1887
Volume 17, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2211-6834
  • E-ISSN: 2211-6842
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

The empirical focus of this paper is register based subject omission in English. On the basis of a range of empirical data (including naturally occurring examples) the paper first dispels a number of common misconceptions about the phenomenon such as the idea that (i) this phenomenon is only restricted to diary style, (ii) only first person subjects can be omitted, (iii) the null subject is an instantiation of pro, (iv) the null subject is always uniquely identified in the context. The paper develops the cartographic analysis of register based subject omission proposed in Haegeman (2013) and based on Rizzi’s (2006b) ‘Privilege of the Root’ approach. A key ingredient of the analysis is the hypothesis that there is a specialized projection for the encoding of subjecthood (SubjP).

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/lv.14019.hae
2018-01-26
2019-08-21
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Ackema, Peter & Neeleman, Ad
    2007 Restricted pro drop in Early Modern Dutch. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics10: 81–107. doi: 10.1007/s10828‑007‑9010‑0
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10828-007-9010-0 [Google Scholar]
  2. Cardinaletti, Anna
    1997 Subjects and clause structure. InThe New Comparative Syntax, Liliane Haegeman (ed.), 33–63. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. 2004 Toward a cartography of subject positions. InThe Structure of CP and IP, Luigi Rizzi (ed.), 115–165. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Chomsky, Noam
    2001 Derivation by phase. InKen Hale: A Life in Language, Michael Kenstowicz (ed.). 1–52. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. 2005 On phases. Ms., Cambridge, Mass: MIT.
  6. Ernst, Thomas
    2002aThe Syntax of Adjuncts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. 2002b Adjuncts and Word order asymmetries. InAsymmetry in Grammar: volume I: Syntax and Semantics, Anne Marie Di Sciullo (ed.), 178–207. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Haegeman, Liliane
    1990 Non-overt subjects in diary contexts. InGrammar in Progress, GLOW essays for Henk van Riemsdijk, Joan Mascaro & Marina Nespor (eds), 167–174. Dordrecht: Foris.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. 1996 Verb Second, the Split CP and Null Subjects in Early Dutch Finite Clauses. GenGenP4 (2): 135–75
    [Google Scholar]
  10. 1997 Register variation, truncation and subject omission in English and in French. English Language and Linguistics1: 233–270. doi: 10.1017/S1360674300000526
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1360674300000526 [Google Scholar]
  11. 1999 Adult null subjects in non pro-drop languages. InThe Acquisition of Syntax, Marc-Ariel Friedemann & Luigi Rizzi (eds.), 329–346. London: Addison, Wesley and Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. 2002 Sentence-medial NP-adjuncts in English. Nordic Journal of Linguistics25: 79–108. doi: 10.1080/03325860213064
    https://doi.org/10.1080/03325860213064 [Google Scholar]
  13. 2012Adverbial Clauses, Main Clause Phenomena, and Composition of the Left Periphery . The Cartography of Syntactic Structures 8. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199858774.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199858774.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  14. 2013 The syntax of registers: diary subject omission and the privilege of the root. Lingua130: 88–110. doi: 10.1016/j.lingua.2013.01.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2013.01.005 [Google Scholar]
  15. Haegeman, Liliane & Ihsane, Tabea
    1999 Subject ellipsis in embedded clauses in English. Journal of English Language and Linguistics3: 117–45. doi: 10.1017/S1360674399000155
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1360674399000155 [Google Scholar]
  16. 2002 Adult null subjects in the non-pro-drop languages: two diary dialects. Language Acquisition9: 329–346. doi: 10.1207/S15327817LA0904_03
    https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327817LA0904_03 [Google Scholar]
  17. Huang, James
    1984 On the distribution and reference of empty pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry15: 531–574.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Huddleston, Rodney & Pullum, Geoffrey 2002The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/9781316423530
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316423530 [Google Scholar]
  19. Hyams, Nina & Wexler, Kenneth
    1993 On the Grammatical Basis of Null Subjects in Child Language. Linguistic Inquiry24: 421–459.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Ihsane, T.
    1998The syntax of diaries: grammar and register variation. Ms. Uni. of Geneva.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Matushansky, Ora
    1995Le sujet nul dans les propositions à temps fini en anglais. Maîtrise paper, Paris VIII.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Mikkelsen, Line
    2015 VP anaphora and verb-second order in Danish. Journal of Linguistics51: 595–643. doi: 10.1017/S0022226715000055
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226715000055 [Google Scholar]
  23. Napoli, Donna J.
    1982 Initial material deletion in English. Glossa16 (1): 85–111.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Nanyan, Varduhi
    2013Subject omission in English diaries. Master’s dissertation, Ghent University. Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Quirk, Randolph , Greenbaum, Sidney , Leech Geoffrey & Svartvik, Jan
    1985A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Raposo, Eduardo
    1986 The null object in European Portuguese. InStudies in Romance Linguistics, Osvaldo Jaeggli & C. Silva-Corvalàn (eds.), 373–390. Dordrecht: Foris.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Rizzi, Luigi
    1994 Early null subjects and root null subjects. InLanguage Acquisition Studies in Generative Grammar, Teun Hoekstra & Bonnie Schwartz . (eds.), 151–177. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lald.8.09riz
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lald.8.09riz [Google Scholar]
  28. 1995 Some notes on linguistic theory and language development: the case of root infinitive. Language Acquisition3: 371–393. doi: 10.1207/s15327817la0304_2
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327817la0304_2 [Google Scholar]
  29. 1997 The fine structure of the left periphery. InElements of Grammar. Liliane Haegeman (ed.), 281–337. Dordrecht: Kluwer. doi: 10.1007/978‑94‑011‑5420‑8_7
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-5420-8_7 [Google Scholar]
  30. 1999 Remarks on early null subjects. InThe Acquisition of Syntax. Marc-Ariel Friedemann & Luigi Rizzi (eds.), 269–292. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. 2001 On the position Int(errogative) in the left periphery of the clause. InCurrent Studies in Italian Syntax: Essays offered to Lorenzo Renzi, Guglielmo Cinque & Giampolo Salvi (eds.), 286–296. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. 2006a On the Form of Chains: Criterial Positions and ECP Effects. InWh-Movement. Moving On, Lisa Cheng & Norbert Corver , (eds.), 97–133. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. 2006b Grammatically-based target-inconsistencies in child language. InThe Proceedings of the Inaugural Conference on Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition -North America (GALANA). UCONN / MIT Working Papers in Linguistics, Deen, K. U. , J. Nomura , B. Schulz & B. D. Schwartz (eds.), Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Rizzi, Luigi . & Shlonsky, Ur
    2005 Strategies of subject extraction. InInterfaces + Recursion = Language? Hans-Martin Gärtner & Uli Sauerland (eds.), 115–160. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Rizzi, Luigi & Shlonsky, Ur
    2006 Satisfying the Subject Criterion by a non-subject: English locative inversion and heavy NP shift. InPhases of Interpretation, Mara Frascarelli (ed.), 341–361. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110197723.5.341
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197723.5.341 [Google Scholar]
  36. Shlonsky, Ur
    2014 Subject positions, subject extraction, EPP, and the Subject Criterion. InLocality, Enoch Aboh , Maria Teresa Guasti & Ian Roberts (eds), 58–85. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199945269.003.0003
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199945269.003.0003 [Google Scholar]
  37. Sigurðsson, Harald A.
    2011 Conditions on Argument Drop. Linguistic Inquiry42: 267–304. doi: 10.1162/LING_a_00042
    https://doi.org/10.1162/LING_a_00042 [Google Scholar]
  38. Sigurđsson Harald, A. & Joan Maling
    2007 Argument drop and the Empty Left Edge Condition (ELEC). Ms. Lund University-Brandeis University.
  39. Stark, Elisabeth & Aurélia Robert-Tissot . This issue. Subject drop in French text messages.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Thrasher, R.
    1977One Way to Say More by Saying Less. A Study of so-called Subjectless Sentences. Kwansei Gakuin University Monograph Series Vol. 11, Tokyo: The Eihosha Ltd.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Velde, John te
    2005Deriving Coordinate Symmetries. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Weir, Andrew
    2012 Left edge deletion in English and subject omission in diaries. English Language and Linguistics16: 105–129. doi: 10.1017/S136067431100030X
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S136067431100030X [Google Scholar]
  43. Wexler, Kenneth
    2013 A new theory of null-subjects of finite verbs in young children: Information structure meets phasal computation. InGenerative linguistics and acquisition. Studies in honor of Nina M. Hyams, Misha Becker , John Grinstead & Jason Rothman (eds.), 325–356. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lald.54.14wex
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lald.54.14wex [Google Scholar]
  44. Wilder, Chris
    1994 Some properties of ellipsis in coordination. Geneva Generative Papers2, 2: 23–61. Also published as Wilder, Chris (1997) inStudies in Universal Grammar and Typological Variation. Artemis Alexiadou & T. Alan Hall (eds.), 59–107. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/lv.14019.hae
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/lv.14019.hae
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error