In this paper, I compare the ellipsis-based theory of non-constituent coordination proposed in Yatabe (2001) with three of its alternatives, namely the theory that has been widely accepted within the context of Categorial Grammar, Mouret's HPSG-based theory, and the theory proposed by Bachrach and Katzir in the framework of the Minimalist Program. It is found (i) that the CG-based theory of non-constituent coordination cannot deal with medial RNR, i.e. a subset of right-node raising constructions in which either all or a part of the right-node-raised material is realized at a location other than the right edge of the final conjunct, (ii) that Mouret's theory encounters similar difficulties when applied to RNR, and (iii) that Bachrach and Katzir's theory cannot be applied to left-node raising in English, has difficulty capturing the semantic inertness of medial RNR, and overgenerates in several ways. The ellipsis-based theory, on the other hand, appears to be consistent with all the observations.
(S. Yatabe, "Comparison of the Ellipsis-Based Theory of Non-Constituent Coordination with its Alternatives," in Stefan Müller, ed., Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, CSLI, Stanford, 2012, pp. 454-474.)