On the Distribution of Missing Arguments and Adjuncts under the Pro Approach

Abstract

This paper focuses on different behaviors of missing arguments and adjuncts. More specifically, this paper shows that interpretations of missing arguments can be freely recovered regardless of their environments while those of missing adjuncts can be recovered in very restricted environments. With respect to this difference, we suggest that missing arguments are syntactically present as silent forms. Hence, their interpretations are relatively less influenced by pragmatic processes. We also suggest that missing adjuncts can be classified into two types. Adjunct reading of one type is obtained through mandatory pragmatic enrichment processes like saturation, and that of the other type is obtained through optional free pragmatic enrichment. Hence, interpretations of missing adjuncts are more influenced by context. We further show that the analysis advanced here can provide a solid explanation for the data pointed out by Yim (2020). We also discuss some advantages of pronoun analysis in comparison to argument ellipsis analyses and Verb-Stranding VP ellipsis analyses.

More doubts on verb‐stranding VP ellipsis: Reply to Simpson 2023

“…This process is purely pragmatic; it involves neither “ellipsis” nor “deletion” in any formal sense. A better term is pragmatic enrichment (Recanati 2010, Ahn & Cho 2021). Thus, a given VP may be pragmatically enriched with an adjunct meaning recoverable from its immediate linguistic context.…”