The syntax of deep and surface anaphora: A study of null complement anaphora and stripping/bare argument ellipsis

This dissertation provides new empirical support for Hankamer and Sag's (1976) mixed theory of anaphora that argues for the existence of two types of anaphora: surface anaphors which are derived transformationally and deep anaphors which are not. The first part of the thesis investigates Null Complement Anaphora (NCA) in English, Spanish, and Italian (e.g: John's mother asked Peter to clean up his room but he refused__). We show that deep anaphors differ from surface anaphors in that they do not allow extraction (*I know which journal Mary volunteered to read but I don't know which book she volunteered__ (NCA) vs. I know which journal Mary read but I don't know which journal Sally did (VP ellipsis)).;We propose that NCA is an element with no internal structure in the syntax; it is a pro-form, the null equivalent of overt predicative/propositional pro-forms (it, so). This accounts for the impossibility of extraction. In the semantics, NCA and other deep anaphors such as do it and do so (which we argue to be a deep anaphor) are free variables that fix their value from a salient property, proposition or question in the linguistic or non-linguistic context.;The second part of the thesis is a study of two different types of surface anaphors: stripping/bare-argument ellipsis in English and Spanish ( John read Hamlet, but not El Quijote); and a similar phenomenon in Spanish, which we term Pseudostripping (Juan leyo Hamlet pero El Quijote no/nunca 'Juan read Hamlet but El Quijote not/never'). We propose that stripping is an instance of IP ellipsis following prior movement of the negation plus remnant to a Focus Position. Pseudostripping is an instance of IP ellipsis prior movement of the remnant to a Focus Position. The presence of a negative element at the end of it is taken as evidence that negation/emphasis (encoded in Sigma) in Spanish is a PF affix, similarly to Tense in English.