Remarks on Rule H

Abstract

Fox (2000) argues that a single principle, Rule H, can account for (i) Strong Crossover, (ii) the ban on using co-binding to sneak around Condition B, and (iii) the Dahl paradigm. The focus of this paper is Fox’s analysis of the Dahl paradigm. Though elegant and appealing, the analysis faces both conceptual and empirical problems. On the conceptual side, the analysis assumes that a bound pronoun within an elided VP must be bound in a structurally parallel configuration to its counterpart in the antecedent VP. This requirement does not follow from independently-motivated constraints on VP ellipsis. On the empirical side, Roelofsen (2011) has turned up additional ellipsis phenomena that do not pattern as Fox’s analysis predicts. I will argue that a relatively minor modification to Fox’s analysis suffices to solve both the conceptual and empirical problems. Taking inspiration from Kehler & Büring (2008), I increase the domain of application of Rule H to include syntactic structures which underlie Focus Semantic Values, so that Rule H acts as a filter on Focus Semantic Values. The only relevant constraint on VP ellipsis is an independently-motivated Rooth-style contrast constraint.

Keywords

• syntax
• semantics
• rule h
• binding
• presuppositions
• crossover
• focus
• ellipsis