Assistant General Linguistics, University of Gilan, Gilan, Iran
Abstract
The present article aims to explore VP ellipsis as well as modal and main verb (Those that take a clause as their complement) complement ellipses in Persian. This research therefore addresses the question: what is the account of modal and main verb (Those that take a clause as their complement) complement ellipses, which are superficially similar to VP ellipsis, in Persian? The proposed hypothesis is that by definition, Persian lacks VP ellipsis; however, modal and main verb complement ellipses exist in this language which both are regarded as a single structure and an example of v-stranding VP ellipsis. Having critically reviewed the previous studies done on the structure under discussion, modal and main verb complement ellipses are explored in detail. Unlike English, Persian disallows VP ellipsis (according to the most accepted definition in Generative Linguistics) in the sense that it is impossible to delete the verb phrase of a sentence and strand the tense. But, in a similar structure, it is possible to delete the complements of modals except ‘bayad’ meaning ‘should’ and main verbs if the conditions on ellipsis are met. Persian modals are morpho-syntactically main verbs and they appear in the same syntactic positions as main verbs. For this reason, the complement ellipses of both are regarded as a single structure. Extracting a constituent like an object out of the ellipsis site, Missing Antecedent Phenomenon, and finally strict and sloppy readings are the major syntactic properties of this structure which all back up the ellipsis analysis of the structure under investigation. The results of this research suggest that E-feature resides on v. When the verb raises to v and as soon as the uninterpretable features are checked via Agreement, the complement of v is deleted but v itself is stranded. Since indirect objects and adverbs occupying positions higher than CP undergo ellipsis as well, it can be argued that the VP, which is situated higher than CP, is deleted. This structure is, therefore, regarded as an instantiation of v- stranding VP ellipsis.
اخلاقی، فریار (1386). «بایستن، شدن و توانستن: سه فعل وجهی در زبان فارسی امروز». دستور. س 3. ش 3. صص 82-132.
دبیرمقدم، محمد (1376). «فعل مرکب در زبان فارسی». مجلۀ زبان‌شناسی. س 12. ش 1 و 2. صص 2-46.
درزی، علی و مزدک انوشه (1389). حرکت فعل اصلی در فارسی (رویکردی کمینه‌گرا). زبان‌پژوهی. د 2. ش 3. صص 21-55.
رحیمیان، جلال و محمد عموزاده (1392). «افعال وجهی در زبان فارسی و بیان وجهیّت». پژوهش‌های زبانی. د 4. ش 1. صص 21-40.
شعبانی، منصور (1392). «پاره‌جمله‌ها در زبان فارسی». پژوهش‌های زبانی. د 4. ش 2. صص 81-100.
کریمی، یادگار و حسن آزموده (1391). «حذف گروه فعلی در زبان فارسی: مسئله ساختاری». پژوهش‌های زبانی. د 3. ش 2. صص 77-94.
لبافان خوش، زهرا و علی درزی (1393). «نگاهی به جایگاه نحوی باید و شاید». پژوهش‌های زبانی. د 5. ش2. صص 97-112.
نقی‌زاده، محمود؛ منوچهر توانگر و محمد عموزاده (1390). «بررسی مفهوم ذهنیّت در افعال وجهی در زبان فارسی». پژوهش‌های زبان‌شناسی. د 3. ش4. صص1-20.
همایونفر، مژگان (1392). «بررسی روند دستوری‌شدگی فعل‌های وجهی زبان فارسی بر‌اساس پارامترهای لِمان». ویژه‌نامۀ فرهنگستان. ش 9. صص 50-73.
Aelbrecht, L. (2010). The Syntactic Licensing of Ellipsis. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Agbayani, B. & E. Zoerner (2004). “Gapping, Pseudogapping and Sideward Movement”. Studia Linguistica. 58(3). pp. 185-211.
Algryani, A. (2011). “VP ellipsis in Libyan Arabic”. Newcastle Working Papers in Linguistics. 17. pp. 1-22.
Chomsky, N. (2000). “Minimalist inquiries: The framework”. In Step by Step. Essays on Minimalist Syntax in Honour of Howard Lasnik. Roger Martin, David Michaels & Juan Uriagereka (eds.): 89-155. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.
Michaels & Juan Uriagereka (2001). “Derivation by phase”. In Ken Hale: A Life in Language. Michael Kenstowicz (ed.): 1-52. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.
Depiante, M. (2000). The Syntax of Deep and Surface Anaphora: A Study of Null Complement Anaphora and Stripping/ Bare Argument Ellipsis. PhD dissertation, University of Connecticut, Storrs.
Grinder, J. & P. M. Postal (1971). “Missing antecedents”. Linguistic Inquiry. 2. pp. 269-312.
Hankamer, J. & I. A. Sag (1976). “Deep and surface anaphora”. Linguistic Inquiry. 7. pp. 391-428.
Johnson, K. (2001). “What VP- ellipsis can do, and what it can’t, but not why”. In Baltin, M. & Collins, C. (eds.). The Handbook of Contemporary Syntactic Theory. pp. 439-479. Oxford: Blackwell.
Karimi, S. (1989). Aspects of Persian Syntax, Specificity, and the Theory of Grammar. Ph. D. dissertation. University of Washington.
Karimi, S. (2005). A Minimalist Approach to Scrambling: Evidence from Persian. Mouton de Gruyter.
Lobeck, A. (1995). Ellipsis: Functional Heads, Licensing, and Identification. New York / Oxford. Oxford University Press.
Merchant, J. (2001). The Syntax of Silence: Sluicing, Islands and the Theory of Ellipsis. New York: Oxford University Press.
Merchant, J. (2013). “Voice and ellipsis”. Linguistic Inquiry. 44. pp. 77-108.
Palmer, F. R. (1986). Mood and Modality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pesetsky, D. & E. Torrego (2007). “The syntax of valuation and the interpretability of features”. In Phrasal and Clausal Architecture. ed. by Simin Karimi, Vida Samiian and Wendy Wilkins. pp. 262-294. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Schoorlemmer, E. (2009). Agreement, Dominance and Doubling: The Morphosyntax of DP. Ph.D. dissertation. University of Leiden.
Toosarvandani, M. (2006). “V- Stranding VPE: Ellipsis in Farsi complex predicates”. North East Linguistic Society (NELS). 36. pp. 639-652.
Van Craenenbroeck, J. & J. Merchant (2013). “Ellipsis phenomena”. In Marcel den Dikken (ed.). The Cambridge Handbook of Generative Syntax. pp. 701-745. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.
Van Craenenbroeck, J. (2013). VP-Ellipsis. Ms. , KU Leuven HUBrussel and Université Saint-Louis.
Language Related Research