Natural Language & Linguistic Theory

, Volume 31, Issue 1, pp 91–136 | Cite as

Verb-stranding verb phrase ellipsis and the structure of the Russian verbal complex

Article

Abstract

This paper investigates novel evidence from Russian Verb-Stranding Verb Phrase Ellipsis (vvpe), and argues for its use as a probe into the syntactic structure of morphophonologically inseparable but morphosyntactically complex verbs. The first step is to distinguish internal argument drop from vvpe, because they appear identical on the surface. I present novel evidence that Russian internal argument drop is illicit in syntactic islands, while vvpe is licit. Once this bifurcation is established, it allows us to explain previously obscured differences in the syntactic licensing of subject vs. internal argument drop in Russian. The second step uses the verb-matching requirement on the stranded verb in Russian vvpe to establish which parts of the verbal complex originate inside the domain of ellipsis, and which parts originate outside. A surprising finding is that the verb-matching properties of the Russian vvpe construction do not align with what has been demonstrated to hold of other languages in which vvpe is available. Unlike the strict matching requirement of Hebrew (Goldberg 2005a, 2005b) or Irish (McCloskey 2011) vvpe, the matching requirement in Russian vvpe appears to be sensitive to discourse factors, at least for certain speakers. This last discovery results in a significant contribution to our understanding of the nature of the identity requirement in ellipsis licensing.

Keywords

Verb phrase ellipsis Verb-stranding Russian Verb movement Argument drop Clause structure 

References

  1. Avrutin, Sergey, and Maria Babyonyshev. 1997. Obviation in subjunctive clauses and Agr: evidence from Russian. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 15 (2): 229–262. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Babko-Malaya, Olga. 2003. Perfectivity and prefixation in Russian. Journal of Slavic Linguistics 11 (1): 5–36. Google Scholar
  3. Bailyn, John Frederick. 1995a. A configurational approach to Russian ‘free’ word order. PhD diss., Cornell University, Ithaca. Google Scholar
  4. Bailyn, John Frederick. 1995b. Underlying phrase structure and ‘short’ verb movement in Russian. Journal of Slavic Linguistics 3 (1): 13–58. Google Scholar
  5. Bailyn, John Frederick. 2004. Generalized inversion. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 22: 1–49. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Biskup, Petr. 2007. Ps, lexical Ps, and superlexical Ps. In Proceedings of grammar and corpora. Czech Republic: The Czech Language Institute. Google Scholar
  7. Borik, Olga. 2009. Morphology-semantics interface: dealing with aspect. In York papers in linguistics series, Vol. 2, eds. Alexandra Galani, Daniel Redinger, and Norman Yeo, 22–45. Google Scholar
  8. Bowers, John. 1993. The syntax of predication. Linguistic Inquiry 24 (4): 591–656. Google Scholar
  9. Bresnan, Joan. 1982. Control and complementation. Linguistic Inquiry 13: 343–434. Google Scholar
  10. Campos, Héctor. 1986. Indefinite object drop. Linguistic Inquiry 17 (2): 354–359. Google Scholar
  11. Chomsky, Noam. 2000. Minimalist inquiries: the framework. In Step by step: essays on minimalist syntax in honor of Howard Lasnik, eds. R. Martin, D. Michaels, and J. Uriagereka, 89–155. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  12. Chung, Sandra. 1984. Identifiability and null objects in Chamorro. In Proceedings of the tenth annual meeting of the Berkeley linguistics society, 116–130. Berkeley: University of California. Google Scholar
  13. Chung, Sandra. 2006. Sluicing and the lexicon: the point of no return. In Proceedings of the 31st annual meeting of the Berkeley linguistics society, eds. Rebecca T. Cover and Yuni Kim, 73–91. Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistics Society. Google Scholar
  14. Chung, Sandra, and James McCloskey. 1983. On the interpretation of certain island facts in GPSG. Linguistic Inquiry 14 (4): 704–713. Google Scholar
  15. Chung, Sandra, Bill Ladusaw, and James McCloskey. 1995. Sluicing and logical form. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 3: 239–282. Google Scholar
  16. Cole, Peter. 1987. Null objects in universal grammar. Linguistic Inquiry 18: 597–612. Google Scholar
  17. Comrie, Bernard. 1973. Clause structure and movement constraints in Russian. In Papers from the ninth regional meeting, Chicago Linguistic Society, 291–304. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar
  18. Culicover, Peter W., and Ray Jackendoff. 2005. Simpler syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dalrymple, Mary, Stuart Shieber, and Fernando Pereira. 1991. Ellipsis and higher-order unification. Linguistics and Philosophy 14: 399–452. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dimitrova-Vulchanova, Mila. 1999. Verb semantics, diathesis and aspect. Munich: Lincom Europa. Google Scholar
  21. Doron, Edit. 1991. V-movement and VP ellipsis. Jerusalem: The Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Google Scholar
  22. Doron, Edit. 1999. V-Movement and VP ellipsis. In Fragments: studies in ellipsis and gapping, eds. Shalom Lappin and Elabbas Benmamoun, 124–140. New York: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  23. Farrell, Patrick. 1990. Null objects in Brazilian Portuguese. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 8 (3): 325–346. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Fiengo, Robert, and Robert May. 1994. Indices and identity. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  25. Fowler, George. 1994. Verbal prefixes as functional heads. Studies in the Linguistic Sciences 24 (1/2): 171–185. Google Scholar
  26. Fox, Danny. 2000. Economy and semantic interpretation. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  27. Franks, Steven. 1995. Parameters of Slavic morphosyntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  28. Ghomeshi, Lila. 2001. Control and thematic agreement. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 46: 9–40. Google Scholar
  29. Ginzburg, Jonathan, and Ivan Sag. 2000. Interrogative investigations. Stanford: CSLI Publications. Google Scholar
  30. Goldberg, Lotus. 2002. An elucidation of null direct object structures in modern Hebrew. In Proceedings of the West coast conference on formal linguistics, Vol. 21, eds. Line Mikkelsen and Christopher Potts, 99–112. Somerville: Cascadilla Press. Google Scholar
  31. Goldberg, Lotus. 2005a. Verb-stranding VP ellipsis: a cross-linguistic study. PhD diss., McGill University, Montréal. Google Scholar
  32. Goldberg, Lotus. 2005b. On the verbal identity requirement in VP ellipsis. Presented at the Identity in Ellipsis workshop at UC Berkeley, October 2005. Google Scholar
  33. Gordishevsky, Galina, and Sergey Avrutin. 2003. Subject and object omissions in child Russian. In Israeli association for theoretical linguistics conference, Vol. 19, ed. Yehuda Falk. Israel: Ben Gurion University of the Negev. Google Scholar
  34. Gundel, Jeanette K. 1980. Zero NP-anaphora in Russian: a case of topic-prominence. In Papers from the parassession on anaphora, Vol. 16, Chicago Linguistics Society, 139–146. Google Scholar
  35. Hankamer, Jorge, and Ivan A. Sag. 1976. Deep and surface anaphora. Linguistic Inquiry 7: 391–426. Google Scholar
  36. Hardt, Daniel. 1993. Verb phrase ellipsis: form, meaning, and processing. PhD diss., University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. Google Scholar
  37. Hartman, Jeremy. 2011. The semantic uniformity of traces: evidence from ellipsis parallelism. Linguistic Inquiry 42 (3): 367–388. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Hashemipour, Peggy. 1988. Finite control in modern Persian. In Proceedings of the West coast conference on formal linguistics, Vol. 7, ed. Hagit Borer. Stanford: CSLI. Google Scholar
  39. Hashemipour, Peggy. 1989. Pronominalization and control in modern Persian. PhD diss., University of California, San Diego. Google Scholar
  40. Heim, Irene. 1997. Predicates or formulas? Evidence from ellipsis. In Proceedings from semantics and linguistic theory, Vol. VII, ed. Aaron Lawson, 197–221. Cornell: CLC Publications. Google Scholar
  41. Hoji, Hajime. 1998. Null objects and sloppy identity in Japanese. Linguistic Inquiry 28: 127–152. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Huang, C. T. James. 1984. On the distribution and reference of empty pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry 15 (3): 531–574. Google Scholar
  43. Isačenko, Aleksandr V. 1960. Grammatičeskij stroj russkogo jazyka. Morfologija. Čast’ vtoraja. Bratislava: Vydavatel’stvo Slovenskej Akademie. Google Scholar
  44. Kim, Soowon. 1999. Sloppy/strict identity, empty objects, and NP ellipsis. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 8: 255–284. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. King, Tracy Holloway. 1995. Configuring topic and focus in Russian. Stanford: CSLI Publications. Google Scholar
  46. Kitagawa, Yoshihisa. 1991. Copying identity. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 9: 497–536. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Landau, Idan. 2004. The scale of finiteness and the calculus of control. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 22: 811–877. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Marantz, Alec. 1984. On the nature of grammatical relations. Vol. 10 Linguistic inquiry monographs. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  49. Marantz, Alec. 1997. No escape from syntax: don’t try morphological analysis in the privacy of your own lexicon. In Proceedings of the 21st penn linguistics colloquium, eds. Alexis Dimitriadis, L. Siegel, C. Surek-Clark, and A. Williams. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Working papers in linguistics. Google Scholar
  50. Markman, Vita. 2008. On Slavic semelfactives and secondary imperfectives: implications for the split ‘AspP’. In Proceedings of the 31st Pennsylvania linguistics colloquium, Vol. 14. University of Pennsylvania working papers in linguistics. Google Scholar
  51. Markman, Vita. 2012. Slavic semelfactives, secondary imperfectives, and the cartography of the Aspectual phrase. Ms. Google Scholar
  52. Martins, Ana-Maria. 1994. Enclisis, VP-deletion and the nature of sigma. Probus 6: 173–205. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Martins, Ana-Maria. 2000. A minimalist approach to clitic climbing. In Portuguese syntax, new comparative studies, ed. João Costa, 169–190. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  54. McCloskey, James. 1991. Clause structure, ellipsis and proper government in Irish. Lingua 85: 259–302. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. McCloskey, James. 2011. The shape of Irish clauses. In Proceedings of formal approaches to Celtic linguistics, ed. Andrew Carnie. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Available at http://ohlone.ucsc.edu/~jim. Google Scholar
  56. McShane, Marjorie. 2005. A theory of ellipsis. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  57. Merchant, Jason. 2001. The syntax of silence: sluicing, islands and the theory of ellipsis. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  58. Merchant, Jason. 2008. An asymmetry in voice mismatches in VP-ellipsis and pseudogapping. Linguistic Inquiry 39 (1): 169–179. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Merchant, Jason. 2010. Three kinds of ellipsis: syntactic, semantic, pragmatic? In Context-dependence, perspective, and relativity, eds. François Recanati, Isidora Stojanovic, and Neftalí Villanueva, 141–192. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Google Scholar
  60. Merchant, Jason. 2013. Voice and ellipsis. Linguistic Inquiry 44(1). Google Scholar
  61. Ngonyani, Deo. 1996. VP ellipsis in Ndendeule and Swahili applicatives. In Syntax at sunset, UCLA working papers in syntax and semantics, number 1, eds. Edward Garrett and Felicia Lee, 109–128. Department of linguistics, UCLA. Google Scholar
  62. Otani, Kazuyo, and John Whitman. 1991. V-Raising and VP-ellipsis. Linguistic Inquiry 22: 345–358. Google Scholar
  63. Padučeva, Elena V. 1985. Vyskazyvanie I ego sootvetstvennost’ s dejstvitel’nost’ju: referencial’nye aspekty semantiki mestoimenii. Moscow: Nauka. Google Scholar
  64. Pesetsky, David. 1982. Paths and categories. PhD diss., MIT Press, Cambridge. Google Scholar
  65. Pollock, Jean-Yves. 1989. Verb movement, universal grammar, and the structure of IP. Linguistic Inquiry 20: 365–424. Google Scholar
  66. Potsdam, Eric. 2007. Malagasy sluicing and its consequences for the identity requirement on ellipsis. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 25: 577–613. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Prüst, Hub, Martin van den Berg, and Remko Scha. 1994. Ellipsis and higher-order unification. Linguistics and Philosophy 17: 261–327. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Ramchand, Gillian, and Peter Svenonius. 2002. The lexical syntax and lexical semantics of the verb-particle construction. In Proceedings of the West coast conference on formal linguistics, Vol. 21, eds. Line Mikkelsen and Christopher Potts, 387–400. Somerville: Cascadilla Press. Google Scholar
  69. Raposo, Eduardo. 1986. On the null object in European Portuguese. In Studies in Romance linguistics, eds. Osvaldo Jaeggli and Carmen Silva-Corvalán, 373–390. Dordrecht and Cinnaminson: Foris Publications. Google Scholar
  70. Rizzi, Luigi. 1986. Null objects in Italian and the theory of pro. Linguistic Inquiry 17: 501–557. Google Scholar
  71. Rizzi, Luigi. 1997. The fine structure of the left periphery. In Elements of grammar, ed. Liliane Haegeman, 281–337. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Rojina, Nina. 2004. English particles, Russian prefixes, and prepositional phrases. Master’s thesis, University of Tromsø. Google Scholar
  73. Romanova, Eugenia. 2006. Constructing perfectivity in Russian. PhD diss., University of Tromsø, Tromsø. Google Scholar
  74. Rooth, Mats. 1992a. Ellipsis redundancy and reduction redundancy. In Proceedings from the Stuttgart ellipsis workshop, Vol. 340, eds. S. Berman and A. Hestvik. Arbeitspapiere des Sonderforschungsbereichs No. 29. Google Scholar
  75. Rooth, Mats. 1992b. A theory of focus interpretation. Natural Language Semantics 1: 75–116. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Ross, John Robert. 1969. Auxiliaries as main verbs. Studies in Philosophical Linguistics 1: 77–102. Google Scholar
  77. Sag, Ivan. 1976. Deletion and logical form. PhD diss., New York: Garland (1979). Google Scholar
  78. Saito, Mamoru. 1985. Some asymmetries in Japanese and their theoretical implications. PhD diss., MIT Press, Cambridge. Google Scholar
  79. Sekerina, Irina. 1997. The syntax and processing of split scrambling constructions in Russian. PhD diss., CUNY Graduate School, New York. Google Scholar
  80. Sherman (Ussishkin), Adam. 1998. VP ellipsis and subject positions in modern Hebrew. In Proceedings of the 13th annual meeting of the Israel association of theoretical linguistics, Bar-Ilan University, Tel-Aviv, Israel, ed. Adam Zachary Wyne, 211–229. Jerusalem: Akademon. Google Scholar
  81. Švedova, Natalia Ju., ed. 1982. Russkaja grammatika. Moscow: Akademija Nauk. Google Scholar
  82. Svenonius, Peter. 2004a. Slavic prefixes inside and outside VP. Nordlyd 32 (2): 205–253. Google Scholar
  83. Svenonius, Peter. 2004b. Slavic prefixes and morphology: an introduction to the Nordlyd volume. Nordlyd 32 (2): 177–204. Google Scholar
  84. Svenonius, Peter. 2008. Slavic prefixes are phrasal. In Proceedings of formal descriptions of Slavic languages 5, eds. G. Zybatow, L. Szucsich, U. Junghanns, and R. Meyer, 526–527. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Google Scholar
  85. Tatevosov, Sergei. 2007. Intermediate prefixes in Russian. In Proceedings of the annual workshop on formal approaches to Slavic linguistics, Vol. 16. Google Scholar
  86. Terzi, Arhonto. 1997. PRO and null case in finite clauses. The Linguistic Review 14: 335–360. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Timberlake, Alan. 2004. A reference grammar of Russian. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
  88. Townsend, Charles E. 1975. Russian word formation. Bloomington: Slavica Publishers. Google Scholar
  89. Uchibori, Asako. 2000. The syntax of subjunctive complements: evidence from Japanese. PhD diss., University of Connecticut, Storrs. Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Linguistics DepartmentStanford UniversityStanfordUSA

Personalised recommendations