Document Type : Research Paper
Authors
1
Assistant Professor of Linguistics, Department of Linguistics, Faculty of Foreign Languages and Literature. Payam Noor University, Tehran, Iran
2
expert at Research Institute of Petroleum Industry
3
Associate professor,payame noor university
4
the University of Tehran
10.22084/rjhll.2025.28714.2298
Abstract
Introduction
Ellipsis is one of the most common syntactic processes in Persian and has long attracted the attention of linguists working within various theoretical frameworks. Among its different types, gapping—the deletion of a verbal element alone or together with its internal or external arguments from the second conjunct of a coordinate structure—has remained one of the most controversial. Two major analytical approaches have been proposed to account for this phenomenon: the across- the- board- movement hypothesis (Johnson, 2009) and the TP-deletion analysis (Anousheh, 2017). The present study aims to reexamine gapping in Persian within the most recent version of the Minimalist framework, namely the Dynamic Phase Theory (Bošković, 2014), and to provide a more comprehensive syntactic explanation of the process.
Methodology
This research adopts a descriptive–explanatory design. The data are based on the authors’ linguistic intuition and examples drawn from both spoken and written Persian. The analysis follows the principles of the Minimalist Program and Phase Theory, comparing Persian gapping structures with those found in other languages such as English, Japanese, and Turkish. Previous accounts of gapping—particularly those of Johnson (2009) and Anousheh (2017)—are reviewed and critically evaluated. The study further examines the interaction between verb movement, phase boundaries, and deletion operations to determine which syntactic domain is actually elided in Persian gapping constructions.
Data Analysis
The analysis first demonstrates that Johnson’s (2009) across- the- board- movement approach, though successful for English, cannot yield grammatical Persian sentences due to the head-final nature of Persian TP and the obligatory verb movement to the T head. Consequently, Anousheh’s (2017) proposal that gapping in Persian results from TP-deletion (or clause stripping) provides a more adequate description of Persian data. However, evidence from complex aspectual structures shows that what is deleted in Persian gapping cannot always be the TP node. Applying the principles of Dynamic Phase Theory (Bošković, 2013, 2014), the study argues that gapping in Persian should be analyzed as Phase Deletion. In sentences containing perfective, imperfective, or progressive aspectual projections, the highest aspectual phrase (PerfP or ProgP) functions as the phase, and its deletion accounts for grammatical gapping. Conversely, in simple clauses lacking aspectual projections, the phase extends to the TP through Phase Extension (Gallego, 2010), and deletion of this extended phase results in a grammatical gapping construction.
Findings
The findings reveal that gapping in Persian is not uniformly realized through TP-deletion as previously claimed. Instead, the deleted constituent corresponds to the entire phase, which may vary depending on the clause structure. In complex aspectual constructions, the deleted element is the maximal aspectual projection; in simple clauses, it corresponds to the extended TP phase. This analysis successfully explains why the deletion of only the lexical or auxiliary verb results in ungrammaticality, whereas deleting the entire phase yields well-formed sentences.
Conclusion
Within the framework of Dynamic Phase Theory, this study concludes that gapping in Persian is best characterized as phase deletion, rather than as TP-deletion or as the result of a shared movement process. The research provides a novel phase-based explanation for ellipsis in Persian and demonstrates that phase hood is a flexible and context-dependent property of syntactic structures. This not only challenges earlier analyses but also contributes to cross-linguistic understanding of ellipsis phenomena from a minimalist perspective.
Keywords: ellipsis, gapping, Minimalist approach, Dynamic Phase Theory, Persian language
Reference
Bošković, Ž. (2013). Phases beyond clauses. In: L. Schurcks, A. Giannakidou, U. Etxeberria, and P. Kosta (Eds).The nominal Structure in Slavic and Beyond, (75-128). Boston: De Gruyter.
Bošković, Ž. (2014). “Now I am a Phase, now I am not a Phase: on the Variability of Phases with Extraction and Ellipsis”. Linguistic Inquiry. 45: 27- 89.
Gallego, Á. (2010). Phase Theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamin’s publishing.
Johnson, K. (2009). “Gapping Is Not (VP-) Ellipsis”. Linguistic Inquiry. 40: 289–328.
Keywords
Main Subjects
