Remarks on Rule H

Fox (2000) argues that a single principle, Rule H, can account for (i) Strong Crossover, (ii) the ban on using co-binding to sneak around Condition B, and (iii) the Dahl paradigm. The focus of this paper is Fox’s analysis of the Dahl paradigm. Though elegant and appealing, the analysis faces both co...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Alex Drummond
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Open Library of Humanities 2021-02-01
Series:Glossa
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.glossa-journal.org/articles/333
id doaj-b3eed3faf1064d4c82ddcb8703aa695c
record_format Article
spelling doaj-b3eed3faf1064d4c82ddcb8703aa695c2021-09-02T20:04:55ZengOpen Library of HumanitiesGlossa2397-18352021-02-016110.5334/gjgl.333595Remarks on Rule HAlex Drummond0UnaffiliatedFox (2000) argues that a single principle, Rule H, can account for (i) Strong Crossover, (ii) the ban on using co-binding to sneak around Condition B, and (iii) the Dahl paradigm. The focus of this paper is Fox’s analysis of the Dahl paradigm. Though elegant and appealing, the analysis faces both conceptual and empirical problems. On the conceptual side, the analysis assumes that a bound pronoun within an elided VP must be bound in a structurally parallel configuration to its counterpart in the antecedent VP. This requirement does not follow from independently-motivated constraints on VP ellipsis. On the empirical side, Roelofsen (2011) has turned up additional ellipsis phenomena that do not pattern as Fox’s analysis predicts. I will argue that a relatively minor modification to Fox’s analysis suffices to solve both the conceptual and empirical problems. Taking inspiration from Kehler & Büring (2008), I increase the domain of application of Rule H to include syntactic structures which underlie Focus Semantic Values, so that Rule H acts as a filter on Focus Semantic Values. The only relevant constraint on VP ellipsis is an independently-motivated Rooth-style contrast constraint.https://www.glossa-journal.org/articles/333syntaxsemanticsrule hbindingpresuppositionscrossoverfocusellipsis
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Alex Drummond
spellingShingle Alex Drummond
Remarks on Rule H
Glossa
syntax
semantics
rule h
binding
presuppositions
crossover
focus
ellipsis
author_facet Alex Drummond
author_sort Alex Drummond
title Remarks on Rule H
title_short Remarks on Rule H
title_full Remarks on Rule H
title_fullStr Remarks on Rule H
title_full_unstemmed Remarks on Rule H
title_sort remarks on rule h
publisher Open Library of Humanities
series Glossa
issn 2397-1835
publishDate 2021-02-01
description Fox (2000) argues that a single principle, Rule H, can account for (i) Strong Crossover, (ii) the ban on using co-binding to sneak around Condition B, and (iii) the Dahl paradigm. The focus of this paper is Fox’s analysis of the Dahl paradigm. Though elegant and appealing, the analysis faces both conceptual and empirical problems. On the conceptual side, the analysis assumes that a bound pronoun within an elided VP must be bound in a structurally parallel configuration to its counterpart in the antecedent VP. This requirement does not follow from independently-motivated constraints on VP ellipsis. On the empirical side, Roelofsen (2011) has turned up additional ellipsis phenomena that do not pattern as Fox’s analysis predicts. I will argue that a relatively minor modification to Fox’s analysis suffices to solve both the conceptual and empirical problems. Taking inspiration from Kehler & Büring (2008), I increase the domain of application of Rule H to include syntactic structures which underlie Focus Semantic Values, so that Rule H acts as a filter on Focus Semantic Values. The only relevant constraint on VP ellipsis is an independently-motivated Rooth-style contrast constraint.
topic syntax
semantics
rule h
binding
presuppositions
crossover
focus
ellipsis
url https://www.glossa-journal.org/articles/333
work_keys_str_mv AT alexdrummond remarksonruleh
_version_ 1721170532874846208