Obligatory zero particle


Sometimes, particles are omitted.

I've read, however, that this can be analyzed as inserting a "zero particle"
instead. See for example [Particle omission or zero
particle](https://jps.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/twpl/article/view/6178/3167)
by Mitsuaki Shimojo. See also [Matt's comment on a related
question](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/3151/what-are-the-
guidelines-of-omitting-particles#comment7168_3152).

Are there situations where a zero particle is required? That is, situations
where adding any particle would change the meaning or make the sentence
incorrect?

Are there situations where a zero particle is strongly preferred?




I can think of one instance -- a noun phrase with も "also" cannot also take
は/が/を. Because the NP still has grammatical case despite having non-overt
case, this can be analysed as the topic/subject/object marker being
obligatorily zero.

This isn't the case for other particles like だけ or など though.




I can think of one instance -- a noun phrase with も "also" cannot also take
は/が/を. Because the NP still has grammatical case despite having non-overt
case, this can be analysed as the topic/subject/object marker being
obligatorily zero.

This isn't the case for other particles like だけ or など though.

