Explaining ellipsis without identity*

IF 0.7 3区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS Linguistic Review Pub Date : 2022-07-18 DOI:10.1515/tlr-2022-2091
Till Poppels
{"title":"Explaining ellipsis without identity*","authors":"Till Poppels","doi":"10.1515/tlr-2022-2091","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Ellipsis is a pervasive phenomenon across the world’s languages, and it is easy to see why: it allows speakers to omit certain parts of their utterances while nonetheless conveying their full meaning, which contributes to making linguistic communication highly efficient. While there is broad consensus that elliptical utterances depend on the context in some way, the nature of this dependency remains controversial. In this paper, I re-evaluate the merits of two classes of ellipsis theories: identity theories, which posit that material can be elided only if it is identical to a linguistic antecedent; and referential theories, which assume that ellipsis is enabled by the same underlying mechanism that governs other forms of discourse reference. I argue that both empirical and theoretical considerations favor referential theories in this comparison, and in doing so I outline new adequacy criteria for linguistic theories aimed at explaining the nature of the linguistic and non-linguistic context and how it interfaces with context-dependent linguistic devices.","PeriodicalId":46358,"journal":{"name":"Linguistic Review","volume":"39 1","pages":"341 - 400"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Linguistic Review","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/tlr-2022-2091","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Ellipsis is a pervasive phenomenon across the world’s languages, and it is easy to see why: it allows speakers to omit certain parts of their utterances while nonetheless conveying their full meaning, which contributes to making linguistic communication highly efficient. While there is broad consensus that elliptical utterances depend on the context in some way, the nature of this dependency remains controversial. In this paper, I re-evaluate the merits of two classes of ellipsis theories: identity theories, which posit that material can be elided only if it is identical to a linguistic antecedent; and referential theories, which assume that ellipsis is enabled by the same underlying mechanism that governs other forms of discourse reference. I argue that both empirical and theoretical considerations favor referential theories in this comparison, and in doing so I outline new adequacy criteria for linguistic theories aimed at explaining the nature of the linguistic and non-linguistic context and how it interfaces with context-dependent linguistic devices.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
解释无身份省略*
摘要省略是世界语言中普遍存在的现象,原因很容易理解:它允许说话人省略话语的某些部分,同时传达其全部含义,这有助于提高语言交流的效率。虽然人们普遍认为,省略的话语在某种程度上取决于上下文,但这种依赖的性质仍然存在争议。在本文中,我重新评估了两类省略理论的优点:同一性理论,该理论认为只有当材料与语言先行词相同时,才能省略;以及指称理论,它们认为省略是由支配其他形式话语指称的相同的潜在机制促成的。我认为,在这种比较中,经验和理论的考虑都有利于指称理论,在这样做的过程中,我概述了语言学理论的新的充分性标准,旨在解释语言和非语言语境的性质,以及它如何与依赖语境的语言手段相结合。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Linguistic Review
Linguistic Review Multiple-
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
26
期刊介绍: The Linguistic Review aims at publishing high-quality papers in syntax, semantics, phonology, and morphology, within a framework of Generative Grammar and related disciplines, as well as critical discussions of theoretical linguistics as a branch of cognitive psychology. Striving to be a platform for discussion, The Linguistic Review welcomes reviews of important new monographs in these areas, dissertation abstracts, and letters to the editor. The editor also welcomes initiatives for thematic issues with guest editors. The Linguistic Review is a peer-reviewed journal of international scope.
期刊最新文献
Coordination versus separation: difference of gapping between Chinese and English and its prosodic attribution Force mismatch in clausal ellipsis Simplifying the theoretical treatment of wager verbs On the verb-raising analysis of non-constituent coordination in Japanese Morphological analysis of alienability contrast in Nuer: an atypical typical case
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1