition. Linguistic Inquiry 38 (3). 563-572.
Google Scholar

Richards, M. D. 2012. On Feature Inheritance, Defective Phases, And the Movement-morphology Connection. In: A. Gallego (ed.), Phases: Developing the Framework, 195-232. Berlin-New York: Walter De Gruyter.
Google Scholar

Saka, P. 2013. Quotation. Philosophy Compass 8(10). 935-949.
Google Scholar

Sakamoto, Y. 2016. Phases And Argument Ellipsis in Japanese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 25(3). 243-274.
Google Scholar

Soames, S. 1999. Understanding Truth. New York: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar

Takita, K., N. Goto and Y. Shibata. 2016. Labeling Through Spell-Out. The Linguistic Review 33(1). 177-198.
Google Scholar

Tarski, A. 1933. The Concept of Truth in Formalized Languages. In: J. Corcoran (ed.), Logic, Semantics, Metamathematics, 152-278. Indianapolis: Hackett. 152-278.
Google Scholar

Tiskin, D. 2015. Locating Hidden Quantifiers in De Re Reports. In: T. Brochhagen, F. Roelofsen and N. Theiler (eds.), Proceedings of the 20th Amsterdam Colloquim, 398-407. [Online] [Available from: http://semanticsarchive.net/Archive/mVkOTk2N/AC2015-proceedings.pdf ].
Google Scholar

Trotzke, A. and J.-W. Zwart. 2014. The Complexity of Narrow Syntax: Minimalism, Representational Economy, and Simplest Merge. In: F. J. Newmeyer and L. B. Preston (eds.), Measuring Grammatical Complexity, 128-147. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar

Wiese, R. 1996. Phrasal Compounds And the Theory of Word Syntax. Linguistic Inquiry 27(1). 183-193.
Google Scholar

Wiślicki, J. 2016a. An Argument for Zwart’s Merge. Quotation as a Challenge for Feature-Driven Phases. MS., University of Warsaw.
Google Scholar

Wiślicki, J. 2016b. Roots and root typing. Evidence from discontinuity. Handout and talk delivered at IGG 42, Lecce.
Google Scholar

Wurmbrand, S. 2013. QR and Selection: Covert Evidence for Phasehood. Proceedings of the North Eastern Linguistics Society Annual Meeting 42. 277-290.
Google Scholar

Wurmbrand, S. 2016. Stripping and Topless Complements. Ms., University of Connecticut.
Google Scholar

Vries, M. 2006. Reported Direct Speech in Dutch. Linguistics in the Netherlands 23 (1). 212-223.
Google Scholar

Zwart, J.-W. 2013. Ellipsis in Layered Derivations. Handout and talk delivered at U4 Workshop New Approaches to the Syntax/Semantics Interface, Gottingen.
Google Scholar