Deriving Split-Antecedent Relative Clauses
Penn collection
Degree type
Discipline
Subject
Funder
Grant number
License
Copyright date
Distributor
Related resources
Author
Contributor
Abstract
There is difficulty representing relative clauses with split antecedents (Perlmutter & Ross 1970, McCawley 1982, Link 1984, Wilder 1994, a.o.): (i) Mary met a man and John met a woman who know each other well. In this paper, I demonstrate that existing analyses, both movement and base generation approaches, have difficulties accounting for split-antecedent relative clauses (SARC) without construction-specific stipulations. Even the most promising accounts do not make predictions about the actual behavior of SARC. Formally, I propose that traditional approaches have difficulty because of how the notion of chain is represented. I provide a preliminary analysis using a novel system of representing narrow syntax that does not run into the type of problem that traditional approaches do. SARC are naturally predicted from the way I propose to treat coordination within the new system. In doing this, I argue for another direction of our model of narrow syntax (cf. Vergnaud to appear), one which redefines the representation of a chain and instead represents grammatical relationships as local – a generalized form of Multidominance. This approach to syntax makes wide-reaching predictions, which I do not discuss here. But, I show that this direction derives SARC naturally, without construction-specific stipulations.