Scopability and sluicing

Linguistics and Philosophy 36 (3):187-223 (2013)

Abstract

This paper analyzes sluicing as anaphora to an anti-constituent (a continuation), that is, to the semantic remnant of a clause from which a subconstituent has been removed. For instance, in Mary said that [John saw someone yesterday], but she didn’t say who, the antecedent clause is John saw someone yesterday, the subconstituent targeted for removal is someone, and the ellipsis site following who is anaphoric to the scope remnant John saw ___ yesterday. I provide a compositional syntax and semantics on which the relationship between the targeted subconstituent and the rest of the antecedent clause is one of scopability, not movement or binding. This correctly predicts that sluicing should be sensitive to scope islands, but not to syntactic islands. Unlike the currently dominant approaches to sluicing, there is no need to posit syntactic structure internal to the ellipsis site, nor is there any need for a semantic mutual-entailment requirement. Nevertheless, the fragment handles phenomena usually taken to suggest a close syntactic correspondence between the antecedent and the sluice, including case matching, voice matching, and verbal argument structure matching. In addition, the analysis handles phenomena exhibiting antecedent/sluice mismatches, including examples such as John remembers meeting someone, but he doesn’t remember who, , and especially so-called sprouting examples such as John left, but I don’t know when, in which there is no overt subconstituent to target for removal. In Sect. 5, I show how the analysis accounts for Andrews Amalgams such as Sally ate [I don’t know what] today, in which the antecedent surrounds the sluiced clause. Finally, in Sect. 6, I propose a new semantic constraint on sluicing: the Answer Ban, which says that the antecedent clause must not resolve, or even partially resolve, the issue raised by the sluiced interrogative

Download options

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 72,879

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-08-21

Downloads
21 (#540,470)

6 months
1 (#386,016)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

Quantification.Anna Szabolcsi - 2010 - Cambridge University Press.
Categorial Type Logics.Michael Moortgat - 1997 - In J. van Benthem & A. ter Meulen (eds.), Handbook of Logic and Language. Elsevier.
On 'Average'.Christopher Kennedy & Jason Stanley - 2009 - Mind 118 (471):583 - 646.

View all 19 references / Add more references

Citations of this work

Perspectival Plurality, Relativism, and Multiple Indexing.Dan Zeman - 2018 - In Rob Truswell, Chris Cummins, Caroline Heycock, Brian Rabern & Hannah Rohde (eds.), Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 21, Vol. 2. Semantics Archives. pp. 1353-1370.
NL Λ as the Logic of Scope and Movement.Chris Barker - forthcoming - Journal of Logic, Language and Information:1-21.
$$\hbox {NL}_\lambda $$ NL Λ as the Logic of Scope and Movement.Chris Barker - 2019 - Journal of Logic, Language and Information 28 (2):217-237.
Free Versus Bound Variables and the Taxonomy of Gaps.Luis Vicente - 2016 - Natural Language Semantics 24 (3):203-245.

View all 6 citations / Add more citations