우전위 요소의 영역

This squib is a reply to Park s (2017) advocation for the ellipsis approach to the right dislocated construction (RDC), i.e., the bi-clausal analysis accompanied by Move & Delete under the head-final structure. Park intends to maintain his ellipsis approach against Shimoyama, Drummond, Schwarz and Wagner s (2015) claim that the ellipsis approach produces wrong scope facts (in Japanese). This squib examines Park s arguments in detail and shows that they are not viable. It is pointed out that one of his proposals, i.e., argument ellipsis of the moved object in the elliptic clause, is suspicious in that this object carries focus with it, and that disallowing pro movement in gapped RDCs is just arbitrary and is in exclusion of his argument ellipsis, which is contradictory. Particularly, Park s analysis applies the Parallelism condition in a way that is inconsistent with Fox (2000) system about scope interpretation. The resulting problems rather indicate that the head-final bi-clausal approach to RDCs is on the wrong track. By contrast, adopting the head-first mono-clausal analysis to RDCs (Lee 2009, 2010, 2011a), I show that it can straightforwardly account for the scope facts in RDCs at issue without facing the problematic situations in Park s system.