Abstract
We offer evidence for a structural identity constraint between a fragment and the structurally parallel position in the antecedent (which we term correspondent here). We ask if there is a preference for morphosyntactic match (generally in terms of syntactic category, but in terms of case marking in the Korean data discussed here) between a fragment and its correspondent. This question follows from the idea that in order to interpret fragments, the parser directly accesses content-addressable representations stored in memory, using as retrieval cues the linguistic information that fragments provide. We explore this preference using experimental data from Korean. In three acceptability judgment experiments, we demonstrate that (1) morphosyntactic match between fragments and correspondents is favored over mismatch, (2) the acceptability of mismatch is directional, favoring fragments that are morphosyntactically less complex than correspondents over the reverse, and (3) caseless fragments are degraded when paired with implicit correspondents compared to explicit ones.
Highlights
Psycholinguistic research on ellipsis has shown that an antecedent for a fragment is retrieved via a mechanism that allows direct access to content-addressable linguistic representations stored in memory (Martin and McElree 2008, 2009, 2011)
We have presented evidence in favor of a structural constraint on Korean fragments such that matching fragments and corespondents are the most acceptable configuration
Our proposal builds on cue-based accounts of clausal ellipsis, where the parser has direct access to content-addressable representations stored in memory while interpreting an ellipsis site
Summary
Psycholinguistic research on ellipsis has shown that an antecedent for a fragment is retrieved via a mechanism that allows direct access to content-addressable linguistic representations stored in memory (Martin and McElree 2008, 2009, 2011). We argue that the possibilities for realizing a fragment are at least the same as the possibilities for realizing the parallel position in the argument structure of the antecedent clause This is clear from the Korean examples in (3) and (5), where the fragments may be either case-marked or caseless, just like the parallel direct object positions. Given the content-addressable architecture of the direct-access mechanism and the Find and Align steps of ellipsis resolution, matching syntactic category and case features provide the maximally informative structure available for fragments under clausal ellipsis. Fifty five native Korean speakers in total took part in the experiments
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
