Real parasitic gaps in Japanese

Abstract

This paper aims to demonstrate that there exist real parasitic gaps (PG) in Japanese, despite the fact that pro is available rather freely in this language, hence making it hard to unveil the existence of real PGs. Taking up Takahashi's (J East Asian Linguistics 15: 1-35, 2006) work as the starting point, I argue that as far as NP gaps are concerned, what Takahashi calls an apparent PG is identified as either a real PG or an instance of pro, contrary to Takahashi's claim that it involves argument ellipsis. Real PG cases are found in typical PG configurations where sloppy readings of zibun 'self' are involved and where reconstruction effects of Condition A take place into PGs. I further argue that the argument-ellipsis strategy is unavailable in the apparent PG configuration due to its last resort nature. This property restricts the availability of argument ellipsis to the configuration in which the elliptic site is not c-commanded by its antecedent or it is not an NP in categorial status.

Revisiting a null pronominal account for parasitic gaps in Japanese

“…The argument that parasitic gaps are pro has often been attacked because the whole sentence involves a weak crossover configuration, as in (59), when the wh-phrase is moved from object position of the matrix clause. In this section, I will argue that the apparent weak crossover effect is not a real problem, following in part Abe (2011). In all possible parasitic gap examples, potential weak crossover violations can be remedied by clause-internal scrambling, which can be A-movement in Japanese (Saito 1992).…”

“…So Japanese apparently has an empty category which shows a surface resemblance to a parasitic gap observed in other languages. This is why Takahashi (2006) and Abe (2011) analyze this construction by comparing it with parasitic gap constructions, rather than considering the gap inside the island as being pro as Yoshimura (1992) did. However, as mentioned above, this obligatory movement of the wh-phrase is puzzling at the same time, considering that Japanese is a wh-in-situ language.…”

“…In this section, I will pay special attention to two properties of parasitic gaps: reconstruction asymmetry and category restrictions. These are two important factors that lead Abe (2011) to conclude that Japanese parasitic gaps are real parasitic gaps in some cases and Takahashi (2006) to argue that they are "apparent" parasitic gaps and are in fact the results of XP ellipsis. Kearney (1983) pointed out that there is an asymmetry regarding reconstruction effects in sentences with parasitic gaps, as shown in (31-32): reconstruction is possible only into the real gap, never into a parasitic gap.…”

“…However, it should be noted that reconstruction into the subject does not always happen in Japanese even when a parasitic gap is inside the subject relative clause island. Abe & Nakao (2009) and Abe (2011) argue that reconstruction into subject is not a possible option when there is a case-mismatch. For example, they argue that in (36), the wh-phrase must be reconstructed into the real gap because this is a case of case-mismatch.…”

Antecedent‐Contained Deletion in Japanese: Support for the VP‐Ellipsis Analysis

“…It is not crystal‐clear, however, whether Sakamoto's () judgments on these data are in the right direction, since (14a, b) involve “backward ellipsis” in the sense that the elliptic parts precede their antecedents. In fact, I demonstrate in Abe (:217) that argument ellipsis in Japanese is subject to a condition to the effect that “the antecedent must either precede or occupy a position higher than the elliptic site,” providing the following example:…”