Since Ross (1967), it has been observed that there are configurations from which otherwise unbounded movement operations cannot occur, and they are called islands. Ellipsis and resumption are known to have a peculiar property to 'repair' island violations. Each chapter of this thesis discusses a case of ellipsis/resumption to examine in what cases movement out of an island becomes licit by those strategies.
Chapter 2 discusses the elliptical construction called sluicing, and argues for the PF-deletion analysis of sluicing (Merchant 2001, originated from Ross 1969). I will show that ECP violations made by adjunct sluicing cannot be repaired by sluicing, unlike island violations. I will thus argue that island violations are PF-violations while ECP violations are LF violations, and that PF-deletion ameliorates only PFdeletion.
Chapter 3 examines properties of stripping and argues that stripping is derived by focus movement followed by PF-deletion. I try to attribute the lack of island repair under ellipsis in stripping to the fact that focus movement is not usually overt in English. Covert movement is derived by a weak feature (Chomsky 1995), but when a focused material is included in the PF-deletion site, it undergoes last resort PFmovement to satisfy the recoverability of deletion. I claim that this PF-movement is incompatible with island-repair, speculating that island violations are ameliorated at spell-out, and post-spell-out movement is 'too late' to be repaired.
Chapter 4 reviews properties of Japanese sluicing, and introduces Hiraiwa and Ishihara's (2002) analysis where Japanese sluicing is derived from what they call "no da" in-situ focus construction. Under this analysis, the sluiced wh-phrase undergoes focus movement, followed by clausal deletion. I adopt the analysis of stripping to Japanese sluicing, claiming that this is another instance of the last resort focus movement at PF, which cannot ameliorate island violations.
Chapter 5 discusses properties of Left Node Raising (LNR) in Japanese. Based on the fact that simple LNR shows properties distinct from Null Object Construction (NOC), I claim that LNR involves ATB-movement rather than NOC. However, the second gap of LNR behaves like a pronoun only when included inside an island. I claim that this is an instance of null resumptive pronoun.
|Advisor:||Hornstein, Norbert R., Lasnik, Howard|
|Commitee:||Lidz, Jeffrey, Pietroski, Paul M., Rey, Georges|
|School:||University of Maryland, College Park|
|School Location:||United States -- Maryland|
|Source:||DAI-A 70/09, Dissertation Abstracts International|
|Keywords:||Ellipsis, Island repair, Islands, Movement, Sluicing, Stripping, Syntax|
Copyright in each Dissertation and Thesis is retained by the author. All Rights Reserved
The supplemental file or files you are about to download were provided to ProQuest by the author as part of a
dissertation or thesis. The supplemental files are provided "AS IS" without warranty. ProQuest is not responsible for the
content, format or impact on the supplemental file(s) on our system. in some cases, the file type may be unknown or
may be a .exe file. We recommend caution as you open such files.
Copyright of the original materials contained in the supplemental file is retained by the author and your access to the
supplemental files is subject to the ProQuest Terms and Conditions of use.
Depending on the size of the file(s) you are downloading, the system may take some time to download them. Please be