대한언어학회 전자저널

Park, Myung-Kwan. (2017). On Corrective Stripping in English. The Linguistic Association of Korea Journal, 25(1), 117-137. This paper examines so-called corrective fragments in English where a fragment remnant occurs after the negative particle no as a response to the preceding yes-no question. Departing from the recent works on them such as Merchant (2004), Griffith and Lipták (2014), Barros et al. (2013), and Weir (2014), we argue that no and the remnant each is typically derived from a clausal structure. The negative particle no is in fact a clausal anaphora, being derived via TP ellipsis, whereas the following remnant after the comma sign as an asyndetic coordination marker is moved out of the TP to be stripped, thus being island-sensitive. However, there are marked cases of corrective remnant-like constituents that occur inside island structure, and they may or may not involve Stripping. On an analogy with corrective but (adopting Toosarvandanis (2013) analysis of them), we show that the marked instances involve sub-clausal coordination or Stripping inside island structure, thus obviating an island violation due to movement.

# corrective ‘fragment’ # TP ellipsis/Stripping # comma coordination # corrective but # island (in)sensitivity # sub-clausal coordination

• Barros, M. (2012). A non-repair approach to island sensitivity in contrastive TP ellipsis. In Proceedings of CLS, 48. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.
• Barros, M., Elliott, P. D., & Thoms, G. (2013). More variation in island repair: Clausal vs. non-clausal islands. In Proceedings of CLS, 49. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.
• Barros, M., & Vicente, L. (2016). A remnant condition for ellipsis. In K. Kim et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 33rd West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (pp. 57-66). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
• Chung, D. (2014). On the locus of the interpretable negative feature in a negative sentence. Language Research, 50(2), 461-486.
• Fernández, R., & Ginzburg, J. (2002). Non-sentential utterances: A corpus study. Traitement automatique des languages, 43(2), 13-42.
• Ginzburg, J., & Sag, I. (2000). Interrogative investigations. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
• Griffiths, J., & Liptak, A. (2014). Contrast and island sensitivity in clausal ellipsis. Syntax, 17(3), 189-234.
• Gruenstein, A. (2002). English corrective fragments: syntactic and semantic considerations. Unpublished Ms., Stanford University.
• Holmberg, A. (2015). The syntax of yes and no. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Kramer, R., & Rawlins, K. (2009). Polarity particles: an ellipsis account. In Proceedings of the 39th Annual Meeting of the North East Linguistic Society (NELS 39). Amherst, MA: Graduate Student Linguistic Association.
• McCawley, J. D. (1991). Contrastive negation and metalinguistic negation. Chicago Linguistic Society (CLS), 27, 189-206.
• Meinunger, A. (1995). Focus relations and weak islands. In J. Camacho, L. Choueiri & M. Watanabe (Eds.), The proceedings of the fourteenth West Coast conference on formal linguistics (pp. 355-349). CSLI: Stanford, California.
• Merchant, J. (2001). The syntax of silence: Sluicing, islands, and the theory of ellipsis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Merchant, J. (2004). Fragments and ellipsis. Linguistics and Philosophy, 27, 661-738.
• Merchant, J. (2008). Variable island repair under ellipsis. In K. Johnson (Ed.), Topics in ellipsis, (pp. 132-153). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Park, M.-K. (2015). Ways of replying to negative questions in English and Korean. Korean Journal of English Language and Linguistics, 15(3), 397-421.
• Potts, C. (2005). The logic of conventional implicatures. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Roberts, C. (2012/1996). Information structure in discourse: towards an integrated formal theory of pragmatics. Semantics and Pragmatics, 5, 1-69.
• Steindl, U. (2013). Corrective coordination with ‘but’ across languages. A handout read at CGSW 28.
• Toosarvandani, M. (2013). Corrective but coordinates clauses not always but sometimes. Natural Language Linguistic Theory, 31(3), 827-863.
• Vicente, L. (2010). On the syntax of adversative coordination. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 28, 381-415.
• de Vries, M. (2002). The syntax of relativization. Ph.D. dissertation, Utrecht University.
• de Vries, M. (2006). The syntax of appositive relativization. Linguistic Inquiry, 37(2), 229-270.
• Weir, A. (2014). Fragments and clausal ellipsis. Doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts Amherst.