Skip Nav Destination
1-1 of 1
Follow your search
Access your saved searches in your account
Would you like to receive an alert when new items match your search?
Publisher: Journals Gateway
Linguistic Inquiry (2020) 51 (3): 579–596.
Published: 01 July 2020
AbstractView article PDF
We reply to Erlewine and Kotek’s (2018) claim that the phenomenon of covariation under focus ( Tanglewood sentences; Kratzer 1991 ) is subject to syntactic islands and that it should therefore be handled by a focus movement theory (contra Kratzer’s view). We present novel data that are at odds with Erlewine and Kotek’s conclusions and demonstrate the necessity of an island-insensitive mechanism to capture focus covariation. We revisit Erlewine and Kotek’s main arguments against such a system and show that they are systematically confounded. Moreover, removing the confounds cancels the force of the arguments, corroborating the central point of this article.