@article {7373, title = {Voice mismatch and contrast in French Right-Node Raising}, journal = {Journal of Linguistics}, year = {2023}, url = {https://hal-cnrs.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03924688}, author = {Anne Abeill{\'e} and Aoi Shiraishi and Barbara Hemforth} } @article {7483, title = {Voice mismatch and contrast in French RNR}, journal = {Journal of Linguistics}, year = {2023}, pages = {1-28}, abstract = {

Right-Node Raising is generally considered to impose stricter identity conditions than other kinds of ellipsis, such as VP ellipsis, according to Hankamer \& Sag 1976 and Hardt 1993. In this paper, we investigate voice mismatch in French Right-Node Raising (RNR) through a corpus study and two experiments. We show that RNR with voice mismatch can be found in a written corpus (frTenTen 2012) and that many examples involve coordination of a reflexive active and a short passive form. We suggest this is because semantic contrast (here, between self and external agent) plays a role according to Hartmann (2000) and Abeillé and Mouret (2010). We ran two acceptability judgement experiments to test voice mismatch and semantic contrast. We did not find any penalty for voice mismatch with VP ellipsis but an interaction with semantic contrast. We also found an effect of semantic contrast when coordinating an active and a passive VP without participle ellipsis. We conclude that voice mismatch is acceptable with RNR and propose a Head-driven Phrase-Structure Grammar (HPSG) ana- lysis, following Chaves (2014) and Shiraïshi et al. (2019).

}, keywords = {contrast, ellipsis, French, Passive, reflexive, Right-Node Raising, voice mismatch}, author = {Anne Abeill{\'e} and Aoi Shiraishi and Barbara Hemforth} } @article {6492, title = {Verbal mismatch in Right-Node Raising}, journal = {Glossa}, volume = {4}, year = {2019}, month = {10/2019}, pages = {1-26}, chapter = {1}, abstract = {

Right-Node Raising (RNR, Ross 1967; Chaves 2014) has been claimed to require phonological identity between the missing material and the shared element. Our corpus investigations provide examples of RNR with verb form mismatch with and without syncretism in English and French. Two acceptability experiments show that lack of phonological identity does not affect the acceptability of RNR. We argue further that RNR without phonological identity cannot be taken to be a case of cataphoric VP-ellipsis in French and that it should not be analyzed as such in English. As regards the status of RNR with verb form mismatch, two positions are available: either it is considered to be grammatical, in which case the phonological resolution principle of Pullum \& Zwicky (1986) does not hold, or it is considered to be ungrammatical but repaired (or \“recycled\”, Arregui et al. 2006; Frazier 2013). The high acceptability of cases with mismatch compared with ungrammatical controls casts doubt on the applicability of the recycling hypothesis in such cases. In order to account for the broader range of data established by our corpus and experimental results, we propose a new analysis of RNR based on lexeme identity rather than form identity.

}, issn = {E-ISSN: 2397-1835}, url = {https://www.glossa-journal.org/articles/10.5334/gjgl.843/}, author = {Aoi Shiraishi and Anne Abeill{\'e} and Barbara Hemforth and Philip Miller} } @conference {4726, title = {Voice mismatch in Right Node Raising: Evidence from acceptability judgments and an eyetracking reading experiment}, year = {2016}, month = {09/2016}, abstract = {

Voice mismatches may arise in VP ellipsis and Pseudogapping between source and target. No such mismatch has been reported for Right Node Raising (RNR).
However, French corpora provide many examples, where the shared participle must be interpreted as active (reflexive) and passive. Since RNR requires semantic contrast between the conjuncts, we conducted two experiments to test semantic (agent) contrast and syntactic (voice) match:\ 
+contrast/-match: Ce pharmacien doit des explications \à ceux qui se sont *ou qui ont \ét\é* mobilis\és pour lui. / This pharmacist owes explanations to those who themselves have or who have been mobilized for him.\ 
-contrast/-match: qu\&$\#$39;on a *ou qui ont \ét\é* / who one has or who have been\ 
+contrast/+match: qui se sont *ou qu\&$\#$39;on a* / who themselves have or who one has\ 
-contrast/+match: qui \étaient *ou qui ont \ét\é* / who were or who have been\ 
Acceptability judgements only showed a significant effect of contrast (p\<.01), not of match. In an eyetracking reading experiment, Gaze and Regression Path Durations show significant effects of semantic contrast in both voice match and mismatch sentences (critical zone between *) and no effect of match. Hence, given the appropriate semantics, voice mismatch is acceptable in RNR.

}, author = {Aoi Shiraishi and Barbara Hemforth and Anne Abeill{\'e}} }