Fragments

Abstract

Abstract This chapter discusses two kinds of fragments: phrases such as DPs and PPs that occur apparently unembedded in a sentence, without any overt antecedent, and fragment answers to questions. It presents non-sententialist (Stainton 2006, Progovac 2006) and sententialist approaches (focusing especially on Merchant’s 2004 movement-then-deletion account), then considers the main evidence for each approach, and how the opposing approach has tried to address this evidence. Arguments discussed in favour of non-sententialism are anticonnectivity effects, differences in the behaviour of fragment answers and their overtly sentential counterparts with regard to presupposition inheritance, and questions about the psychological plausibility of silent syntax; arguments in favour of sententialism are various kinds of connectivity effects—case, island effects, binding, and requirements for complementizers and prepositions in fragment answers.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 20 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.