Missing objects in special registers: The syntax of null objects in English

Abstract

Even though null definite objects are usually ungrammatical in English, they are widely used in certain special registers. This paper investigates object drop in the recipe and, to a lesser extent, match broadcasting registers in English, contributing an analysis of a substantial set of naturally occuring data, hence making it possible to verify observations from previous syntactic studies of the phenomenon, which were based on a restricted array of isolated sentences. Having shown that the data support the assumption that the unrealised object is syntactically active, I propose a novel analysis of missing objects in special registers, guided by recent developments in the generative linguistic theory. Null realisation of the object is considered as an issue of externalisation and intralinguistic variation is attributed to the rules operating at the SM interface which make it possible to extend the application of copy deletion, as assumed within the copy theory of movement

Licensing null arguments in recipes across languages

“…We note in passing that we do not address the categorial nature of the null patient in a recipe. Both Ruda (2014) and Weir (2017) propose that it is a D-less nominal, on analogy with East Asian languages that exhibit discourse or radical pro-drop, and lack determiners (Tomioka 2003). 27 However, as argued by Massam et al (2017), Niuean is also a radical pro-drop language, but it arguably does not lack determiners.…”

“…Null arguments are a common feature of written recipes, as long noted in the literature (e.g. Haegeman 1987a, b, Massam & Roberge 1989, Massam 1992, Cote 1996, Culy 1996, Bender 1999, Ruppenhofer & Michaelis 2010, Ruda 2014, Weir 2017. In (1) below, there is no overt agent for any of the verbs and the verbs cut and add are missing their patient argument.…”

“…Many authors have addressed this issue (e.g. Haegeman 1987a,b, Massam & Roberge 1989, Massam 1992, Ruda 2014, Massam et al 2017, Weir 2017. The details of their analyses differ, but for the most part, the differences between them relate to the nature of the null object (whether it be a trace, a DP, D, or nP, for example).…”

“…[19] Others (Ruda 2014, Weir 2017 have also argued for a relation between discourse pro-drop and recipe null objects, but they have focused on the nature of the null object (being determinerless, as in East Asian languages), rather than on the role of topic binding. We do not adopt this line of argumentation, because not all radical pro-drop languages lack determiners (Massam et al 2017).…”

Implicit Arguments in Ugandan English

“…For Iten et al (2005: 13), even though such examples have been heard among L1 English speakers, they are "nonetheless ungrammatical". Conversely, for Glass (2014) (as shown in (6) below) and Ruda (2014), such sentences are discourse-specific to a given community of practice or a given register, where assumptions about the missing referents are shared among interlocutors, since they share a common ground. For example, waiters can easily use devour without its object while talking about a patron's way of eating in a restaurant, since this use foregrounds the most salient information.…”