7 thoughts on “Acceptability of extraction out of adjuncts depends on discourse factors

  1. Do you think that this discourse-based account is relevant to the amelioration effect of resumptive pronouns? In other words, how would this discourse-based account explain the amelioration effect of resumptive pronouns?

    1. it may depend on the construction, do you mean resumptive pronoun in relative clauses or in wh-question?

    2. Thank you for your reply and your interesting talk.

      I mean Arabic cleft wh-questions, d-linked wh-questions and relative clauses with violations of strong islands are accepted when there is a resumptive pronoun ( highly acceptable based on an experimental work I am conducting now). Bare wh-questions with violation of islands, on the other hand, are highly unacceptable with and without resumptive pronouns.

      I am just wondering how your account would expect such findings.

      Thank you

  2. It is claimed that animacy and D-linking properties of filler phrases in wh-questions ameliorate island effects (Alexopoulou et al., 2013). How would this discourse-based account explain these observations?

  3. Nice talk Elodie! But I would have answered Grant’s question a little differently. As it turns out, extraction from subjects in the relevant environments does not always require pied-piping, as the attested examples below suggest:

    The eight dancers and their caller, Laurie Schmidt, make up the Farmall Promenade of nearby Nemaha, a town_i that [to describe i as tiny] would be to overstate its size.
    (Huddleston and Pullum, 2002b, 1094, n. 27)

    In his bedroom, [which]i [to describe i as small] would be a gross understatement, he has an audio studio setup.
    (Chaves, 2012, 471)

    Leaving the room, she is quick to offer you some Arabic coffee and dates [which]i
    [to refuse _i] would be insane because both are delicious, and an opportunity to
    relax and eat is welcome when working twelve hours.
    [www.thesandyshamrock.com/being-an-rt-in-saudi-arabia/, May 22, 2020]

    The moment itself was something [which]i [to deny _i] would be a blasphemy.
    (Culicover and Winkler, 2019)

    There are some things [which]i [fighting against _i] is not worth the effort. Concentrating on things which can create significant positive change is much more fruitful.
    [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13946026, January 7, 2020]
    (Culicover and Winkler, 2019)

    I’m looking for someone who I click with. You know, the type of person [who]i [spending time with _i] is effortless.
    [https://3-instant.okcupid.com/profile/mpredds, January 7, 2020]
    (Culicover and Winkler, 2019)

    Survived by her children, Mae (Terry), Dale (Andelyn), Joanne (Gary), Cathy (Jordan), George, Betty (Tim), Danny (Angela); a proud grandmother of 14 grandchildren and 16 great-grandchildren, [who]i [spending time with _i] was one of her finest joys;
    [http://www.mahonefuneral.ca/obituaries/111846, January 7, 2020]
    (Culicover and Winkler, 2019)

    In sum, pied-piping is not necessary. More discussion of these is in my 2020 book with Putnam (yes! Shameless self-promotion!).

    But I do have a quasi-rhetorical question: if preposition stranding is connected to the oddness, then why does it supposedly disappear when there is a second gap, outside the island (i.e. parasitism)?

Leave a Comment or Question Below