Vehicle Change & Simplex-Anaphors
Abstract
This paper argues against the LF-Copy VP-ellipsis model in Oku (1998) and for a PF-deletion approach. Simplex (SE) anaphor data from Thai is used to show that long-distance person blocking patterns are incompatible with elided content being copied in at the interface, post-agreement. This analysis adopts Reuland’s (2011) φ-feature agreement approach to SE-anaphor valuation, with Giblin’s (2015) modifications for long-distance anaphors (LDAs). It is shown that positions where Reuland’s account predicts valuation via φ-feature agreement do not licence Vehicle Change (VC), the phenomenon where interpretations of elided elements would require different anaphora in overt counterparts. In LDA blocking contexts it can be seen that SE-anaphors must be valued independently of each other. This interaction in syntax between overt and elided material is only possible under a PF deletion analysis. This has consequences for analyses of ellipsis and reconstruction, as well as the more general division of labour between interfaces.
Keywords
ellipsis, vehicle change, simplex-anaphors, LF-copy, long-distance anaphorsReferences
Abe, Jun. 2009. Identification of Null Arguments in Japanese. In Hoshi Hiroto (ed.). The Dynamics of the Language Faculty: Perspectives from Linguistics and Cognitive Neuroscience, 135-162. Tokyo: Kuroshio Publishers.
Abe, Jun. 2011. Real parasitic gaps in Japanese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 20(3): 195-218. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10831-011-9076-1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10831-011-9076-1
Abels, Klaus. 2022. On Vehicle Change and Ellipsis Identity. Ms. UCL. https://lingbuzz.net/lingbuzz/006709
Ackema, Peter & Neeleman, Ad. 2018. Features of Person: From the Inventory of Persons to Their Morphological Realization (Linguistic Inquiry Monographs 78). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/11145.001.0001
Aelbrecht, Lobke. 2010. The Syntactic Licensing of Ellipsis (Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 149). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/la.149
Battistella, Edwin & Xu, Yonghui. 1990. Remarks on the reflexive in Chinese. Linguistics 28(2): 205-240. https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1990.28.2.205 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1990.28.2.205
Béjar, Susana & Rezac, Milan. 2009. Cyclic Agree. Linguistic Inquiry 40(1): 35-73. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40071465 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/ling.2009.40.1.35
Chaiphet, Khanin. 2014. The Status of Inverse Scope in Thai: A Comparison between Native and Heritage Speakers. Talk presented at the WILA5, UCLA, CA. Slides available at http://tekstlab.uio.no/WILA5/abstracts/Thai%20Inverse%20Scope.pdf [last accessed: 12 August, 2024].
Chaiphet, Khanin & Jenks, Peter. 2021. Names as complex indices: On apparent Condition C violations in Thai. In Alessa Farinella & Angelica Hill (eds.). Proceedings of NELS 51, vol. 1, 113-122. Amherst, MA: GLSA.
Chomsky, Noam. 1981. Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht: Floris.
Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Cooke, Joseph R. 1965. Pronominal Reference in Thai, Burmese, and Vietnamese. Berkley, CA: University of California, Berkley PhD Thesis.
Doan, Quy Ngoc Thi, Reuland, Eric & Everaert, Martin. 2023. The blocking effect in Vietnamese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 33: 153-189. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10831-023-09263-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10831-023-09263-9
Fiengo, Robert & May, Robert. 1994. Indices and Identity. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Fox, Danny. 1995. Economy and Scope. Natural Language Semantics 3(3): 283-341. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01248820 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01248820
Giblin, Iain. 2015. Agreement restrictions in Mandarin long-distance binding. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology PhD Thesis.
Hankamer, Jorge & Sag, Ivan. 1976. Deep and Surface Anaphora. Linguistic Inquiry 7(3): 391-428.
Harbour, Daniel. 2016. Impossible Persons (Linguistic Inquiry Monographs 74). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9780262034739.001.0001
Hoonchamlong, Yuphaphann. 1991. Some issues in Thai anaphora: A government and binding approach. Wisconsin: The University of Wisconsin PhD Thesis.
Huang, C.-T. James. 1982. Logical relations in Chinese and the theory of grammar. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology PhD Thesis.
Huang, C.-T. James. 1993. Reconstruction and the Structure of VP: Some Theoretical Consequences. Linguistic Inquiry 24(1): 103-138. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4178803
Jenks, Peter. 2011. The Hidden Structure of Thai Noun Phrases. Boston, MA: Harvard University PhD Thesis.
Jenks, Peter. 2013. Quantifier Float, Focus, and Scope in Thai. Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 39(1): 90-107. https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v39i1.3872 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v39i1.3872
Katz, Jerrold J. & Paul Postal. 1964. An integrated theory of linguistic descriptions. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
Lasnik, Howard. 1989. On the Necessity of Binding Conditions 1986. In Howard Lasnik (ed.). Essays on Anaphora (Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory), 149-167. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-2542-7_9
Merchant, Jason. 2001. The Syntax of Silence: Sluicing, Islands, and the Theory of Ellipsis (Oxford Studies in Theoretical Linguistics). Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199243730.001.0001
Merchant, Jason. 2016. Rebinding, ineffability, and limits on accommodation. Presented at the Ellipsis Across Borders, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina. Slides available at https://home.uchicago.edu/merchant/pubs/RebindingSarajevo2.pdf [last accessed: 12 August, 2024].
Oku, Satoshi. 1998. A theory of selection and reconstruction in the minimalist perspective. Connecticut: University of Connecticut PhD Thesis.
Pesetsky, David & Torrego, Esther. 2004. Tense, Case, and the nature of syntactic categories. In Jacqueline Guéron & Jacqueline Lecarme (eds.). The Syntax of Time. Cambridge MA: MIT Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/6598.003.0021
Pesetsky, David & Torrego, Esther. 2007. The syntax of valuation and the interpretability of features. In Simin Karimi, Vida Samiian & Wendy K. Wilkins (eds.). Phrasal and Clausal Architecture: Syntactic derivation and interpretation. In honor of Joseph E. Emonds (Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today), 262-294. John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/la.101.14pes DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/la.101.14pes
Phimsawat, On-Usa. 2011. The syntax of pro-drop in Thai. Newcastle University PhD Thesis.
Reinhart, Tanya. 1986. Center and Periphary in the Grammar of Anaphora. In Barbara Lust (ed.). Studies in the Acquisition of Anaphora, vol. 1, 123-150. Dordrecht: Reidel Publishing Company. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-4548-7_3
Reinhart, Tanya. 2006. Interface Strategies: Optimal and Costly Computations (Linguistic Inquiry Monographs 45). Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/3846.001.0001
Reinhart, Tanya & Reuland, Eric. 1993. Reflexivity. Linguistic Inquiry 24(4): 657-720.
Reuland, Eric. 2001. Primitives of Binding. Linguistic Inquiry 32(3). 439-492. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4179157 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/002438901750372522
Reuland, Eric. 2011. Anaphora and Language Design (Linguistic Inquiry Monographs 62). Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
Reuland, Eric, Chi Ho Wong, Sally & Everaert, Martin. 2020. How the Complexity of Mandarin Zi-Ji Simplifies the Grammar. Linguistic Inquiry 51(4): 799-814. https://doi.org/10.1162/ling_a_00355 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/ling_a_00355
Royal Thai Dictionary. 2011. เธอ. พจนานุกรม ฉบับราชบัณฑิตยสถาน. https://dictionary.orst.go.th [last accessed: 24 November, 2024].
Safir, Ken. 1999. Vehicle Change and Reconstruction in Ā-Chains. Linguistic Inquiry 30(4): 587-620. https://doi.org/10.1162/002438999554228 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/002438999554228
Safir, Ken. 2004a. The Syntax of (In)dependence (Linguistic Inquiry Monographs 44). Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
Safir, Ken. 2004b. The Syntax of Anaphora. Oxford, United Kingdom: OUP. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195166132.001.0001
Saito, Mamoru. 2007. Notes on East Asian Argument Ellipsis. Language Research 43(2): 203-227.
Sakamoto, Yuta. 2016. Phases and argument ellipsis in Japanese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 25(3): 243-274. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10831-016-9145-6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10831-016-9145-6
Sakamoto, Yuta. 2020. Silently Structured Silent Argument. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/la.259
SEAlang Library. 2006. เธอ. Reference. SEAlang Library Thai Lexicography. http://sealang.net/thai/dictionary.htm [last accessed: 24 November, 2024].
Sells, Peter, Zaenen, Annie & Zec, Draga. 1987. Reflexivization Variation: Relations between Syntax, Semantics and Lexical Structure. In Masayo Iida, Stephen Wechsler & Draga Zec (eds.). Working Papers in Grammatical Theory and Discourse Structure: Interactions of Morphology, Syntax, and Discourse (Series: CSLI Lecture Notes 11), 169-238. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
Tancredi, Christopher. 1992. Deletion, deaccenting, and presupposition. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology PhD Thesis.
Tang, Chih-Chen Jane. 1989. Chinese Reflexives. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 7(1): 93-121. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00141348
Winkler, Susanne. 2005. Ellipsis and Focus in Generative Grammar. De Gruyter Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110890426 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110890426
Woolford, Ellen. 1999. More on the Anaphor Agreement Effect. Linguistic Inquiry 30(2): 257-287. https://doi.org/10.1162/002438999554057 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/002438999554057
Published
How to Cite
Downloads
Copyright (c) 2025 Richard Wilson
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
