Cover not available

Article published In: Register Variation and Syntactic Theory
Edited by Diane Massam and Tim Stowell
[Linguistic Variation 17:2] 2017
► pp. 229–250

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

Unspeakable sentences

Subject omission in written registers: a cartographic analysis

 | GIST/FWO, Ghent University
Published online: 26 January 2018
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/lv.14019.hae
Abstract
The empirical focus of this paper is register based subject omission in English. On the basis of a range of empirical data (including naturally occurring examples) the paper first dispels a number of common misconceptions about the phenomenon such as the idea that (i) this phenomenon is only restricted to diary style, (ii) only first person subjects can be omitted, (iii) the null subject is an instantiation of pro, (iv) the null subject is always uniquely identified in the context. The paper develops the cartographic analysis of register based subject omission proposed in . 2013. The syntax of registers: diary subject omission and the privilege of the root. Lingua 1301: 88–110. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar and based on . 2006b. Grammatically-based target-inconsistencies in child language. In The Proceedings of the Inaugural Conference on Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition -North America (GALANA). UCONN / MIT Working Papers in Linguistics, Deen, K. U., J. Nomura, B. Schulz & B. D. Schwartz (eds.), Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar ‘Privilege of the Root’ approach. A key ingredient of the analysis is the hypothesis that there is a specialized projection for the encoding of subjecthood (SubjP).
Article outline
  • 1.Starting point: when ungrammatical sentences become acceptable
  • 2.Register determined subject omission and subject omission in spoken English
  • 3.Some properties of WSO
    • 3.1The content of the null subject
    • 3.2Distributional restrictions
    • 3.3Subject omission in coordination
  • 4.What WSO is not
    • 4.1Pro drop
    • 4.2Topic drop (cf. Huang 1984, Raposo 1986)
  • 5.Cartography and structural truncation: defining the root
    • 5.1Spell out, the privilege of the root and truncation
    • 5.2SubjP as the root
      • 5.2.1WSO and adjuncts
      • 5.2.2Subject ellipsis in second conjuncts
  • 6.A comparative perspective
  • 7.Summary
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (44)
References
Ackema, Peter & Neeleman, Ad. 2007. Restricted pro drop in Early Modern Dutch. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 101: 81–107. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cardinaletti, Anna. 1997. Subjects and clause structure. In The New Comparative Syntax, Liliane Haegeman (ed.), 33–63. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2004. Toward a cartography of subject positions. In The Structure of CP and IP, Luigi Rizzi (ed.), 115–165. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2001. Derivation by phase. In Ken Hale: A Life in Language, Michael Kenstowicz (ed.). 1–52. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2005. On phases. Ms., Cambridge, Mass: MIT.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ernst, Thomas. 2002a. The Syntax of Adjuncts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2002b. Adjuncts and Word order asymmetries. In Asymmetry in Grammar: volume I: Syntax and Semantics, Anne Marie Di Sciullo (ed.), 178–207. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane. 1990. Non-overt subjects in diary contexts. In Grammar in Progress, GLOW essays for Henk van Riemsdijk, Joan Mascaro & Marina Nespor (eds), 167–174. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1996. Verb Second, the Split CP and Null Subjects in Early Dutch Finite Clauses. GenGenP 4 (2): 135–75Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1997. Register variation, truncation and subject omission in English and in French. English Language and Linguistics 11: 233–270. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1999. Adult null subjects in non pro-drop languages. In The Acquisition of Syntax, Marc-Ariel Friedemann & Luigi Rizzi (eds.), 329–346. London: Addison, Wesley and Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2002. Sentence-medial NP-adjuncts in English. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 251: 79–108. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2012. Adverbial Clauses, Main Clause Phenomena, and Composition of the Left Periphery . The Cartography of Syntactic Structures 8. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2013. The syntax of registers: diary subject omission and the privilege of the root. Lingua 1301: 88–110. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane & Ihsane, Tabea. 1999. Subject ellipsis in embedded clauses in English. Journal of English Language and Linguistics 31: 117–45. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2002. Adult null subjects in the non-pro-drop languages: two diary dialects. Language Acquisition 91: 329–346. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Huang, James. 1984. On the distribution and reference of empty pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry 151: 531–574.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney & Pullum, Geoffrey. 2002. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hyams, Nina & Wexler, Kenneth. 1993. On the Grammatical Basis of Null Subjects in Child Language. Linguistic Inquiry 241: 421–459.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ihsane, T. 1998. The syntax of diaries: grammar and register variation. Ms. Uni. of Geneva.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Matushansky, Ora. 1995. Le sujet nul dans les propositions à temps fini en anglais. Maîtrise paper, Paris VIII.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mikkelsen, Line. 2015. VP anaphora and verb-second order in Danish. Journal of Linguistics 511: 595–643. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Napoli, Donna J. 1982. Initial material deletion in English. Glossa 16 (1): 85–111.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nanyan, Varduhi. 2013. Subject omission in English diaries. Master’s dissertation, Ghent University. Linguistics.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Greenbaum, Sidney, Leech Geoffrey & Svartvik, Jan. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Raposo, Eduardo. 1986. The null object in European Portuguese. In Studies in Romance Linguistics, Osvaldo Jaeggli & C. Silva-Corvalàn (eds.), 373–390. Dordrecht: Foris. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 1994. Early null subjects and root null subjects. In Language Acquisition Studies in Generative Grammar, Teun Hoekstra & Bonnie Schwartz. (eds.), 151–177. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1995. Some notes on linguistic theory and language development: the case of root infinitive. Language Acquisition 31: 371–393. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1997. The fine structure of the left periphery. In Elements of Grammar. Liliane Haegeman (ed.), 281–337. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1999. Remarks on early null subjects. In The Acquisition of Syntax. Marc-Ariel Friedemann & Luigi Rizzi (eds.), 269–292. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2001. On the position Int(errogative) in the left periphery of the clause. In Current Studies in Italian Syntax: Essays offered to Lorenzo Renzi, Guglielmo Cinque & Giampolo Salvi (eds.), 286–296. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2006a. On the Form of Chains: Criterial Positions and ECP Effects. In Wh-Movement. Moving On, Lisa Cheng & Norbert Corver, (eds.), 97–133. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2006b. Grammatically-based target-inconsistencies in child language. In The Proceedings of the Inaugural Conference on Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition -North America (GALANA). UCONN / MIT Working Papers in Linguistics, Deen, K. U., J. Nomura, B. Schulz & B. D. Schwartz (eds.), Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. & Shlonsky, Ur. 2005. Strategies of subject extraction. In Interfaces + Recursion = Language? Hans-Martin Gärtner & Uli Sauerland (eds.), 115–160. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi & Shlonsky, Ur. 2006. Satisfying the Subject Criterion by a non-subject: English locative inversion and heavy NP shift. In Phases of Interpretation, Mara Frascarelli (ed.), 341–361. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shlonsky, Ur. 2014. Subject positions, subject extraction, EPP, and the Subject Criterion. In Locality, Enoch Aboh, Maria Teresa Guasti & Ian Roberts (eds), 58–85. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sigurðsson, Harald A. 2011. Conditions on Argument Drop. Linguistic Inquiry 421: 267–304. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sigurđsson Harald, A. & Joan Maling. 2007. Argument drop and the Empty Left Edge Condition (ELEC). Ms. Lund University-Brandeis University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stark, Elisabeth & Aurélia Robert-Tissot. This issue. Subject drop in French text messages.
Thrasher, R. 1977. One Way to Say More by Saying Less. A Study of so-called Subjectless Sentences. Kwansei Gakuin University Monograph Series Vol. 11, Tokyo: The Eihosha Ltd.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Velde, John te. 2005. Deriving Coordinate Symmetries. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Weir, Andrew. 2012. Left edge deletion in English and subject omission in diaries. English Language and Linguistics 161: 105–129. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wexler, Kenneth. 2013. A new theory of null-subjects of finite verbs in young children: Information structure meets phasal computation. In Generative linguistics and acquisition. Studies in honor of Nina M. Hyams, Misha Becker, John Grinstead & Jason Rothman (eds.), 325–356. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wilder, Chris. 1994. Some properties of ellipsis in coordination. Geneva Generative Papers 2, 2: 23–61. Also published as Wilder, Chris (1997) in Studies in Universal Grammar and Typological Variation. Artemis Alexiadou & T. Alan Hall (eds.), 59–107. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (20)

Cited by 20 other publications

Haegeman, Liliane & Lieven Danckaert
2025. Styling the characters, setting the scene. In The Ziggurat of Grammar [Language Faculty and Beyond, 20], ► pp. 138 ff. DOI logo
Van Luven, Katie & Ida Toivonen
2024. The obligatoriness of arguments. Language and Linguistics Compass 18:3 DOI logo
Weir, Andrew & Liliane Haegeman
2024. Register Variation: Core Grammar and Periphery. In Reference Module in Social Sciences, DOI logo
Endo, Yoshio
2021. Subject drop in how come questions in English. In Current issues in syntactic cartography [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 267], ► pp. 127 ff. DOI logo
Halm, Tamás
2021. Radically Truncated Clauses in Hungarian and Beyond: Evidence for the Fine Structure of the Minimal VP. Syntax 24:3 ► pp. 376 ff. DOI logo
Paul, Ileana & Diane Massam
2021. Une recette pour des arguments nuls. Arborescences :10 ► pp. 113 ff. DOI logo
PAUL, ILEANA & DIANE MASSAM
2021. Licensing null arguments in recipes across languages. Journal of Linguistics 57:4 ► pp. 815 ff. DOI logo
Radford, Andrew
2020. An Introduction to English Sentence Structure, DOI logo
Rankin, Tom & Melinda Whong
2020. Grammar, DOI logo
Haegeman, Liliane
2019. Register-Based Subject Omission in English and its Implication for the Syntax of Adjuncts. Anglophonia 28 DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2020. Null Constituents. In An Introduction to English Sentence Structure, ► pp. 152 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2020. Head Movement. In An Introduction to English Sentence Structure, ► pp. 209 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2020. Glossary and Abbreviations. In An Introduction to English Sentence Structure, ► pp. 332 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2020. Index. In An Introduction to English Sentence Structure, ► pp. 412 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2020. Preface. In An Introduction to English Sentence Structure, ► pp. ix ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2020. Heads, Complements and Specifiers. In An Introduction to English Sentence Structure, ► pp. 54 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2020. Adjuncts. In An Introduction to English Sentence Structure, ► pp. 108 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2020. Phrasal Movement. In An Introduction to English Sentence Structure, ► pp. 265 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2020. References. In An Introduction to English Sentence Structure, ► pp. 375 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2020. Grammar. In An Introduction to English Sentence Structure, ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue