104 A Grammar of Spoken English Discourse
McCarthy (1991: 43) argues that ellipsis is a pragmatic speaker choice
and not a compulsory feature generated when two clauses are joined. Hence
it is not possible to predict occurrences of ellipsis within a grammar.
However, it is possible to predict instances when ellipsis is likely to be real-
ized. In (40) the ellipsis of the lexical element I is predictable.^23 Speaker A’s
question, in the context in which it was asked, was concerned with the well-
being of speaker B and so B’s use of ellipsis is entirely predictable. This
raises the issue of what added communicative value if any is produced by
the unexpected overt realization of words which an analyst predicts should
be unrealized, e.g.
(41) A: What’s the matter?
B: I’ve got an awful coldIn (41), speaker (B) produces the lexical elements I’ve. Such a response
could be uttered with the lexical item I either prominent or not. Non-
prominence signals that it is already part of the common speaker/hearer
background and so its overt realization appears to have no signifi cant com-
municative value. However, if it is made prominent the speaker projects it
as representing a communicatively signifi cant selection from an existential
paradigm. By exploiting the freedom to project the existence of a possible
opposition to the lexical item I the speaker is able to generate added
meaning. For example, the overt realization of a prominent I serves to
personalize and focus the response. By focusing on him/herself the
speaker highlights that he/she is the one who is suffering from the cold.
A local meaning could perhaps be an appeal for sympathy.
A reasonable approach in attempting to incorporate ellipsis into a
grammar of used language appears to be as follows. First to identify the
criterion which predicts the elliptical realization of a lexical element or
elements. The suggested criterion is that in the unmarked case, speakers
avoid repetition by not overtly realizing lexical elements whose presence
is recoverable from either the preceding text or situation. Second to
acknowledge that a grammar of used language must be capable of describ-
ing both utterances where speakers produce elliptical and non-elliptical
realizations of lexical elements. Third to recognize that a grammar of
used language, which predicts the overt realization of predictable lexical
elements, is an idealized abstraction which, in real communicative situ-
ations, is constrained by a speaker’s need for economy. Fourth to recognize
that it is the non-occurrence of predicted ellipsis when the particular
lexical element is made prominent that is of added communicative value.