Search Results

This chapter reviews data on various kinds of resumption. I first examine resumptive pronouns in unbounded dependencies in languages where they are fully grammatically licensed, in particular Irish, Hebrew, Swedish and Vata. A typological generalization about the morphological form of resumptive pronouns, McCloskey’s Generalization, is presented and investigated. It is also shown that resumptives are interpreted like non-resumptive pronouns and unlike gaps. The form and interpretation generalizations indicates that resumptive pronouns are just ordinary pronouns. However, I argue that there are two kinds of grammatically licensed resumptive pronoun, according to syntactic criteria. I next examine English resumptive-like pronouns, which are a processing effect. I lastly examine copy raising, a phenomenon in which a pronominal copy of a matrix subject is required in the complement to a raising verb. Copy raising is thus apparently a kind of resumption phenomenon, but one that involves a local dependency similar to raising, rather than an unbounded dependency.

This chapter presents the main theory of the book. The Resource Management Theory of Resumption (RMTR) is based on two key assumptions. the first is the Resource Sensitivity Hypothesis (RSH), that natural language is resource-sensitive, and the second is McCloskey’s Generalization, that resumptive pronouns are ordinary pronouns. The logic behind the theory is as follows. If a resumptive pronoun is an ordinary pronoun, then it constitutes a surplus resource. If the Resource Sensitivity Hypothesis is to be maintained, then there must be an additional consumer of the pronominal resource present. The additional consumer is a manager resource, which licenses the resumptive pronoun by managing the resource surplus constituted by the resumptive. Manager resources are thus at the heart of RMTR and unify the two main classes of resumptives, syntactically active resumptives and syntactically inactive resumptives. The latter require a special kind of syntactic integration, which is captured by LFG's restriction operator.

This chapter investigates resumptive pronouns in Swedish, which have puzzlingly gap-like syntactic properties. I argue, based on form and interpretation, that Swedish resumptive are nevertheless not underlyingly gaps, but are rather ordinary pronouns. It is instead the binder-resumptive relation in languages like Swedish that undergoes a further, syntactic operation, such that it is equivalent in effect to a filler-gap dependency. It is the relation between the binder and the resumptive that is exceptional, not the resumptive. The formal mechanism that accomplishes this is restriction, which allows the functional equality for filler-gap dependencies to be used in resumption, although this would normally be impossible. Aside from the modification of the filler-gap functional equality, resumptives in Swedish are licensed exactly as in Irish and Hebrew: by manager resources that remove the resource surplus created by the pronouns, thus allowing successful composition and licensing the pronoun.

This chapter applies the Resource Management Theory of Resumption to data from Irish. I first present the basic clausal structure of Irish that I am adopting, based on antecedent work that is adapted to LFG using Toivonen’s theory of phrase structure. I next present an overview of the data to be analyzed, followed by detailed analyses of core Irish filler-gap and binder-resumptive dependencies. These analyses are then extended to deal with certain difficult cases known as 'mixed chains'. I conclude with a discussion of some further empirical predictions of the analysis of Irish, some directions for further research, and an extended comparison to a prominent Minimalist analysis of the Irish data.

This chapter reviews the book's main claims and findings. It also outlines some joint predictions of the Resource Management Theory of Resumption and the processing model. Some alternative approaches to resumption are reviewed and some apparent challenges to resource sensitivity are discussed. The chapter concludes with a consideration of directions for future work.

This chapter introduces the main theoretical hypothesis of the book, the Resource Sensitivity Hypothesis. With respect to semantics, the hypothesis is that the meaning of each part of a linguistic expression is used exactly once in the computation of the meaning of the expression. The hypothesis is tested by the phenomenon of resumption, which constitutes an apparent case of resource surplus, since the resumptive pronoun is saturating an argument slot that must be left open for composition. Two kinds of resumption are introduced: resumption in unbounded dependencies and resumption in copy raising. It is also noted that the semantics of resumption is all the more challenging when seen in light of McCloskey's Generalization, which is the typological observation that resumptive pronouns are cross-linguistically morphologically ordinary pronouns.

This chapter examines the phasal analysis of syntactic derivation, focusing on reconstruction and successive cyclicity effects. It proposes a non-movement analysis of resumptive pronouns in Celtic relative clauses in which these properties are derived under a phasal analysis of Agree. This novel conception of the articulation between resumption, reconstruction, and locality shows that successive cyclicity effects are not the exclusive property of movement derivations and that the correlation of movement with reconstruction effects is not absolute. Under a phasal analysis, Move and Agree therefore can exhibit similar effects. After discussing phasal agreement in resumptive relatives, the chapter considers Agree and phases as well as resumptive pronouns as definite descriptions.

Resumptive pronouns in Vata, as in Swedish, pattern like gaps with respect to certain diagnostics, particularly with respect to weak crossover and islands. This chapter develops an analysis of Vata resumptives as syntactically inactive resumptives, which are nonetheless licensed semantically like syntactically active resumptives, as found in Irish and Hebrew. I first review some of the key resumptive pronoun data in Vata and then provide an analysis along the same lines as those in previous chapters.

This chapter extends the analysis of Irish to Hebrew. The resumptive pronoun system of Hebrew is shown to be similar to that of Irish. With respect to distribution, resumptive pronouns occur in every position except the highest subject. The main difference between the two languages concerns the realization of the licensers for resumptive pronouns. In Irish, the information is associated with a particular morphological series of complementizers. In Hebrew, the information is associated with complementizers in general, i.e. with the complementizer system. I first present some basic Hebrew unbounded dependency data, focusing on resumptive pronouns. I then present the lexical licensing mechanism for Hebrew resumptive pronouns and provide an analysis of the data. I also consider dialectal variation in Hebrew with respect to resumptive pronouns in questions. The chapter concludes with a comparison of the Irish and Hebrew resumptive pronoun systems.

This chapter examines how the analysis of resumptive pronouns affects syntactic theory, with an emphasis on superiority, reconstruction, and islands in Lebanese Arabic multiple-wh constructions in relation to the minimalist program. It argues that the quantified noun phrase subject of the complement clause can bind the pronoun contained in the fronted wh-phrase in cases where the resumptive pronoun occurs in a non-island context. It also considers the absence of reconstruction effects for resumptive pronouns inside islands and suggests that the copy theory of movement, which follows from the Inclusiveness Condition, is not compatible with the minimal link analysis of superiority (via either shortest move or attract).

This chapter explores the analysis of constructions in which a constituent appears in a position other than the one with which its syntactic function is usually associated. Section 17.1 discusses the syntax of long-distance dependencies, including topicalization, left- or right-dislocation constructions, relative clauses, and constituent (“wh”) questions. Section 17.2 discusses constructions in which the displaced phrase is related not to a gap within the clause, but to a resumptive pronoun. Section 17.3 discusses how a long-distance dependency construction may be marked morphologically. Section 17.4 considers evidence for and against traces, with particular attention to the phenomenon of weak crossover. Section 17.5 examines multiple-gap constructions, including “across-the-board” extraction and parasitic gaps. The semantics of constructions involving long-distance dependencies are then considered: relative clauses are discussed in Section 17.6, and constituent (“wh”) questions in Section 17.7.

An imposter or camouflage determiner phrase having the same ultimate antecedent may replace the grammatical instance of a pronominal without loss of grammaticality. Many pronominals cannot be replaced in this way, however. In general, imposters other than number 1 cannot occur in positions where a reflexive pronoun is expected. This chapter focuses on irreplaceable pronominals and discusses reflexives, inherently reflexive verbs, and resumptive pronouns.

The main goal of this chapter is to provide a descriptive and critical overview of the some of the most striking and interesting problems and questions related to issues in Romance relative clause formation, covering such areas as the distribution of relativizers, including pronouns, zero forms (gapping), particles and complementizers (agreeing or uninflected); the use of resumptive pronouns and its stylistic status; diachronic shifts up and down the Accessibility Hierarchy; formal distinctions in marking the restrictive vs non-restrictive distinction; stylistic and register variation. Specific topics dealt with include: paradigms of relativizers across Romance; development of relativizers in different Romance varieties; gap and resumptive pronoun strategies.

This chapter deals with various clauses having that clause complements, including those containing what appear to be 3 objects. It illustrates how clauses offer important insights into English periphrastic passives. The chapter first considers an example which is associated with a distinct pattern of passivization possibilities before turning to a four-way typology of verbs taking that clause complements. It then discusses Type II verbal clause structures in relation to English periphrastic passives and invisible resumptive pronouns, ditransitive clauses with that clause complements, and particles and 3 objects.

This chapter examines identity avoidance and the “Obligatory Contour Principle” (OCP) in phonology, focusing on syntactic problems raised by headed relative clauses in Swiss German. It discusses the properties of a range of headed relative-clause constructions in Swiss German and considers three major subclasses: resumptive relative clauses, “aboutness” relative clauses, and locative relative clauses. It argues that resumptive pronouns in Swiss relative clauses manifest behavior similar to clitics. Clitic movement, normally optional, must apply to feed deletion. The chapter also looks at the annihilation of the correlative element either by haplology or the Avoid Pronoun Principle, which it calls the “kamikaze conspiracy.” A further ingredient of this conspiracy is the Doubly Filled COMP Filter, which constitutes a “syntactic reflex” of the OCP.

Null-subject structures were discussed in Chapter 3 under the heading of syntax. However, one of the puzzles that needs to be dealt with is why null-subject sentences are acceptable in Singapore English but not in British or American English even though all these varieties have a similar system of present-tense verbal inflections. Topic prominence was suggested as having an influence on this. The fronting of a topic belongs within the realm of discourse, because it involves manipulating word order to present ideas in a certain way, which is discussed in this chapter. After the discussion of topic prominence, the use of resumptive pronouns, tolerance for repetition of words, and the ubiquitous occurrence of discourse particles such as lah, ah and yah are considered. The chapter then proceeds to deal with individual words — those that are unique to Singapore English as a result of borrowing, compounding, or the use of abbreviations, and also those that are found in other varieties of English but are used in a different way in Singapore.