Recent Developments in Phase Theory

Jeroen van Craenenbroeck, Cora Pots, Tanja Temmerman, Jeroen van Craenenbroeck, Cora Pots, Tanja Temmerman

• Publisher: De Gruyter Mouton
• Year: 2020
• eBook ISBN: 9781501510137
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Languages & Linguistics
• Subtopic: Syntax in Linguistics
• Index: Languages & Linguistics

The overarching goal of this volume is to explore a number of recent developments in Phase Theory (both theoretical and empirical), thus contributing to our overall understanding of the concept of phases.
The volume is divided into three parts, of which the first focuses on the traditional role played by phases in defining successive cyclicity, while at the same time examining the interaction between that traditional role and Chomsky (2013)'s proposal about labeling. The second part focuses on the question of whether only the highest projection of the clausal and nominal domain, CP and DP, are phases or whether those domains also contain an internal phase: vP and NP/NumP/QP, while the third part contains two chapters that focus on the extent to which ellipsis can be used as a reliable diagnostic for phasehood.
As a whole, the volume provides a detailed and in-depth view on a number of recent developments in Phase Theory, which will likely continue to dominate the debate for several years to come.

1 Recent developments in Phase Theory Introductory remarks

Jeroen van Craenenbroeck

KU Leuven, Blijde-Inkomststraat 21, 3000, Leuven, Belgium

Jeroen van Craenenbroeck is Professor of Dutch Linguistics at KU Leuven, where he is also vice-president of the Center for Research in Syntax, Semantics, and Phonology (CRISSP). He is the author of The syntax of ellipsis (OUP) and co-editor of the Oxford Handbook of Ellipsis, and his research interests include ellipsis (sluicing, swiping, spading, VP-ellipsis), expletives, verb clusters, and the left periphery of the clause.

Cora Pots

KU Leuven, Warmoesberg 26, 1000, Brussels, Belgium

Cora Pots is postdoctoral researcher at KU Leuven and member of the Center for Research in Syntax, Semantics, and Phonology (CRISSP). She obtained her Ph. D. from KU Leuven in 2020 with a dissertation entitled Roots in Progress. Semi-lexicality in the Dutch and Afrikaans verbal domain. Her main research interests are morphosyntactic variation, comparative syntax, Dutch and Afrikaans syntax, dialectal variation, syntactic optionality, and language change.

Tanja Temmerman

Université Saint-Louis, Boulevard du Jardin botanique, 43, 1000, Brussels, Belgium

Tanja Temmerman is Assistant Professor of Dutch Linguistics at Université Saint-Louis Bruxelles (Belgium). She also teaches English and is the head of the English Department at the same university. She obtained her Ph.D. from Leiden University in 2012 with a dissertation entitled Multidominance, ellipsis, and quantifier scope. Her principal research foci lie in (generative) syntax, issues at the syntax-phonology and syntax-semantics interfaces, Dutch dialectology and comparative Germanic syntax. Specific topics of interest include ellipsis, the internal and external syntax of idioms, phase theory, long distance dependencies, island effects, phrase structure, modals, and negation. She is co-editor of the Oxford Handbook of Ellipsis.

1.1 Introduction

Throughout the history of generative grammar, there have been various ways of implementing locality effects, for example through Transformational Cycles (Chomsky 1965, Kayne 1975) or Barriers (Chomsky 1986). Phase Theory (Uriagereka 1999, Chomsky 2000, 2001) constitutes the most recent development in this line of thinking: it is argued that there exist discrete structural domains in natural language that exhibit a degree of syntactic, semantic, and phonological independence from the rest of the computation. Phase Theory offers a tool for investigating and understanding such domains. However, since the inception of phases, there have been many different proposals about the specific formalization of this concept, along with much debate about the ways in which (and the extent to which) phases can be evidenced empirically—and indeed whether they exist at all. The aim of this volume is to explore a number of recent developments (both empirical and theoretical) in Phase Theory, thus contributing to our overall understanding of the concept of phases.

The six chapters of this book have been organized around three current themes in Phase Theory: (i) the interaction of phases and ellipsis, (ii) the existence and properties of domain-internal phases, and (iii) phases and labeling. In order to reflect this thematic tripartition, the volume has been divided into three parts. In addition, there is a fourth theme, which surfaces in all of the chapters in one form or another; the question of whether the size of phases is fixed or flexible. In this introductory chapter, we introduce those four topics and indicate which position the individual chapters stake out with respect to them.

1.2 Phases and ellipsis

Given that phase heads signal Spell-Out points, i. e. points of Transfer to the PF-interface (Uriagereka 1999, Chomsky 2000, 2001), and given that one of the dominant approaches to ellipsis takes this process to involve deletion or non-pronunciation at PF (Merchant 2001), it seems only natural to try and link these two phenomena. Indeed, over the years, various authors have proposed that ellipsis sites can be reduced to phasal complements (Gengel 2007, Rouveret 2012) (though see Aelbrecht (2010) for an opposing view) and hence, that ellipsis can be used as a diagnostic for phasehood. In recent years, Bošković (2014) has brought this issue to the forefront of linguistic theorizing, by putting forward a very specific proposal in which both phasal complements and entire phases can undergo ellipsis, but no other constituents can. The impact of Bošković’s (2014) proposal on the (ellipsis and phases) literature has been substantial, with researchers arguing both for and against it. Bošković (2014) has sparked an interesting debate regarding the extent to which ellipsis can be used to detect phasehood: exactly how tight is the relationship between phases and ellipsis? If the link between phases and ellipsis pans out, it has important repercussions for our understanding of phases. On the one hand, it confirms Chomsky’s classical intuition that phases are ‘PF-complete’ in some sense, but on the other hand, the fact that both full phases and phasal complements are candidates for ellipsis does not mesh well with Chomsky’s classical approach, which clearly distinguishes between the two. The first two chapters in this volume address Bošković’s proposal, though from different perspectives and with a different conclusion.

Neda Todorović’s contribution “Aspect interacts with phasehood: evidence from Serbian VP-ellipsis” shows that the hypothesis that both phases and phasal complements can be deleted yields the correct empirical results in describing VP-ellipsis in Serbian. There is a twist, however, and one that takes us beyond Bošković’s proposal: Todorović argues that the phasal (complement) status of a constituent not only decides if that constituent can be elided, it is also the basis for an additional identity constraint on ellipsis. This phasal identity requirement states that phasal ellipsis sites need to have phasal antecedents, and phasal complement ellipsis sites need to have phasal complements as antecedents. To the extent that this identity condition in terms of phasal status is on the right track, it implies that phase theory is even more intimately connected to the mechanism of ellipsis than was previously assumed.

Barbara Citko takes a different stance in her chapter “On Top but not a Phase: phasehood inheritance and variation in sluicing”. She focuses on Polish, as a representative of the so-called ‘focus sluicing languages’, whereby the remnant that survives after sluicing (typically a wh-phrase) resides not in the highest specifier of the left periphery (call it specCP), but rather in a lower one (typically identified as specFocP). The data patterns discussed by Citko suggest that phasal complements can be elide...

Table of contents

• Title Page
• Copyright
• Contents
• 1 Recent developments in Phase Theory Introductory remarks
• Part I Phases and ellipsis
• Part II Domain-internal phases
• Part III Phases and labeling
• Subject Index