THE PROBLEMS OF LINGUISTIC ANALYSIS OF ELLIPTICAL SENTENCES IN MODERN ENGLISH

THE PROBLEMS OF LINGUISTIC ANALYSIS OF ELLIPTICAL SENTENCES IN MODERN ENGLISH

Authors

  • Jurayeva Hilola Kamol qizi
  • Eshonkulov Ravshan Tokhirovich

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17672117

Keywords:

Ellipsis; Elliptical Sentences; Linguistic Analysis; Syntax; Pragmatics; Cohesion; Contextual Meaning; Sentence Structure; Omission; Modern English Grammar; Implicit Communication; Structural Reduction; Functional Linguistics; Semantic Interpretation; Discourse Analysis

Abstract

This article examines in depth the enduring challenges associated with the linguistic analysis of elliptical sentences
in Modern English, giving particular attention to definitional ambiguity, licensing conditions, representational models of
missing structure, corpus-observed variation, and the interplay of syntax, semantics and pragmatics in real discourse.
Drawing from leading theoretical proposals (e.g., Jason Merchant [1], Paul Culicover [2], Ann Lobeck [3]), I propose and
apply a mixed methodology that combines typological classification, syntactic diagnostics, and distributional corpusanalysis
to distinguish major ellipsis types (including VP-ellipsis, sluicing, gapping, stripping, fragment answers) and to
test competing accounts of their licensing (identity/subset structural accounts, silent-syntax approaches, interpretationbased
or discourse licensing accounts). Results drawn from targeted corpus searches and new constructed examples
demonstrate (i) that strict structural identity accounts fail to capture many conversational ellipses where semantic or
pragmatic equivalence, not full syntactic parallelism, appears to license omission; (ii) that syntactic reconstruction (silent
syntax) approaches encounter empirical counter-examples in mismatch contexts (e.g., number/gender mismatches) and
thus require additional constraints; and (iii) that interpretation-driven accounts (which emphasise discourse salience,
parallelism, and processing economy) afford better coverage of spontaneous fragment and spoken ellipses, but require
a sharper formal mechanism to satisfy compositional semantics. The discussion synthesises these findings with
conclusions advanced by Merchant [1], Culicover [2] and others, arguing in favour of a hybrid framework that preserves
formal constraints while integrating discourse and processing considerations; it closes with recommendations for future
research—particularly more fine-grained corpus annotation, psycholinguistic verification of interpretive preferences, and
formal work to reconcile dynamic semantics with minimal syntactic representations.

Author Biographies

Jurayeva Hilola Kamol qizi

Masters Department
University of Economics and Pedagogy


Eshonkulov Ravshan Tokhirovich

Scientific supervisor:
Department of Foreign Languages,
University of Economics and Pedagogy


References

Culicover, P. W. (2012). Ellipsis in simpler syntax. Oxford University Press.

Lobeck, A. (1995). Ellipsis: Functional heads, licensing, and identification. Oxford University Press.

Merchant, J. (2004). Fragments: Syntax and pragmatics. In The syntax and pragmatics of ellipsis (pp. 143–176).

Oxford University Press.

Merchant, J. (2013). Voice and ellipsis. Linguistic Inquiry, 44(2), 235–274.

Goldberg, L., & Stubbs, A. [4] (2020). The English VP Ellipsis Corpus. Brandeis & Simmons Universities.

Khullar, P. (2020). NoEl: An annotated corpus for noun ellipsis in English. LREC.

Hong, S. (2025). A corpus-based study on the spoken ellipsis in English. AEHSSR.

Menzel, W. (2016). Ellipses as cohesive devices in English–German corpus texts. LARTIS

Downloads

Published

2025-11-01

How to Cite

Jurayeva , H., & Eshonkulov, R. (2025). THE PROBLEMS OF LINGUISTIC ANALYSIS OF ELLIPTICAL SENTENCES IN MODERN ENGLISH. Innovation Science and Technology, 1(11). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17672117
Loading...