Fragments vs. null arguments in Korean

Abstract

Korean has two types of answers shorter than full sentential answers: Fragments and null argument constructions. Apparently the two constructions have the same interpretative processes. However, there are some cases where the fragment and null argument construction behave differently: e.g., wh-puzzles, sloppy interpretation. We suggest that the two constructions involve two different types of anaphora and that the sources of sloppy(-like) interpretation are fundamentally distinct. Fragments pattern differently with null arguments in that only the former may display genuine sloppy readings. The latter may yield sloppy-like readings which are pragmatically induced by the explicature that can be cancelled unlike genuine sloppy readings in fragments. Evidence (wh-ellipsis, quantifier ellipsis) all lends substantial support to our claim that fragments are analyzed as an instance of clausal ellipsis while null arguments are analyzed as an instance of null pronoun pro; hence, the former is surface anaphora whereas the latter is deep anaphora in the sense of Hankamer & Sag (1976).