Pragmatically motivated null subjects in English: A relevance theory perspective

Abstract

Despite English being traditionally classified as a non-null subject language, there are certain discourse contexts in which subject pronouns may be left non-overt. While previous analyses of this phenomenon have focused on syntactic explanations, each has acknowledged that pragmatics plays a vital role in understanding their production and interpretation. This paper takes up where the syntactic analyses leave off, and offers an analysis of the pragmatic motivation behind null subjects in non-null subject languages, focusing particularly on English.It is argued that, far from being exceptional, pragmatically motivated null subjects are not surprising on a relevance-theoretic approach to utterance production and interpretation (Sperber & Wilson, 1986/95). Three categories of null subject are identified, each driven by the balance between hearer's effort and cognitive effects, while allowing for the speaker's abilities and preferences. It is argued that pronouns encode procedural information which guides the hearer to the intended subject referent. Furthermore, the analysis of the discourse contexts in which these subjects may be optionally omitted sheds light not only on the nature of the pronouns themselves, but on the nature of the utterance interpretation process generally, and has important implications for the study of style.

Fragments online: virtual performatives in recreational discourse

“…Contextual cues may be expected to indicate grammatical person (of the first and second person ellipses, as compared to third-person ellipsis), as well as the intended referent of the implicit subject (for discussions, see, e.g. Haegeman 2013;Janda 1985;Quirk et al 1985, 845ff;Scott 2013;Siewierska 2004; Torres Cacoullos and Travis 2014). The type of fragment under investigation, however, differs from these uses by the systematic self-referentiality of the zero-subject across contexts: it is interpreted as referring to the user unless otherwise specified, in spite of the third-person morphological marker.…”

Referential Choice: Predictability and Its Limits

“…In particular, quite common zero references in English only appear in fixed syntactic contexts, such as coordinate, gerundial, and infinitival constructions; at least this applies to the kind of written English we explore (cf. Scott, 2013 ). Syntactically induced zeroes should not be treated as a discourse-based referential option on a par with third person pronouns and full NPs.…”

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

“…0 Locate 0 in handbag. (Haegeman and Ihsane 1999:138) As Scott (2013) suggests, cases such as (46)-(47) should not be possible on Haegeman's approach. Additionally, as pointed out in Ihsane (1999, 2001), the attested data involving omission in embedded contexts are problematic for any theory assuming a link between omission and the left periphery of the clause.…”

“…7 Scott (2013) suggests that subject drop in the diary register is conditioned by pragmatic considerations and processing constraints and offers an analysis of the pragmatics of the diary subject drop couched within Relevance Theory (cf. Sperber andWilson 1986/1995).…”