Ellipsis: can be described as grammatical omission to be distinguished to

other types of omission in language , such as the( phonological loss) of a

syllable in ''because'' (often spelled 'cos). Also , clipping of words such as
''flu'' from ''influenza'' is also a kind of '' phonological omission'' .

The semantic omission in :

Frankly , he is very handsome.

''Frankly '' implies a meaning that can be expressed by many sets of missing
words such as :

I am speaking frankly when I say ….. , If I may put it frankly I would tell
you…… .

In such cases it is difficult to pin down in exact words what has been
omitted. So it is more appropriate to describe this phenomenon as
'' semantic implication'' rather than as ellipsis .

The criteria for ellipsis

Ellipsis, just like many grammatical categories, is hard to define because its
boundaries are unclear . yet , we have certain criteria to recognize different
degrees of '' strength'' .In the identification of examples of ellipsis. The
criteria will be as follow :

-2-
 a-The ellipted words are precisely recoverable.
Ex : She can't sing tonight, so she won't .

Here , it is the word ''sing'' that has been ellipted from the context , it is
clear what words are to be supplied.

Ex : The suspect admits stealing a car from a garage , but he can't

remember which .

In the sentence above , '' which could mean either '' which car '' or '' which
a garage''.

So in saying that with ellipsis the omitted words precisely recoverable, we

don't meant to exclude from ellipsis such cases of genius ambiguity. We
only exclude cases where there is no clear – cut choice between one
verbalization and another , that's to say it is difficult to determine in exact
words what has been omitted.

b-The elliptical construction is grammatically ''defective''.

Grammatically defective means that some obligatory element of a
grammatical sentence is lacking '' grammatical gap''.

Ex: She can't sing tonight , so she won't.

In the sentence above , the auxiliary won't occurs without a following main
verb. That it normally introduces there are other cases for which this is
''less clear '' . So the recognition of structural gaps depends on a prior
descriptive decision of grammar on the bases of available evidence .

Ex: Visit me tomorrow, if you wish (to visit me tomorrow).

-3-
In the sentence , it depends on whether we accept as ''normal '' the
occurrence of wish as an intransitive verb .

Some structures are clearly defective, but don't match the condition of
precise recoverability . ''Thanks'' can act as a complete utterance but not
properly elliptical according to criterion (a) which suggest that the criterion
of (b) can't be usefully applied in isolation from (a).
c- The insertion of the missing words result in a grammatical sentence
( with the same meaning as the original sentence ).

Ex: He always wakes up earlier than I . (formal)(1)

Ex: He always wakes up earlier than me . (informal)(2)

We can added the ellipted words '' wake up'' to (1) but not to (2).

Ex: While (I was) eating my lunch , I heard a loud noise. (3)

Ex: (*Since I was) knowing no French , I couldn't express my thanks . (4)

The insertion of (was) is not possible in (4) because '' know'' is a stative
verb which lacks progressive forms.

Ex: The poor (people) need more help.

In the sentence above the insertion of the noun phrase '' people '' , would
change the (generic meaning) of the sentence to a (specific meaning ). So
we exclude from ellipsis such cases, in which the insertion leads to a
grammatical sentence but the meaning is slightly altered .

-4-
d-The missing word(s) are textually recoverable, and
 e- Are present in the text in exactly the same form .

{ Textual recoverability is the surest guarantee of ellipsis , because without

it there is room of disagreement on what particular word has been ellipted.

Ex: She might (sing tonight)but I don't think she will (sing tonight).(1)

Ex: She really sings, so I don't think she will (sing) tonight. (2)

In (1) the ellipted expression is an exact copy of the antecedent (sing

tonight), while in (2) the ellipted verb is morphologically different from its
antecedent . So criterion (e) is dependent on criterion (d).

Ellipsis is defined is terms of gradience.

Criteria of ellipsis
A B C D E SENTENCES
+ + + + + 1.I am happy if you are ( happy).
+ + + + - 2.She sings better than I can (sing).
+ ? - + (+) 3. She works harder than him (*works).
+ + + - 0 4. ( I am) glad to see you .
+ + + + - 5. { ( Since he was ) (being) } angry, he stalked out.
+ ? + - 0 6. I believe (that) you are wrong .
- + + - 0 7. The man ( that / who / whom) I saw was half asleep.
- ? + - 0 8. Houses ( that/which are) owned by Mr. smith……..
- - + - 0 9. The door opened and (then / after / that/…..) Mary
entered.

-5-
Criteria:
 a. The missing expression is precisely recoverable.
b. The elliptical construction is ''defective''.
c. The insertion of the missing expression results in a grammatical
sentence with the same meaning as the elliptical sentence.
d. The missing expression is recoverable from the neighboring text
(rather than from the structural or situational context).
e. The missing expression is the exact copy of the antecedent.

Key:
+ The criterion is satisfied .
- The criterion isn't satisfied.
? There is doubt about the criterion's satisfaction.
(+) With required grammatical change, the criterion would apply.
0 The criterion isn't applicable.

Types of ellipsis :
In the examples above from (1-9), each will be given a term to describe the
various subcategories of ellipsis:
1. This is strict ellipsis , to which all five criteria apply .

2. This is standard ellipsis, to which only the '' exact copy '' criterion
need not apply.

3. This is less strict than example (2), because the full form of the sentence
can't be recovered without changing '' him '' to ''he''. It is preferable to
treat it as a case of substitution rather than ellipsis call it quasi ellipsis .
-6-
 4.Situational ellipsis that doesn't satisfy criteria (d)and(e).

5.This example doesn't satisfy the criterion of unique recoverability

(a), because various conjunction or alternatively a nonfinite verb
could be inserted: (Since he was angry, as he was angry, being angry,
etc.).
6.Structural ellipsis: being structurally recoverable.

7. This is also a case of structural ellipsis but it doesn't satisfy the

criterion of (a) precise recoverability.
8. This example falls short of criterion (a).

9.This illustrates the end point of the ellipsis gradient , it is more

appropriately to classify it as a case of semantic implication.

(Note) for cases like 5,7,8 where the choice of what to insert, although
not precise , is restricted to a small number of grammatical alternatives ,
the term '' weak ellipsis may be used.

The End

Reference
Quirk, R.;Leech,G.;Greenbaum,S.and Svartvit, (1985). A comprehensive
Grammar of English language. London:Longman.

-7-