Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||Argument ellipsis in Colloquial Singapore English and the Anti-Agreement Hypothesis||Authors:||Sato, Y.||Issue Date:||2014||Citation:||Sato, Y. (2014). Argument ellipsis in Colloquial Singapore English and the Anti-Agreement Hypothesis. Journal of Linguistics 50 (2) : 365-401. ScholarBank@NUS Repository. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226713000303||Abstract:||This paper provides new data from Colloquial Singapore English (CSE) showing a hitherto unnoticed subject-object asymmetry: empty objects, but not empty subjects, exhibit sloppy/quantificational readings. According to a recent theory of argument ellipsis in Japanese/Korean (Oku 1998; S. Kim 1999; Takahashi 2007, 2008a, b, 2010), these readings obtain as a result of the LF-Copy of an overt argument from a full-fledged clause onto the corresponding empty argument position in an elliptical clause. Şener & Takahashi (2010) and Takahashi (2010) hypothesize that this operation is blocked by φ-agreement. This hypothesis provides a principled explanation for the subject-object asymmetry in CSE, coupled with the new observation that primary substrates of CSE - Mandarin, Cantonese, Hokkien and Malay - exhibit the same asymmetry as CSE. My analysis has significant implications for the comparative syntax of argument ellipsis and for theories of contact genesis. Among others, the analysis supports the claim (Miyagawa 2010) that Chinese possesses φ-agreement despite the lack of morphological manifestations. The results in this paper also provide strong evidence for the general substratist explanation on the emerging grammar of CSE (Bao 2005). Copyright © 2013 Cambridge University Press.||Source Title:||Journal of Linguistics||URI:||http://scholarbank.nus.edu.sg/handle/10635/126420||ISSN:||14697742||DOI:||10.1017/S0022226713000303|
|Appears in Collections:||Staff Publications|
Show full item record
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
checked on Apr 4, 2020
WEB OF SCIENCETM
checked on Mar 19, 2020
checked on Mar 27, 2020
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.