Romance Linguistics 2007: Selected Papers From The 37th Linguistic Symposium On Romance Languages (LSRL), Pittsburgh, 15-18 March 2007 (Amsterdam Studies ... IV: Current Issues in Linguistic Theory)

Romance Linguistics 2007

AMSTERDAM STUDIES IN THE THEORY AND HISTORY OF LINGUISTIC SCIENCE General Editor E.F.K. KOERNER (Zentrum für Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft, Typologie und Universalienforschung, Berlin) Series IV – CURRENT ISSUES IN LINGUISTIC THEORY Advisory Editorial Board Lyle Campbell (Salt Lake City) Sheila Embleton (Toronto) Elly van Gelderen (Tempe, Ariz.) Brian D. Joseph (Columbus, Ohio) John E. Joseph (Edinburgh) Manfred Krifka (Berlin) Martin Maiden (Oxford) E. Wyn Roberts (Vancouver, B.C.) Joseph C. Salmons (Madison, Wis.)

Volume 304

Pascual José Masullo, Erin O'Rourke and Chia-Hui Huang (eds.) Romance Linguistics 2007. Selected papers from the 37th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL), Pittsburgh, 15–18 March 2007

Romance Linguistics 2007 Selected papers from the 37th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL), Pittsburgh, 15–18 March 2007

Edited by

Pascual José Masullo Erin O’Rourke Chia-Hui Huang University of Pittsburgh

JOHN BENJAMINS PUBLISHING COMPANY AMSTERDAM/PHILADELPHIA

8

TM

The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American ­National Standard for Information Sciences — Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1984.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (37th : 2007 : Pittsburgh, Pa.) Romance Linguistics 2007 : selected papers from the 37th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL), Pittsburgh, 15–18 March 2007 / edited by Pascual José Masullo, Erin O’Rourke, Chia-Hui Huang.       p.   cm. -- (Amsterdam studies in the theory and history of linguistic science. Series IV, Currentissues in linguistic theory, ISSN 0304-0763 ; v. 304) Includes bibliographical references and index. 1. Romance languages--Congresses. I. Masullo, Pascual José. II. O'Rourke, Erin, 1971- III. Huang, Chia-Hui, 1973- IV. Title. PC11.L53    2007 440--dc22 2009003058 isbn 978 90 272 4820 6 (hb; alk. paper) isbn 978 90 272 8956 8 (eb) © 2009 – John Benjamins B.V. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form, by print, photoprint, microfilm, or any other means, without written permission from the publisher. John Benjamins Publishing Co. • P.O.Box 36224 • 1020 ME Amsterdam • The Netherlands John Benjamins North America • P.O.Box 27519 • Philadelphia PA 19118-0519 • USA

CONTENTS

Foreword Null Expletives and Case: The View from Romance Gabriela Alboiu

vii 1

On the Existence of Null Complementizers in Old French Deborah Arteaga

19

On the Lack of Transparency Effects in French J.-Marc Authier & Lisa A. Reed

37

On the Syllabification of Prevocalic /w/ in Judeo-Spanish Travis G. Bradley

51

Word Order and Minimalism Heles Contreras

69

The Status of Old French Clitics in the 12th Century Jennifer Culbertson

89

Towards a Unified Account of Positive and Negative Polarity: Evidence from Romanian Anamaria Falaus Correlativization and Degree Quantification in Spanish Javier Gutiérrez-Rexach Imperfect Variation and Class Marking in the Old Spanish Third Conjugation Nicholas C. Henriksen

105 121

143

Licensing Negative Fragments and the Interpretation of Comparison Simona Herdan

157

Developing I-Language in L1 and L2 Julia Herschensohn

173

Crypto-Variation in Italian Velar Palatalisation Martin Krämer

193

Antisymmetry and the Typology of Relative Clauses: Syntactic and Morphological Evidence from Spanish Juan Martín

209

vi

CONTENTS

Romance Paths as Cognate Complements: A Lexical-Syntactic Account Jaume Mateu & Gemma Rigau

227

Discriminating Pitch Accent Alignment in Spanish Rebecca E. Ronquest & Manuel Díaz-Campos

243

Proscriptions…Gaps…and Something in Between: An Experimental Examination of Spanish Phonotactics Michael Shelton, Chip Gerfen & Nicolás Gutiérrez Palma

261

Romanian Palatalization: The Role of Place of Articulation in Perception Laura Spinu

277

Putting the Spanish Determiner Phrase in Order M. Emma Ticio

291

The Domain of Palatalization in Romanian Irene Vogel & Laura Spinu

307

Rhotic Metathesis Asymmetries in Romance: Formalizing the Effects of Articulation and Perception on Sound Change Eric Russell Webb & Travis G. Bradley

321

The Left Edge in the Spanish Clausal Structure Maria Luisa Zubizarreta

339

Index of Terms & Concepts

359

FOREWORD

The 37th annual Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL) was held at the University of Pittsburgh during March, 2007. We are grateful to have been able to host the conference for the first time and consider it to be a cornerstone in promoting advances in theoretical research on Romance languages. Two parasessions were held on “Romance Linguistics at the Interfaces” and “Microparametric Variation within Romance.” We trust that this conference has brought researchers together in such a way as to promote the sharing of ideas across Romance linguistics and its subdisciplines and that this volume will likewise serve a similar purpose. We would like to recognize the more than 100 scholars who sent abstracts to be reviewed; from these, a total of 50 papers were selected for presentation. In addition, we were honored to have four plenary speakers, Eulàlia Bonet, Javier Guitiérrez-Rexach, Julia Herschensohn, and Luigi Rizzi, and an outreach lecture by Heles Contreras. This volume of selected proceedings includes 21 peerreviewed articles which are based on those presentations and invited lectures. We would like to express our gratitude to the anonymous reviewers for the time and expertise they offered during the review process of both the abstracts and the articles contained here. The conference would not have been possible without the help and tireless work from Roberto Aranovich, Maeve Eberhardt, Verónica Lifrieri, Guillermo Rodríguez, and Ben Zimmerman, and from numerous other graduate students who volunteered during the conference. We are also grateful for the support from the Department of Linguistics faculty, including Scott Kiesling, Department Chair, Alan Juffs, Director of the English Language Institute, and administrative staff, including Susan Merriman and Patricia Cochran, who helped with registration and travel arrangements. In addition, we would like to thank Claire Bradin Siskin and Mark Siskin for their invaluable assistance with the website and management of the PASHA abstract submission system. Thanks are also due to the following organizations and campus units for their generous financial support, including: School of Arts and Sciences, English Language Institute, Department of Hispanic Languages and Literature, Center for Latin American Studies, University Center for International Studies, European Studies Center and European Union Center of Excellence (University of Pittsburgh), and the Department of Modern Languages (Carnegie Mellon University). Finally, we would like to thank Anke de Looper of John Benjamins for her guidance throughout the editing process. December 2008, University of Pittsburgh Pascual Masullo, Erin O’Rourke and Chia-Hui Huang

NULL EXPLETIVES AND CASE THE VIEW FROM ROMANCE *

Gabriela Alboiu York University

This chapter focuses on lexical subjects in non-finite domains and, following Chomsky (2006, 2008), provides an account of structural Case reliant on the phase head. I argue that agreement, understood as uninterpretable phi-features (i.e., uφ), is not compulsory for either Case licensing or for obtaining a Case value. Nonetheless, I show that the presence of uφ on the probing domain will ensure a Nominative value, while its absence will constrain the DP to an Accusative value. I propose that a null expletive checking the EPP feature will trigger Nominative subjects whenever (C)-T lacks uφ, specifically, in non-finite domains, such as infinitives and gerunds. I offer evidence for expletive pro as a UG primitive from Romanian binding facts and provide an analysis of Case valuation in this language. Lastly, I discuss micro-parametric variation in subject lexicalization within null expletive languages.

1.

Introduction Following recent work by Chomsky (2006, 2008), A-related features such as Case, agreement and the EPP are not intrinsic properties of T (or v), but of the phase head, specifically, C (or v*). Consequently, T operates as a probe derivatively, by virtue of its relationship to C. I adopt these assumptions but depart from the standard generative approach whereby structural Case and agreement are inherently linked (e.g., Cardinaletti 1997, Chomsky 1981 et seq., George & Kornfilt 1981, Landau 2004, Schütze 1997). Chomsky (2006, 2008) maintains this traditional correlation but renounces Case as an independent probing feature (i.e., there is no uCase) and suggests instead that uφ acts as a Case probe. While I show evidence that the phase head is crucial for structural Case, I argue that agreement, understood as φ-features, is not compulsory for either Case licensing or for obtaining a Case value. Nonetheless, φ-specifications are shown to be an important ingredient of Case realization. In particular, I propose that the split between Nominative (henceforth NOM) versus Accusative (henceforth ACC) *

For various discussion and/or comments, I would like to thank Peter Avery, Larisa Avram, Michael Barrie, Alexandru Grosu, Ruth King, Jaklin Kornfilt, Virginia Hill, Luigi Rizzi, Ian Roberts, Acrisio Pires, Ioanna Sitaridou, as well as the LSRL 37 audience. All errors are mine.

2

GABRIELA ALBOIU

subject lexicalization is strictly dependent on the presence of a phi-Probe, such that if the probing domain contains a phi-feature deficiency, the value is NOM and if it does not, the value is ACC. Furthermore, this phi-Probe (uφ) may be encoded on either a verbal head (such as, for example, T or Aspect), or may be a property of a nominal head (specifically, the null expletive pro). This entails the following two crucial facts, both of which are empirically supported: (i) T lacks an instrisic NOM value, and (ii) null expletive pro is a parametrized UG primitive. The chapter is organized as follows. Following the Introduction, Section 2 explores the limitations of equating Case with agreement. Section 3 discusses the status of A-related features in non-finite domains and refutes the idea of Tense as a Case licenser. Section 4 introduces null expletives as Probes and proposes a dissociation between NOM and ACC Case values and specific heads, such as T or v, respectively. In Section 5, I argument the presence of expletive pro in the lexical array and provide an analysis of subject Case values in Romanian infinitives and gerunds. Section 6 focuses on micro-parametric variation in null expletive languages, while Section 7 is a conclusion. 2.

Phi-features (agreement) as a Case prerequisite From a current Minimalist standpoint, φ-complete T Probes are synonymous to lexical subjects with NOM Case, while φ-complete v Probes are synonymous to DP objects valued ACC. Theoretically speaking, it is unclear what properties of T and v would license this split. Besides, Chomsky proposes that a defective, φ-incomplete Probe cannot license Case. However, given the lack of agreement between v and the argument it Case-marks, there really is no evidence that v comes equipped with uφ (see also Baker et al. 2005). From an empirical perspective, it turns out that lexical subjects are permitted in some non-finite (uninflected) domains, with variation for NOM or ACC values, at both a macro- and a micro-parametric level, as follows.1 At least infinitives and gerunds in most Ibero-Romance, Greek gerunds (Sitaridou 2002), West Flemish infinitives (Haegeman 1985), absolute participial constructions in Hungarian (Liptak, p.c.), Albanian (Kallulli, p.c.), and Italian 1

Traditionally, the distinction between inflected and uninflected clausal domains mirrors the distinction between finiteness and non-finiteness, respectively (e.g. Ledgeway 1998 and references therein). Thus, indicatives, subjunctives, optatives and imperatives - which manifest agreement are all finite forms, while infinitives, gerunds and participles - which lack inflectional morphology - are non-finite forms. I adopt this distinction and use the non-finite label for the uninflected infinitives, gerunds and participles that I investigate below in relationship to Case. Note that under this division of labour, inflected infinitives in European Portuguese of the type in (i) would qualify as ‘finite’. The example in (i) is from Raposo (1987:86). (i) Será difícil [eles aprovarem a proposta]. ‘It will be difficult they to-approve-AGR the proposal.’ Raposo (1987) argues that these inflected infinitives are CP phasal domains, which is why I do not discuss this particular construction here. Terminology aside, the NOM subject in (i), a proposta ‘the proposal’, could be licensed by either agreement, the phase head, or both.

NULL EXPLETIVES AND CASE

3

Aux-to-Comp (Rizzi 1982, Belletti 1990), all show NOM subjects, as selectively seen in (1).2 (1) a. Îi

punea la calculator [CP pentru a avea (RO) put.3SG at computer [CP for INF have tu / *tine linişte]. 2.SG.NOM-*ACC quiet] “She would leave them at the computer for you to have peace and quiet.” noi gata cu toţii], am pornit la drum. [CP Fiind [being.GER we.NOM ready with all] 1PL started on way “Given that we were all ready, we started on our way.” (RO) (fata / ea) deşteptată (fata / ea)], [CP Odată [CP once girl-the.NOM / she awoken.3FSG, girl-the.NOM / she ] mama puse de mîncare. (RO) food mother-the put.PAST.3SG of “The girl having awoken, mother started preparing some food.” Lo supimos [CP después de llegar él]. (SP) of arrive.INF he.NOM] we found out [CP after “We found out after he had arrived.” (Ledgeway 1998:5) [CP Avendo Gianni / (lei) chiuso il dibattito], (IT) Gianni / (3SGF.NOM) closed the debate] [CP having la riunione è finita prima. (Belletti 1990:98) the meeting is finished before “Gianni having closed the debate, the meeting ended early.”

CL.3PL.M.ACC

b.

c.

d.

e.

However, other languages show ACC subjects in non-finite contexts (whether lexicalized or null), as illustrated by the English and AG data in (2) or allow for either NOM or ACC lexical subjects in infinitives, as shown in (3) for Old Italian. (2) a. [CP For him to listen to that talk] was awkward. b. [CP Him baking the pie] pleased everyone. (AG) c. [PRO filanthropon einai] dei.3 PRO.ACC friendly-ACC-3SG to-be must-3SG “One needs to love people.” (Isokrates, II:15., Sevdali 2005:137) 2

I use the following abbreviations in this paper: AGR: agreement, AUX: auxiliary, SBJ: subjunctive, infinitive, GER: gerund, PRES: present, PRF: perfect, PRTC: participle, CL: object pronominal clitic, SCL: subject pronominal clitic, SU: subject, OBJ: object, SG: singular, PL: plural, NOM: Nominative Case, ACC: Accusative Case, DAT: Dative Case, REFL: reflexive, M: masculine, F: feminine, and PE: a preposition associated with Romanian direct objects. For languages other than English, AG: Ancient Greek, IT: Italian, OIT: Old Italian, RO: Romanian, SP: Spanish. 3 I assume that PRO bears structural or quirky Case (cf. Cecchetto & Oniga 2004, Schütze 1997, Sigurðsson 1991, inter alia, but contra Chomsky 1982, Chomsky & Lasnik 1995). INF:

4

GABRIELA ALBOIU

d. Fe:mi [se men egno:kenai peri touto:n] (AG) say-I you-ACC to know-PRF about these-GEN] [eme de suneire:kenai tais sais epithumiais] [me-ACC to go along-PRF the your wishes-DAT] “I say that since you knew about these things, I went along with your wishes.” (Isokrates, Ad Philippum III, 3:3-4, Sevdali 2005:134) (3) a. Tu non ti rallegri [aver io incontrata una morte] you not CL delight [to-have I found a death] “You are not glad that I have found death.” (OIT) (D’Azeglio, ch. 18, p222, cf. Schwendener 1923:72) b. Negar non voglio esser possibile, [lui essere beato .. to-deny not (I) want to-be possible him to-be blessed “I do not want to deny that it is possible that he is blessed.” (OIT) (Boccaccio, Dec., I, 1; cf. Schwendener 1923:82) Note that the Old Italian subject micro-variation is sensitive to word order, with postverbal subjects being strictly NOM (Mensching 2000:20), as in (3a).4 The crucial observation with respect to the data in (1)-(3) is that all nonfinite instances are either adjuncts or subject clauses, so constitute phasal domains by definition. Given that agreement on T is absent in all these situations yet lexical subjects are licensed, the correlation seems to be between Case and phases, not Case and agreement (cf. also Alboiu 2006, Sitaridou 2002, a.o.). 3.

Phasal features and Case In this section, I discuss the status of A-related features in non-finite domains and entertain the idea of Tense as a Case licenser. I show that agreement (i.e., uφ) is only available to finite CPs and that the Tense feature, while a property of the phase, is epiphenomenal to Case. 3.1

Agreement (phi-features) as a phasal property Chomsky (2006) argues for obligatory transmittal of uninterpretable features from the phase head to its proxy head. Consequently, if φ-features are present on C, these will be inherited by T (or the relevant proxy head). Given that infinitives and gerunds lack agreement morphology, in languages with otherwise inflected T paradigms, C is arguably φ-featureless in non-finite domains. This observation is supported by the behaviour of clitics in various Romance languages.

4

To avoid any confusion given that in Old Italian lui was also sometimes used for the NOM (e.g. in Dante’s work), Mensching (2000:208) points out in Footnote 6 that Boccaccio strictly distinguishes between lui/lei (ACC) and egli/ella (NOM) in the Decameron.

NULL EXPLETIVES AND CASE

5

Poletto (2000) mentions that in Friulian, a Northern Italian dialect, subject clitic doubling is extremely common. Paoli (p.c.) confirms that they occur in finite clauses with both pre- and post-verbal subjects regardless of predicate type. However, subject clitics are ruled out in non-finite clauses, which, interestingly, otherwise permit a NOM lexical subject postverbally. Consider the data in (4). (4) a. E

rive ‘l pustin. (Friulian) arrives the postman. “The postman is coming.” b. Ue e cusine Marie. today SCL cook Mary “Mary is cooking today.” c. (*E) Vint Marie / je ciacaraat cun ti, e SCL having Mary / she spoken with you, SCL diciduut di cumprà el livri. decided of buy.INF the book “Having spoken with you, Mary decided to buy the book.” SCL

ha have

While subject clitics occur with both unaccusative (4a) and unergative (4b) finite predicates in Friulian, they are ruled out in non-finite contexts as illustrated by the gerund Aux-to-Comp construction in (4c).5 Following Rizzi's (1986) claim that clitics are agreement markers, nominal substitutes for verbal inflection, Roberts (2006), construes them as uφ on T. Under this view, (4) provides empirical evidence against uφ on uninflected T heads. Summing up, given the above empirical observations, as well as work in Alboiu (2006) and Landau (2004), I conclude that in languages with overt agreement morphology, uφ is absent on uninflected T heads. 3.2

Tense and Case values Under the feature-inheritance model, C transfers to T both its temporal interpretation and all A-related features. Recently, Pesetsky & Torrego (2001, 2004) have explored the link between Tense and Case, construing Case as uT. However, Case as uT runs into empirical trouble as there are contexts where structural Case occurs in the absence of Tense. Hungarian possessives discussed in Kenesei (1986) allow for NOM possessors in the presence of agreement on the head noun. Kenesei, however, 5

An anonymous reviewer points out that Aux-to-Comp is somewhat doubtful in Northern Italian dialects. Even so, note that the above conclusion is independently supported by empirical data from Romanian. Romanian clitic ordering is sensitive to Person ranking (π1 > π2) and Case ranking (DAT > ACC), but (Săvescu-Ciucivara 2007) shows that π ranking disappears in non-finite contexts. This follows straightforwardly if C lacks uφ.

6

GABRIELA ALBOIU

argues convincingly that the category Tense is excluded in these constructions. Crucially, a phase head (i.e., D) and agreement (uφ) are both present. In addition, there are CP phases which seemingly do not project a TP. Specifically, Romanian gerunds (see Avram 2003) and Ancient Greek infinitives (see Sevdali 2005) have independent aspectual but not independent tense properties. According to Avram (2003), Romanian gerunds denote events and are verbal in nature but cannot combine with either a Neg head (i.e., the negative free morpheme nu) or a T head (i.e., auxiliaries), and to the extent that they license temporal adverbs, these adverbs denote time of event rather than time of reference. However, while Avram treats Romanian gerunds simply as AspP, I suggest they are CP domains lacking a TP given the fact that they, (i) can combine with speaker-oriented adverbs such as probably, which according to Cinque (1999) associate with epistemic modality, so are higher than Aspect, (ii) allow for topicalized subjects, which target the left-periphery of the clause (i.e., the CP domain, following Rizzi's 1997, 2004 cartographic approach), and (iii) precede clitics, which are part of the inflectional domain in Romance, as argued by Kayne (1991). (5) illustrates the first two properties -- availability of a topicalized subject and an epistemic adverb. (5)

Ea fiind probabil încă supărată, (RO) be-GER probably yet upset.3SGF, 3SGF.NOM am decis să plecăm singuri. AUX.1PL decided SBJ leave.1PL alone.1PL “What with her probably still being upset, we decided to leave alone.”

In sum, temporal deixis is not what licenses structural Case and neither is agreement, though both of these are features of the phase head. I next outline the proposal for structural Case-licensing and parametrization of Case valuation. 4.

Null expletives and Case Lexical subjects are DPs that have checked structural Case and instantiate a Case value. Following Alboiu (2007), I propose that T and v lack intrinsic Case values, NOM and ACC, respectively. Rather, Case values are determined by the specifics of the probing domain, as follows: (6)

Case spell-out: a. NOMINATIVE, iff the probing domain is specified as [uD, uφ] b. ACCUSATIVE, iff the probing domain is specified as [uD]

(6) dissociates between Case licensing and Case values (in the spirit of Marantz 2000, Schütze 1997) and assumes that Case valuation is dependent on the operation Agree, specifically, the formation of an A-chain, triggered by either uφ

NULL EXPLETIVES AND CASE

7

or the EPP (i.e., uD). In NOM-ACC systems any active DP entering an A-chain will be guaranteed a Case value. Choice of NOM versus ACC rests solely with availability or lack thereof of φ-features. However, while paramount in determining type of Case (i.e., DP spell-out), φ-features are not crucial for syntactic Case licensing. Recall that our discussion focuses on non-finite phasal domains, as this is where languages show disparity in spell-out of DP subjects as NOM, ACC or, if not lexicalized, PRO. Given that C lacks an uninterpretable φ-feature in these domains, the unique A-related feature transferred to the proxy head is a nominal deficiency (i.e., uD). What then ensures the φ-specification assumed necessary in languages with NOM subjects in gerunds and infinitives? Ledgeway (1998) and Sitaridou (2002) have remarked that only null subject languages permit NOM subjects in these constructions. Nonetheless, West Flemish is not, technically speaking, a null subject (i.e., pro-drop) language, as it only permits for null expletives (Haegeman, p.c.). So it would appear that the crucial property is whether or not a language is a null expletive language (henceforth NEL). Support for this view comes from various dialects of English, such as Newfoundland English in Canada shown in (6), and working-class Somerset English in the UK, where null expletives are still current, and where uninflected infinitives with NOM subjects are also permitted.6 (7)

For he to listen to that talk was awkward.

(Ruth King, p.c.)

I suggest that the null expletive, merged in Spec,TP to satisfy the EPP, itself acts as a Probe thus ensuring that the thematic subject enters an A-chain and is thereby Case-licensed. Furthermore, the featural specifications of this Probe will guarantee a NOM Case value, as discussed below. 4.1

Expletives as Probes Chomsky (1981) introduces pro, an empty category that does not always bear the same array of featural specifications. On the one hand, there is the null subject of pro-drop languages, a nominal element that is referential and φcomplete and enters the derivation in theta-assigning domains, on the other hand, there is the null expletive, which is non-referential, lacks intrinsic φ-values and cannot be merged in theta-related positions. In this chapter, pro refers to the null expletive. I take expletive pro to be featurally specified as [D, uφ].7 Consequently, 6 In his analysis of null subjects with working-class Somerset English, Ihalainen (1991) points out that the subject is omissible in the West Country variety about 20% of the time (by comparison to 1% in the standard). Data in (i) is from Ihalainen (1991:205). (i) a. Ø Was old chaps called Toutes use to do it. b. You could hardly see ‘cause Ø was so much dust around. 7 As a D category, null expletives are potentially also specified for an uCase feature. Nothing crucial hinges on whether this feature is present (or not), so I leave it out for ease of exposition.

GABRIELA ALBOIU

8

it can be merged in Spec,TP, see (8), and thereby check off T’s nominal deficiency. (8)

CP C proj [D, uφ]

TP T’ T [uD, (uφ)]

vP DPj v’ [iφ, uCase: NOM] .............

(8) illustrates a derivation for either finite or non-finite CPs (hence the brackets around uφ on T). Focusing on non-finite C, T only inherits the EPP/uD feature, which is checked off by pro. Merge of pro in Spec,TP cancels T’s status as a Drelated Probe. Given that pro has a φ-deficiency, it will itself probe for a Goal with interpretable φ-features, will check against the highest contender (i.e., the subject DP) and will copy its φ-values, thereby getting a ‘j’ index. The expletive is both a minimal and maximal syntactic object, so c-commands the subject DP. At Spell-Out, this DP is part of an A-chain where the probing domain has both nominal and φ-feature deficiences so, according to (6), it will be valued NOM. In effect, pro acts as a Probe and guarantees a NOM as opposed to an ACC value. 4.2

Two notes on expletives Two questions arise here: (i) what guarantees pro in the lexical array, and (ii) whether the ‘null’ status of this expletive has any bearing on the issues at hand. With respect to the first question, the minimum premise is that the respective language have a lexeme with the specification [D, uφ] as part of its mental lexicon. The expletive, lacking semantic content, will participate in the checking of features otherwise devoid of any semantico-pragmatic flavour, hence checking of purely nominal features. This would in turn ensure that contentful DPs are free to occupy structural positions with various semantic and pragmatic relevance with the effect of what is often referred to as a ‘free word order’ language. For example, Alboiu (2002) argues that Romanian exploits syntactic structure to encode sentence pragmatics. Specifically, DP phrases never dislocate to check A-related features (i.e., Case, agreement, or the EPP), but do so only for novel interpretive effects related to the encoding of the Theme-Rheme

NULL EXPLETIVES AND CASE

9

partitioning. The presence of a [D, uφ] lexeme in the lexical array would explain what enables Romanian to encode information structure in any derivation.8 Nonetheless, since availability in the mental lexicon does not immediately guarantee insertion in the lexical array, variation in lexical instantiation is expected even among NELs. Empirically speaking, there are languages like Romanian (and possibly Spanish and Catalan) where NOM subjects are the norm, regardless of finiteness. At the other extreme, there are languages like Serbian and Bulgarian which exclude NOM values in non-finite domains (Olga Tomić, p.c.) and Ancient Greek which shows only ACC lexical subjects in infinitives (Sevdali 2005). In addition, there are languages like Old Italian, for which a NOM-ACC lexicalization is dependent on DP linearization. I return to these issues in Section 6. With regards to the second question, the ‘null’ status of the expletive must be taken to be irrelevant syntactically. Phonetic features are not accessible to the computational system, and perhaps not even available prior to Spell-Out (as in Distributed Morphology). However, if these expletives satisfy a purely formal principle, there is no need for overtness.9 To conclude, expletive pro is a parametrized UG primitive with a role in Case valuation and pragmatic encoding.

5.

Analysis: a case study on Romanian Given the contentious nature of expletive pro in Minimalism (Alexiadou & Anagnostopoulou 1998, Manzini & Savoia 1997, versus Cardinaletti 2004, Rizzi & Shlonski 2005, a.o.), some empirical evidence for its presence in the lexical array would be welcome. By focusing on Romanian, this section provides a case study of the role of expletive pro in Case valuation and discusses some evidence for its presence in the lexical array. 5.1

Compulsory pro in the lexical array Cardinaletti (2004) argues convincingly on both theoretical and empirical grounds for pro and discusses some interesting evidence with respect to the existence of (at least) two IP-related preverbal subject positions in natural languages: SpecSubjP, hosting the subject of predication (i.e., the ‘notional’ subject), and SpecAgrSP (or SpecTP), hosting the grammatical subject. The latter

8

See also Rizzi & Shlonski (2005:13) who view expletives as formal devices required by “discourse conditions” or “communicative intentions” and Tomić (2006) who argues for null expletives as a property of languages that are structurally pragmatically oriented. 9 Note that most overt expletives have various degrees of φ-specifications (perhaps crucially, a π feature) and possibly deixis (Kayne 2006 on there), properties pointing to a different syntax; see (i): [D, π:3] [D, π:3, u#, ug] (i) [D, uφ] [D, π:3, #:SG, g:N] pro il, it, það, es there von

GABRIELA ALBOIU

10

position is constrained to weak pronouns and pro.10 Unless contrastively focused, Romanian preverbal subjects are subject to a specificity effect and precede whphrases (see Alboiu 2002, Cornilescu 2000, Dobrovie-Sorin 1994, a.o.). The general consensus is that these subjects move into the CP, as opposed to the IP domain in Romanian.11 Whether the 'notional' subject is CP or IP-related is less relevant since the focus here is on pro which is of necessity ruled out from either such position. However, what seems clear is that the SpecAgrS/TP grammatical subject is exclusively realized as the null expletive in Romanian (i.e., pro satisfies the EPP in all derivations with a C phase head). This, of course, will entail that ACC lexical subjects are never an option in such a language. Conceptual issues aside, Binding phenomena provide good empirical testing ground for the presence of pro in Romanian. (9) illustrates a passivized double object construction in which the indirect object contains a possessive pronoun bound by a quantified direct object. (9)

După expoziţie (i)-a fost înapoiat after exhibition (DAT.CL.3SG) -AUX.3SG been returned.3SG tablou]j. (RO) [pictorului săuj ]k [fiecare [painter-DAT hisj]k [each painting]j-NOM “After the exhibit, each painting was returned to its own artist.”

In (9), the direct object, which does not dislocate to a preverbal position in the absence of relevant semantico-pragmatic interpretations, enters an Agree relationship with T and has its Case valued as NOM. The indirect object appears to the left of this direct object, so is structurally higher than the latter.12 But (9) is well-formed. Conspicuously, the binding relations (in bold) between the quantified direct object DPj and the possessive pronoun can only be accounted for by positing a null expletive in Spec,TP as in (10). (10)

[TP

proj T [D, uφ] [iT, uD, uφ]

[DP-DAT POSSj ]k

DPj ....] [D, iφ, uCase:NOM]

Εxpletive pro, merged in Spec,TP to check off uD on T, as discussed, bears the same index with the direct object which indirectly (i.e., via T) values its features. Crucially, it c-commands the indirect object DPk, a seemingly sufficient condition 10

It is not unreasonable to assume that in languages without null expletives, these two IP-related subject positions form a merged, syncretic category, so that the DP satisfying the EPP must also be the subject of predication. 11 Note that ‘specificity’ refers to definite DPs or indefinite DPs with a referential, partitive, or a generic collective reading. 12 For arguments that linear order reflects hierarchy in this language see Alboiu (2002). Note that Datives do not passivize in Romanian, so are opaque to A-chain formation.

NULL EXPLETIVES AND CASE

11

for felicitous binding of the possessive at LF.13 The exact implementation of this well-formedness could be perceived as falling out from either LF-movement and replacement of the expletive by its associate, as assumed in early Minimalism (Chomsky 1995) or, from a failure to delete the expletive’s φ-features. I will not try to sort out these issues here but rather point out the crucial fact that φ-features on pro behave differently from φ-features on verbal functors, which cannot Bind. 5.2

Case valuation of infinitives and gerunds For a concrete illustration of Case checking and valuation, let us consider the Romanian infinitives and gerunds in (11a,b) and (11c), respectively. (11) a. [CP *(Pentru) a avea tu linişte], plecă. (RO) [CP *( For) INF have 2.SG.NOM quiet] leave.PST.3SG “S/he left so that you can have peace of mind.” fi numai tu prezent la adunare] b. [CP A [CP INF be only 2.SG.NOM present at meeting] e de neconceput. inconceivable be.PRES.3SG of “It's inconceivable that you be the only one present at the meeting.” c. [CP (tu) fiind (tu) gata], am şi pornit. 2.SG.NOM ready] AUX.1PL also started [CP 2.SG.NOM be-GER “Once you were ready, we started on our way.” With infinitives, the NOM lexical subject must occur postverbally, in a position distinct from the grammatical subject position, in the sense of Cardinaletti (2004).14 The preposition-type complementizer is obligatory with adjunct CPs (presumably for semantic clause-typing). Furthermore, the lexical verb raises to T but not beyond as the infinitive particle ‘a’, blocks subsequent T to C movement of the verb. Schematically, these infinitives can be represented as in (12), where C transfers its sole A-related feature to T and pro is externally merged to satisfy this feature. The unvalued features of the expletive establish a syntactic chain with the thematic subject, which at Spell-Out is valued NOM. Overt items are bolded. 13 Note that if the indirect object were to topicalize and move into the left-periphery of the clause, above TP, (9) would be ungrammatical, as expected given that pro in Spec,TP is no longer in a position to c-command the possessive pronoun. See (i). expoziţie i-a fost (i) *[Pictorului săuj ]k după [painter-DAT hisj]k after exhibition DAT.CL.3SG -AUX.3SG been [fiecare tablou]j . (RO) înapoiat [each painting]j-NOM returned.3SG “After the exhibit, each painting was returned to its own artist.” 14 Given that lexical verbs always raise to the highest Inflectional head in Romanian (e.g. Dobrovie-Sorin 1994), “postverbal” refers to material below the respective available head. The exact locus of the inverted subject is less important here.

GABRIELA ALBOIU

12 (12)

Romanian phasal infinitives: [CP C (P)

proj [D, uφ]

a-T [INF, v, uD]

DPj ....] [uCase: NOM, iφ]

Conversely, with gerunds, there is never any preposition and the subject may occur preverbally. The verb undergoes movement beyond the Inflectional domain and into C. That this movement is possible follows from the verbal nature of the gerund affix and that it actually occurs is evidenced by its interaction with clitics, as previously discussed in Section 3.2. The schematic representations in (13) show the EPP feature being transferred to Asp given the absence of T (cf. Section 3.2). Unvalued φ-features and Case check as for infinitives. (13) a. Romanian gerund adjuncts with VS linearization: [CP C v-GER

proj [D, uφ]

Asp [, uD]

DPj ....] [uCase: NOM, iφ]

b. Romanian gerund adjuncts with SV linearization: [CP CHigh DPj-Top CLow [uCase: NOM, iφ] [v-GER]

proj Asp ..] [D, uφ] [, uD]

In addition, (13b) differs from (13a) in that it projects an expanded CP domain, with a Topic position sandwiched in-between a high C head (i.e., “Force”) and a low C head (i.e., “Finite”) to accomodate the topicalized preverbal subject (in the spirit of Rizzi 1997, 2004). While in (13b) the gerund only raises to a low C head, I assume a high C head must be present to guarantee the phasal status of this CP.15 This section has discussed the presence of expletive pro in the Romanian lexical array and has provided an analysis of subject NOM values in Romanian noninfinitives and gerunds. I next address instances of ACC subjects in finite CPs.

15

Note in passing that absolute participial constructions can readily be construed as a sub-type of the gerund construction, where a be-GER is replaced by a null Aspectual head. The CP adjunct in (1c), repeated as (ia), is semantically equivalent to (ib). (fata / ea) Ø deşteptată (fata / ea)], ... (i) a. [CP Odată (girl-the.NOM/she) ASP awoke.PRTC.FSG (girl-the.NOM/she) CP once (fata / ea) deşteptată (fata / ea)], ... b. [CP Fiind (girl-the.NOM/she) ASP awoke.PRTC.FSG (girl-the.NOM/she) CP be-GER I therefore do not provide a distinct analysis, but simply assume that the unaccusative vP in (ia) is selected by a null Asp head which lacks the GER specification. Consequently, no head movement to C can ensue and a stative adverb is inserted for clause-typing, as seen for adjunct infinitives. Case-licensing is not affected.

NULL EXPLETIVES AND CASE

13

6.

NOM-ACC variation within NELs: Ancient Greek and Old Italian At the macro-parametric level, languages show a typological split between NELs (e.g. Romanian) and non-NELs (e.g. English). Given the construal of Case proposed in this chapter, NOM subjects for non-NELs are not expected in uninflected domains. Hence, ACC lexicalization in English infinitives and gerunds is unsurprising. The seemingly surprising, hence potentially more interesting cases, are those of Ancient Greek and Old Italian, two NELs for which ACC subjects are often required. Crucially, the micro-parametric variation within NELs can be accounted for if we keep in mind that availability of expletive pro in the mental lexicon does not automatically guarantee its insertion in every derivation. Let us consider the data discussed in Sevdali (2005) and illustrated in Section 2 as (2c,d) above. In (2c), the adjectival predicate is marked ACC, in agreement with its PRO subject, while in (2d), the overt subjet se ‘you’ is also ACC. Now, while expletive pro is available to AG, given its pragmatic role it is only expected in the derivation in the presence of lexical subjects. If the subject is null, the DP cannot be relevant for discourse properties, so pro would be futile, hence not selected from the lexicon.16 The schematic representation for (2c) is shown in (14a). Following Sevdali (2005), the subject in (2d) is contrastively focused. This time pro is absent because its lack of semantic content would prevent it from satisfying the uD feature on the Focus head.17 Consequently, the lexical DP in Spec,FocP is valued ACC as there is no uφ associated with the Probe (see 14b). (14) a. infinitives with PRO [CP C

PRO [D, uφ]

Asp [INF, uD]

[uCase: ACC, iφ]

v

AP ....] [ACC]

b. infinitives with focused subjects [CP C

[FocusP

DPi Focus Asp [uCase: ACC, iφ, FOC] [uD]

[vP

v ....]]

Moving on to Old Italian infinitives, lexical ACC and NOM subjects are both available but postverbal subjects are strictly NOM (Mensching 2000).18 Assuming that discourse conditions determined whether uD was checked via expletive pro or subject DP dislocation, I propose the representations in (15).

16

Alternatively, PRO cannot remain in a postverbal position, as evidenced by the data in (i), so competes with the null expletive for insertion in Spec,TP. (i) John promised his psychologist [PRO to seem to himself/*herself [t to be competent] before leaving therapy]. (example offered by LI reviewer) 17 Recall that C transmits its EPP/uD feature to its proxy head (i.e., Asp in 14a, Focus in 14b). 18 Recall data in (3a,b) which I do not repeat here for lack of space.

GABRIELA ALBOIU

14 (15) a. infinitives with pro [CP C

proj [D, uφ]

X [INF, v, uD]

DPj ....] [uCase: NOM, iφ]

b. infinitives without pro [CP C

DPi [uCase: ACC, iφ]

X [INF, v, uD]

....]

In (15a), the uD feature transmitted from C to its proxy head, say X, is satisfied by external Merge of the expletive, with NOM consequences for the subject, while in (15b), this feature is satisfied by the subject istelf, with ACC consequences. The fact that both pre- and post-verbal lexical subjects are licensed in the absence of any overt C marker suggests that the clause typing relationship was satisfied by head movement to a position below C. Presumably X is some CLOW domain, akin to what we saw for Romanian gerunds, fact strengthened by the observation that preverbal NOM subjects were attested in Old Italian without Aux-to-Comp in these constructions. Consider (16a) represented in (16b): (16) a. perchè io disso [io aver trovato iscritto ...] because I said [I to-have found written “because I said that I had found that it was written ... ” (OIT) (Mensching 2000:133, Malispini, ch. 42, 13th c; cf. Diez 1882:946) b. infinitives with pro and subject fronting [CP C

DPj [uCase: NOM, iφ]

proj [D, uφ]

X < DPj> [INF, v, uD]

....]

The representation in (16b) indicates subsequent movement of the thematic subject into the CP, left-peripheral domain. I leave open the question of locus of movement given that we do not have the tools to determine interpretative differences.19 To sum up then, pro-availability does not automatically guarantee insertion in the lexical array and various language specific phenomena might either prevent or require the presence of the expletive in the Numeration. The main empirical claim here is that uninflected phasal domains permit NOM subjects only in languages with null expletives. 19

Note that in standard modern Italian lexical subjects in uninflected CPs are restricted to Aux-toComp constructions (Belletti 1990, Rizzi 1982), with preverbal subjects ruled out. This suggests very different infinitive structures diachronically speaking. Specifically, the left peripheral field in modern Italian non-finite CPs must be more limited, with presumably less available XP positions than in OIT and a single C head. Consequently, clause-typing and feature transmission for C presuppose Aux-to-Comp.

NULL EXPLETIVES AND CASE

15

7.

Conclusions This chapter has argued for a dissociation between Case checking, understood as syntactic licensing of DP arguments, and Case valuation, by assuming that the phase head guarantees Case licensing but not a specific Case value. Rather choice of NOM versus ACC DP lexicalization is incumbent on the presence versus absence of φ-features, respectively. Therefore, while paramount in determining type of Case (i.e., DP spell-out), φ-features are not crucial for syntactic Case licensing. The assumption is that φ-feature deficiencies are properties of C in finite phases and properties of null expletive pro but not properties of phasal v or non-finite C. In order to capture the empirical variation of lexical subjects in non-finite CPs, I have argued for expletive pro as a parametrized UG primitive with a role in Case valuation and pragmatic encoding. Specifically, in NELs, when pro is present in the derivation, it acts as a Probe and guarantees a NOM as opposed to an ACC value. Consequently, Case values are not primitives of T and v, but a dynamic property of the domain that probes.

References Alboiu, Gabriela. 2002. The Features of Movement in Romanian. Bucharest: University of Bucharest Press. Alboiu, Gabriela. 2006. “Are we in Agreement?” Agreement Systems, ed. by Cedric Boeckx, 13-39. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Alboiu, Gabriela. 2007. “Feature Inheritance and Case Values in NominativeAccusative Systems”. Ms., York University. Alexiadou, Artemis & Elena Anagnastopoulou. 1998. “Parametrizing AGR: Word Order, V-Movement and EPP-Checking”. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 16.491-539. Avram, Larisa. 2003. “An Aspectual Analysis of Gerunds”. Revue Roumaine de Linguistique XLVIII. 203-219. Baker, Mark C., Roberto Aranovich & Lucía A. Golluscio. 2005. “Two Types of Syntactic Noun Incorporation: Noun Incorporation in Mapudungun and its Typological Implications”. Language 81.138-177. Belletti, Adriana. 1990. Generalized Verb Movement. Turin: Rosenberg and Sellier. Cardinaletti, Anna. 1997. “Agreement and Control in Expletive Constructions”. Linguistic Inquiry 28.521-534. Cardinaletti, Anna. 2004. “Toward a Cartography of Subject Positions”. The Structure of CP and IP: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, vol. 2, ed. by Luigi Rizzi, 115-166. New York: Oxford University Press. Cecchetto, Carlo & Renato Oniga. 2004. “A Challenge to Null Case Theory”. Linguistic Inquiry 35.141-149. Chomsky, Noam. 1981. Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris.

16

GABRIELA ALBOIU

Chomsky, Noam. 1982. Some Concepts and Consequences of the Theory of Binding. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Chomsky, Noam. 2006. “Approaching UG from Below”. Ms., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge. Chomsky, Noam. 2008. “On Phases”. Foundational Issues in Linguistic Theory, ed. by P. Otero et al., 133-167. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Chomsky, Noam & Howard Lasnik. 1995. “The Theory of Principles and Parameters”. The Minimalist Program, 13-129. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Cinque, Guglielmo. 1999. Adverbs and Functional Heads: A Cross-linguistic Perspective. New York: Oxford University Press. Cornilescu, Alexandra. 2000. “The Double Subject Construction in Romanian”. Comparative Studies in Romanian Syntax, ed. by Virginia Motapanyane, 83-134. Amsterdam & New York: Elsevier. Diez, Friedrich. 1882. Grammatik der Romanischen Sprachen, vol. 3 book 4: Syntax, 5th ed., Bonn: Weber. Dobrovie-Sorin, Carmen. 1994. The Syntax of Romanian: Comparative Studies in Romance. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. George, Lelan & Jaklin Kornfilt. 1981. “Finiteness and Boundedness in Turkish”. Binding and Filtering, ed. by Frank Heny, 105-127. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Haegeman, Liliane. 1985. “INFL, COMP and Nominative Case Assignment in Flemish Infinitivals”. Features and Projections, ed. by Peter Muysken & Henk van Riemsdijk, 123-137. Dordrecht: Foris. Ihalainen, Ossi. 1991. “The Grammatical Subject in Educated and Dialectal English: Comparing the London-Lund Corpus and the Helsinki Corpus of Modern English Dialects”. English Computer Corpora: Selected Papers and Research Guide, ed. by Stig Johansson & Anna-Brita Stenstrøm, 201214. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Kayne, Richard. 1991. “Romance Clitics, Verb Movement and PRO”. Linguistic Inquiry 22.647-686. Kayne, Richard. 2006. “Expletives, Datives, and the Tension between Morphology and Syntax”. Ms., New York University. Kenesei, Istvan. 1986. “On the Role of the Agreement Morpheme in Hungarian”. Acta Linguistica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 36.109-120. Landau, Idan. 2004. “The Scale of Finiteness and the Calculus of Control”. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 22.811-877. Ledgeway, Adam. 1998. “Variation in the Romance Infinitive: The Case of the Southern Calabrian Inflected Infinitive”. Transactions of the Philological Society 96.1-61. Manzini, Rita M. & Leonardo M. Savoia. 1997. “Null Subjects without pro”. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 9.303-313.

NULL EXPLETIVES AND CASE

17

Marantz, Alec. 2000. “Case and Licensing”. Arguments and Case: Explaining Burzio’s Generalization, ed. by Eric Reuland, 11-30. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Mensching, Guido. 2000. Infinitive Constructions with Specified Subjects: A Syntactic Analysis of the Romance Languages. New York: Oxford University Press. Pesetsky, David & Esther Torrego. 2001. “T-to-C Movement: Causes and consequences”. Ken Hale: A Life in Language, ed. by Michael Kenstowicz, 355-426. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Pesetsky, David & Esther Torrego. 2004. “Tense, Case, and the Nature of Syntactic Categories”. The Syntax of Time, ed. by Jacqueline Gueron & Jacqueline Lacarme, 495-539. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Poletto, Cecilia. 2000. The Higher Functional Head: Evidence from Northern Italian dialects. New York: Oxford University Press. Raposo, Eduardo. 1987. “Case Theory and Infl-to-Comp: The Inflected Infinitive in European Portuguese”. Linguistic Inquiry 18.85-109. Rizzi, Luigi. 1982. Issues in Italian Syntax. Dordrecht: Foris. Rizzi, Luigi. 1986. “On the Status of Subject Clitics in Romance”. Studies in Romance Linguistics, ed. by Osvaldo Jaeggli & Carmen Silva-Corvalán, 137-152. Dordrecht: Foris. Rizzi, Luigi. 1997. “The Fine Structure of the Left Periphery”. Elements of Grammar: Handbook in Generative Syntax, ed. by Liliane Haegeman, 281-337. Dordrecht & Boston: Kluwer. Rizzi, Luigi. 2004. “On the Cartography of Syntactic Structures”. The Structure of CP and IP: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, vol. 2, ed. by Luigi Rizzi, 3-16. New York: Oxford University Press. Rizzi, Luigi & Ur Shlonski. 2005. “Strategies of Subject Extraction”. Ms., University of Siena & University of Geneva. Roberts, Ian. 2006. “Clitics, Phases and Incorporation”. Paper presented at the Conference on Interface Legibility at the Edge, Bucharest University, Romania. Săvescu-Ciucivara, Oana. 2007. “Challenging the Person Case Constraint: Evidence from Romanian”. Romance Linguistics 2006: Selected Papers from the 36th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL), New Brunswick, March-April 2006, ed. by José Camacho et al., 255-269. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Schütze, Carson T. 1997. INFL in Child and Adult Language. Ph.D. dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge. Schwendener, Ulrich. 1923. Der accusativus cum infinitivo im Italienischen. Ph.D. dissertation, Universität Bern. Sevdali, Christina. 2005. “Tense and Ancient Greek Infinitives”. On Space and Time in Language, ed. by Martine Coene & Liliane Tasmovski, 129-150. Cluj-Napoca: Clusium.

18

GABRIELA ALBOIU

Sigurðsson, Halldor. 1991. “Icelandic Case-marked PRO and the Licensing of Lexical Arguments”. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 9.327-364. Sitaridou, Ioanna. 2002. The Synchrony and Diachrony of Romance Infinitives with Nominative Subjects. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Manchester. Tomić, Olga M. 2006. Balkan Sprachbund Morphosyntactic Features. Dordrecht: Springer.

ON THE EXISTENCE OF NULL COMPLEMENTIZERS IN OLD FRENCH ∗

DEBORAH ARTEAGA University of Nevada, Las Vegas This paper considers apparent null complementizers in Old French, a phenomenon typically considered by philologists to be parataxis, or a juxtaposition of two main clauses (cf. Foulet 1982, Jensen 1990, Moignet 1988); recent studies within the Minimalist framework (e.g., Bošković & Lasnik 2003, Epstein et al. 2005 and Kishimoto 2006) argue for the existence of null complementizers. This paper proposes that subordinate phrases apparently headed by a null complementizer in Old French are in fact lexically selected CPs with an EPP feature in C. We argue that subordinate clauses in the subjunctive provide evidence against the traditional parataxis analysis, as the mood is clearly lexically selected for by the main verb. Our analysis accounts not only for the distribution of complementizer phrases not headed by a complementizer in OF, but also for their loss diachronically, as the EPP feature of subordinate C was lost in the evolution from OF to MF.

1.

Introduction Several recent studies (e.g., Bošković & Lasnik 2003, Bošković 1997, Epstein et al. 2005, Kishimoto 2006) address the issue of null complementizers within the Minimalist framework, in which proper government does not play a role in licensing empty categories. In this paper, we consider apparent null complementizers in Old French (OF), which have been traditionally considered by philologists to be instances of parataxis, or a juxtaposition of two independent clauses. We begin by reviewing recent studies on null complementizers in Section 2; we then turn to the distribution of apparent null complementizers in Old French in Section 3. We follow our data presentation by a syntactic analysis of these structures in Section 4, arguing that OF provides support for a CP analysis of subordinate clauses that are apparently headed by a null complementizer. We differ from most previous CP analyses, however, by arguing that it is unnecessary to posit a null complementizer for OF in such structures; our proposed analysis is along the lines of that of Webelhuth (1992) for German. We further argue that OF subordinate clauses not headed by a complementizer are not cases of simple ∗

Special thanks to Julia Herschensohn, Heles Contreras, the audience of LSRL, and three anonymous reviewers for helpful comments and suggestions. Errors are of course my own.

20

DEBORAH ARTEAGA

parataxis, because it is clear that the mood in the subordinate clause is lexically determined. Rather, following Arteaga & Herschensohn’s (2004, 2006) analysis of matrix clauses in OF, we argue that the subordinate CPs in question have a lexically selected EPP feature, which explains their word order. This EPP feature also allows us to account in Section 5 for the evolution from OF to Modern French (MF) with respect to apparent null complementizers. 2.

Previous Studies In English, the complementizer that can be omitted in a variety of syntactic contexts, such as after verbs of believing (e.g., believe, think, say). The example in (1) illustrates the (optional) omission of that in such contexts: (1)

a. I think that you’re right. b. I think you’re right.

However, as pointed out by many scholars, including Bošković & Lasnik (2003), Bošković (1997), Pesteksy (1995), Postal (1974), and Stowell (1981), among others, null complementizers are not allowed in all contexts in English. For example, Bošković & Lasnik (2003) note that null complementizers are excluded in subject clauses (2), in cases of extraposition (3), in cases of pseudoclefting (4), in right node raising (RNR) constructions (5), where there is gapping (6), as well as in topicalization structures (7) (Bošković & Lasnik 2003:529): (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)

*[CPC[IPHe liked linguistics]] was widely believed. Subject clause *It seemed at that time[CPC[IP[ David had left]]] Extraposition *What the students believe is [CPC[IP they will pass the exam]] Pseudoclefting *They suspected and we believed [CP[C[IP they will pass the exam]] Right Node Raising *Mary believed Peter finished school and Bill [CP C [IP Peter got a job]] Gapping *[CP C[IPJohn likes Mary]] Jane didn’t believe. Topicalization

Current research accounts for this distribution of null complementizers in English according to two main approaches, which we will term the “IP approach” (cf. Bošković & Lasnik 2003, Bošković 1997, Bowers 1987, Doherty 1997, Webelhuth 1992) and the “CP PF Merger approach” (cf. Bošković & Lasnik 2003, Epstein et al. 2005, Kishimoto 2006). Bošković (1997), a proponent of the “IP approach,” argues that embedded clauses not headed by an overt complementizer do not project to CP, due to some form of the Minimal Structure Principle, a principle of economy. According to this principle, as IPs, the subordinate clause

NULL COMPLEMENTIZERS IN OLD FRENCH

21

in examples like (1b) are not headed by a null complementizer, so that there is no empty category in C to be licensed. The ungrammaticality of (2) – (7), is due, in Bošković’s (1997) view, to the fact that the empty category (I) is not properly licensed. Such examples are therefore ruled out by some formulation of the ECP (Bošković 1997: n 35).1 Bošković & Lasnik (2003) assume a CP analysis of the subordinate clause, because in their view, all lexical heads (unlike functional heads) take CP complements. They seek to account for the licensing of the null complementizer without recourse to government, in keeping with the Minimalist Program. Bošković & Lasnik (2003) further argue that the correct generalization regarding the distribution of null complementizers in English is that they are not possible where they are not adjacent to the verb, which is the case in (2) – (7) above. They reject an ECP account of the facts, proposing instead that the null complementizer in question is a PF affix, which must undergo C to V PF Merger (a sort of affixhopping) to affix itself to the main verb, requiring that it be adjacent to the verb at PF. This analysis effectively rules out (2) – (7) without recourse to government, because the affixal C is not adjacent to the verb, and is therefore left “stranded.”2 Kishimoto (2006) also argues that null complementizer phrases in Japanese project to CP. He proposes the existence of a phonetically null complementizer where the embedded clause has a declarative interpretation, based on evidence from the Japanese dialect of Kansai. This dialect of Japanese patterns similarly to English, in that complementizer deletion is possible in declaratives after verbs of saying and thinking, as in (8) (Kishimoto 2006:341): (8)

John wa [Mary-ga ki- ta (tte)] yuu-ta / omoo-ta John-TOP Mary-NOM come-PAST that say-PAST/think-PAST “John said/thought (that) Mary came.”

Kishimoto (2006) further notes that as in English, complementizer deletion is not possible in the Kansai dialect where the verb is not adjacent to the complementizer, which explains the ungrammaticality of (9) (Kishimoto 2006:341): (9)

[Mary-ga ki- ta *(tte)]i John-ga ti yuu-ta. Mary-NOM come-PAST that John-NOM say-PAST “*(That) Mary came John said.” (cf. 2)

1 Other IP approaches rule out examples in (2) – (7) by restrictions on IP movement (see Bowers 1987, Webelhuth 1992, among others). 2 Not all null C’s are affixes, according to Bošković & Lasnik (2003); they posit two distinct null C’s in English, the affixal one we have seen, and one with an EPP feature, which is not an affix. The selection of the EPP C is forced by locality. The authors admit that this is somewhat problematic, as it requires a “look ahead.” See Contreras (2003) who argues that introducing Pfeatures during the derivation violates the Inclusiveness Condition (Chomsky 2000:113).

22

DEBORAH ARTEAGA

Kishimoto (2006) claims that in Japanese, the interpretation of adverbial particles varies according to where they are attached. For example, the particle dake ‘only’ can attach to either T, as in (10a), or to C, as in (10b), resulting in different meanings, as given below (Kishimoto 2006:343-344): (10)

a. John-wa [Mary-ga okotta dake tte] yuu-ta John-TOP Mary-NOM get.angry-PAST only that say-PAST “John said that it is only the case that Mary got angry.” b. John-wa [Mary-ga okotta tte dake] yuu-ta John-TOP Mary-NOM get.angry-PAST that-only say- PAST “John said only that Mary got angry.”

Where the complementizer tte is omitted, as in (11), the meaning becomes ambiguous (Kishimoto 2006:344): (11)

John-wa [Mary-ga okotta dake] John-TOP Mary-NOM get.angry-PAST only (=either 10a or 10b)

yuu-ta say- PAST

This ambiguity of meaning can only be explained, according to Kishimoto (2006), if dake is attached to either T or to a null C. In his view, the dual interpretation available in (11) provides supporting evidence for the existence of a phonetically null complementizer in this dialect of Japanese.3 In this section, we have reviewed two recent approaches to null complementizers, the IP approach and the CP PF Merger approach. Both seek to account for the distribution of null complementizers in simple declaratives without appealing to the notion of government; in the former approach, there is no empty C to be governed, while the latter approach provides for an affixal C which must undergo PF merger. In the next section, we turn to data regarding apparent null complementizers in OF. We begin by presenting an overview of the relevant morphosyntactic features of that language. 3. 3.1

OF V2 word order and case system Old French was a null subject matrix V2 language with a dual case system (nominative/oblique). In subordinate clauses, however, canonical V2 word order is generally not found, which is characteristic of an “asymmetric V2 language,”

3

Kishimoto (2006) assumes that the phonetically null complementizer is base-generated. He argues that it can host adverbial particles. He leaves open the question of whether it undergoes PF merger or whether it is an affix

NULL COMPLEMENTIZERS IN OLD FRENCH

23

according to Vance (1997:134).4 The examples in (12) – (13) illustrate V2 matrix word order and the OF case system.5 (12)

V2 Word Order-matrix clause Bon consel aroie good.M.SG.OBL advice.M.SG.OBL would.have.1SG je cier I dear.M.SG.OBL “I would appreciate good advice.” (Aucassin 20.18) (Jensen 1190 §1018)

(13)

Nominative vs. Oblique case: a. Un-s chevalier-s sui a-M.SG.NOM KNIGHT-M.SG.NOM am.1SG pro “I am a knight.” (Lancelot en prose III, 195), (Ménard 1988 §1) b. Si avoit illuec un chevalier so had-3SG there a-M.SG.OBL knight.M.SG.OBL “There was a knight there.” (Clari 76.3) (Jensen 1990 §24)

In (12), the direct object DP, bon consel ‘good advice’, which is in the oblique case, has been fronted; the verb aroie ‘I would have’ occupies the second place (V2) and the subject je ‘I’ is therefore postposed. The example in (13) illustrates the declension difference between the nominative singular masculine noun uns chevaliers ‘a knight’ (13a) and its oblique singular counterpart, un chevalier ‘a knight’ (13b). 3.2

Apparent null complementizers The focus of this paper is another characteristic of OF, namely apparent omission of the complementizer que ‘that,’ a common OF phenomenon which has typically been considered by philologists to be parataxis, or a juxtaposition of two main clauses (cf. Anglade 1965, Einhorn 1974, Foulet 1982, Jensen 1990, Moignet 1988, Nyrop 1930, Togeby 1974). Apparent null complementizers are 4

In subordinate clauses, subject pronouns are also typically overt. See Vance (1997) for discussion. Although a detailed discussion of word order in OF subordinate clauses is outside the scope of the current study, it must be noted that there are some isolated cases of V2 word order as complements to non-bridge verbs. See also Roberts (1993) for discussion. 5 Other scholars have also noted this pattern (cf. Dupuis 1989, Foulet 1980, Jensen 1990 §1027, Ménard 1988 §37, Roberts 1993, Vance 1997). It is interesting to note that this difference of word order in subordinate vs. main clauses is also seen in Modern German, in which the conjunction dass ‘that’ generally heads a subordinate clause with the word order SOV, although in matrix clauses the word order is V2; see especially Webeluth (1992) for detailed discussion.

24

DEBORAH ARTEAGA

possible in OF, unlike in MF) as complements of verbs of opinion/declarative verbs (e.g., croire ‘to believe,’ jurer ‘to swear,’ penser ‘to think, promettre ‘to promise,’ savoir ‘to know,’ vouloir ‘to want’) as illustrated in (14) – (15): (14)

Je cui-t [plus sot de ti n i’ a] I believe-1sg more stupid.M.SG.OBJ of you not there has.3SG pro “I think (that) there isn’t anyone more stupid than you.” (Feuillée 341), (Togeby 1974 § 151)

(15)

Ele se-t bien she knows-3SG well [ce es-t la voie] it is-3SG the.F.SG.NOM way.F.SG.NOM “She really knows (that) it is the way.” (La Chasteleine de Vergi 570) (Foulet §490)

U

In (14), the subordinate clause plus sot de ti n’i a ‘dumber than you’ (literally ‘more dumb than you’) is not headed by the complementizer que. Note that the word order illustrates the XP fronting typical in matrix V2 clauses (cf. 12). Similarly, in (15) que ‘that’ is lacking in the second clause, which is headed by an expletive subject, ce, ‘it’ followed by the verb in second position.6 Apparent null complementizers can also be found in OF after verbs of semblance, as in (16) – (17): U

(16)

De loing sanbloi-t [ce fus-t chastiau-s] from afar seemed-3SG pro it was-3SG-SUB castle-M.SG.NOM “From afar it seemed (that) it was a castle.” (Enéas 7301) (Jensen 1990 §957)

(17)

Ce m’ es-t avi-s it to.me is-3SG opinion-M.SG.NOM [trop i a letre] too.many there has.3SG letter.F.SG.OBL “It seems to me (that) there are too many letters in it.” (Cligés 1392) (Jensen 990 §957)

U

U

In examples (16) – (17), as in (14) – (15) above, no overt complementizer introduces the second clause. The verb in the subordinate clause occupies the

6 Arteaga (1994) and Arteaga & Herschensohn (2004, 2006) argue that expletive subjects (e.g., il ‘it’) in OF are found in matrix clauses where needed to maintain V2 Word order. See Section 4.3 below for discussion.

NULL COMPLEMENTIZERS IN OLD FRENCH

25

second position. In (16) the expletive subject ce heads the phrase, while in (17), the adverb trop ‘too much’ has fronted. Apparent null complementizers are also found in OF subordinate clauses in the subjunctive containing the so-called ‘ne explétif’, or expletive ne, which is to be distinguished from negative ne. This expletive negative element is directly inherited from the Latin conjunction ne, which was used after verbs of fearing, as in (18): (18)

Timeo ne venia-t fear-2sg pro NEG.CONJ come-3SG.SUBJ “I’m afraid that he will come.” (Tobegy 1974 §270.1)

Expletive ne is regularly found in OF after verbs indicating fear, preventing, and doubt; there are vestiges of expletive ne in MF in expressions such as (19): (19)

Je crain-s qu’ il ne vienn-e. I fear-1SG that he NEG.EXPL comes-3SG.SUBJ “I’m afraid that he will come.” (=23)

This expletive ne in OF must be distinguished from negative ne, both syntactically and semantically. In OF, negative ne was clearly an Xo, as shown in (20): (20)

Einsi ne le comand-e pas nostre ordre thus not it commands-3SG not our.M.SG.NOM order.M.SG.NOM “Our order does not command it in this way.” (La Queste 120, 6) (Vance 1997:52)

For our purposes, what is important in OF, is that in complements of verbs indicating fear, preventing, and doubt, expletive ne is commonly found where the subordinate clause is not headed by the complementizer que (cf. Anglade 1965, Einhorn 1975, Foulet 1982, Ménard 1988, Togeby 1974) as illustrated in (21) – (22):7

7

There are examples in Old French of subordinate clauses headed by que that contain an apparent expletive negation: (i) Ge crie-m qu’ il ne me fac-e ennui I fear-1SG that he-M.SG.NOM NEG.EXPL to.me does-3.SG.SUBJ trouble.M.SG.OBL “I fear that he may cause me trouble.” In our view, examples like (i) provide evidence of an early confusion between expletive ne and negative ne. Given our analysis, it must be the case that ne could have two representations, one of an XP and one of an X. Eventually, in the history of French, they merged.

26

DEBORAH ARTEAGA

(21)

Or ne lairai now not will.fail.1SG [ne-m met-e [NEG.EXPL. me put-1SG.SUBJ] en lour baili-e] [in their.F.SG.OBL lordship-F.SG.OBL] “I will not fail to place myself under their lordship.” (La Vie de Saint Alexis 209) (Jensen 1990 §957)

(22)

Gardez [ne vos i fi-ez ja]. be.wary-2PL NEG.EXPL you there trust-2PL.SUBJ pro now “Now be wary of trusting it.’” (Perceval §3622) (Foulet 1974 §491) U

The difference in syntactic function between expletive ne and negative ne can be further illustrated by comparing (22) above with (23) below: (23)

Gard-ez [sans lui ne retorn-ez] watch-2PL.IMPF without him not return-2pl.SUBJ pro “See (that) you don’t come back without him.” (Le Roman de Renart 950) (Einhorn 1974 §156)

We argue that in (22), expletive ne occupies the SPEC of CP, maintaining V2 word order. However, in (23), it is the XP sans lui that has fronted to SPEC, CP. The last structure which we will consider in which apparent null complementizers are found in OF is that of subjunctive main clauses, (cf. Anglade 1965, Brunot 1966, Einhorn 1974, Foulet 1982, Jensen 1990, Moignet 1988, Nyrop 1930, Togeby 1974); as illustrated in (24) – (25): 8 (24)

8

[Or ai-t Dieu-s merchi now has-3SG.SUB God-M.SG.NOM mercy.M.SG.OBL de l’ ame de li] of the.F.SG.OBL soul.F.SG.OBL of her.F.SG.OBL “May God have mercy on her soul!” (La Comtesse de Ponthieu 220 ) (Sebenthall 1876: 44)

According to Grame-Richie (1907), Jensen (1990), and Lerch (1925 vol I), there are only isolated examples of main clause subjunctives with que, before the 13th century, none attested before La chanson de Roland; the word order found is predominantly SVO, as in other subordinate clauses.

NULL COMPLEMENTIZERS IN OLD FRENCH

(25)

27

[A grant honour et a grant to great.M.SG.OBL honor.M.SG.OBL and to great.F.SG.OBL joi-e soi-t il venu-s] joy-F.SG.OBL be-3SG.SUBJ he.M.SG.NOM come-M.SG.NOM “May he come to great honor and to great joy!” (Amis et Amile 70) (Sebenthall 1876:440)

As seen by examples (24) – (25), main clause subjunctives in OF, unlike those in MF, did not obligatorily require que to introduce them; V2 order is invariably found. This is a pattern which we have also seen with subordinate clauses not headed by the complementizer que. In summary, in this section, we have seen that apparent null complementizers are possible in OF in the following syntactic contexts: following verbs of opinion/declarative verbs, after verbs of semblance, as complements of verbs of fearing, doubt and preventing in subordinate clauses in the subjunctive containing the expletive ne, and in subjunctive main clauses. In the next section, we turn to our proposed analysis of apparent null complementizers in OF. 4. 4.1

Analysis of OF Subordinate clauses in OF not headed by que are CPs In our view, the data from OF in (14) – (17) and (24) - (25) provide support for a CP analysis of complementizer phrases not headed by an overt complementizer (cf. Bošković & Lasnik 2003, Kishimoto 2006) , because of the V2 word order found in such clauses. In this way, our analysis is similar to that of Webelhuth (1992) for German subordinate clauses not headed by the complementizer dass ‘that,’ as discussed above in fn. 5. For example, consider (14) above, repeated as (26) below: (26)

Je cuit [CP plus sot de ti [C n’i a [IP pro [I t [VP [Vt [AP t]]]]]]] (=14) B

BU

U

B

B

B

B

B

B

B

B

B

B

B

B

In (26), under a standard analysis of V2 word order, we assume that the XP plus sot de ti ‘dumber than you’ (literally ‘more dumb than you’) has fronted to SPEC, CP. The verb a ‘has’ has undergone V to I to C raising, and the (expletive) subject is unexpressed, yielding V2 word in the second clause. The objective case of the adjective sot ‘dumb’ (nominative soz) in (26) provides further evidence of XP fronting in the subordinate clause. Our analysis has implications regarding the presence or absence of a null complementizer in OF; we turn to this next. 4.2

Against Null C in OF We believe that Bošković & Lasnik’s (2003) analysis of licensing of null complementizers by a PF merger (affix hopping) between the null complementizer and the main clause verb is problematic for a language like OF which undergoes

28

DEBORAH ARTEAGA

V to I (to C) raising, as postulated for all V2 languages. It has been argued independently (Rizzi 1997) that null affixal complementizers do not exist in MF, which explains, in his view, the ungrammaticality of (27): (27)

Je croi-s *(que) Jean viendr-a. I think-1SG *(that) John will.come-3SG “I think (that) John will come.” (Rizzi 1997:320)

Similarly, we assume that null affixal complementizers were not possible in OF. In our view, main clause subjunctives, such as those in (24) – (25), cannot be accounted for if we assume a null complementizer/ affix hopping analysis, because there is no licenser for the null category.9 Rather, under our analysis of (24) – (25), illustrated by (28), we assume V to I to C raising: (28)

[CPOr [C ait [IP Dieus [I t [VP [vt [DP merchi]]]]]]]

(=24)

Given our analysis, there is no empty category to be licensed in (28), as C is filled by V. Although we have argued for a CP analysis of clauses not headed by que in OF, our analysis is nonetheless similar in spirit to the IP analysis of Bošković (1997), Bowers (1987), Doherty (1997), and Webelhuth (1992), in that there is no empty category in C to be licensed, as C is filled by V. Movement of an XP to the SPEC, CP, is forced, in our view, since phrases apparently headed by a null complementizer in OF are in fact lexically selected CPs with an EPP feature in C. We turn to this in the next section. 4.3

EPP in subordinate C It has been argued independently that C in OF has an EPP feature in main clauses (Arteaga & Herschensohn 2004, 2006) and that this feature was lost in the evolution of the French language. As noted by Arteaga (1994), OF, although a null subject language, evinced overt expletive pronouns from the earliest texts. Consider the examples in (29) (Arteaga 1994:142):

9

However, as discussed in fn2 above, Bošković & Lasnik (2003), like Chomsky (2000), (2001), provide evidence for the existence of a null C with an EPP feature. The question then arises as to whether OF subordinate clauses lacking que are headed by a null C with an EPP feature. The possibility for lexically selected null C must exist, in our view, to account for null complementizers in OF relative clauses, although a discussion of such structures is outside the current scope of this paper.

NULL COMPLEMENTIZERS IN OLD FRENCH

(29)

29

Impersonal expressions a. Quant l-i jur-z passe-t when the-NOM.M.SG day-NOM.M.SG passes-3SG ed il fu-t anuitét and it.NOM.N.SG was-3SG night.fallen.NOM.N.SG “When the day passed and it was night.” (La Vie de Saint Alexis 51) b. Et certes mout m 'es-t bel and certainly very to.me is-3SG pro beautiful.NOM.N.SG que vos Estes l-i plus cortoi-s de nos that you are.2pl the-NOM.M.SG most courtly-NOM.M.SG of us “And it certainly pleases me that you are the most courtly one of us.” (Yvain 73-74) (Raynaud de Lage 1975:37)

In (29a) above, the expletive il ‘it’ is overt, whereas in (29b), no expletive is expressed; the XP mout ‘very’ has fronted. Arteaga & Herschensohn (2004, 2006) argue that the EPP feature in matrix C accounts for the distribution of expletives in OF in examples like (29), as well as V2 word order, in that fronting of an XP to SPEC, CP is required to satisfy the uninterpretable EPP feature in C. In (29a), the expletive il satisfies this feature, under this analysis; in (29b), the uninterpretable EPP feature in C is satisfied by the fronting of the XP buenes armes ‘good weapons.’ Now as noted above, in Section 3.1, subordinate clauses in OF are generally not V2, so Arteaga & Herschensohn (2004, 2006) assume that they do not carry this EPP feature which explains the lack of true CP expletives in such clauses. In our view, the fact that V2 order is regularly found in embedded clauses not headed by a complementizer after verbs of believing, of opinion, and of semblance, as in (14) - (17) above (cf. Modern German, as discussed by BoaseBeier & Lodge 2003 and Webelhuth 1992), provides independent support to the existence of a lexically selected EPP feature in subordinate C after these verbs. Following Arteaga & Herschensohn (2004, 2006), we argue that in such cases, the XP fronts to the SPEC, CP to satisfy this EPP feature. As we have seen, in virtually all other contexts with apparent null complementizers in OF, namely after verbs of fearing, preventing and doubt, expletive ne is found, as in (21) – (22). We argue that expletive ne serves to satisfy the EPP feature in C by fronting to the SPEC, CP, thereby maintaining V2 word order, which is normally not found in subordinate clauses in OF. This is illustrated in (30): (30)

Gardez [CP ne [C vos i fiez [IP [I t [ VP [V t]]]]]] B

B

U

U

B

B

B

B

B

B

B

B

B

B

(=22)

30

DEBORAH ARTEAGA

4.4 Predictions 4.4.1 Subordinate expletives and omission of que. As we have discussed, Arteaga & Herschensohn (2004, 2006) argue that true XP expletives do not exist in subordinate clauses in OF because subordinate clauses do not carry the EPP feature. Our analysis in fact predicts that where null complementizers are found, true XP expletives will also be possible. Although further research is needed, it appears that this prediction is borne out by the data, in that expletives appear to be found in such cases only where necessary to maintain V2 word order, as in (14) – (17) above, or, in our analysis, to check off the uninterpretable EPP feature in C. 4.5

Main clause subjunctives Our central claim thus far is that instances of apparent null complementizers in OF are in effect subordinate clauses with a lexically selected EPP feature in C. We have thus far argued in favor of a CP analysis of the subordinate clause; we assume no empty C, so that there is no empty category to be licensed. Our analysis further avoids the necessity of positing an affixal complementizer for OF, with concomitant PF affixing hopping (cf. Bošković & Lasnik 2003). How does our analysis extend to main clause subjunctives, such as (24) – (25)? As discussed above, V2 word order is also found in main clause subjunctive clauses with apparent null complementizers, as illustrated by the structure given in (28). For main clause subjunctives, we assume here a Rizzian C feature (cf. Rizzi 1997) which lexically selects the subjunctive mood in addition to the EPP feature of the subordinate C (cf. MF que Dieu ait merci de son âme = 24). This EPP feature, in turn, forces V to I to C movement, resulting in V2 word order. As C is filled by the verb in such structures, there is no empty category to be licensed in main clause subjunctives. We next turn to whether the two types of clauses are actually instances of parataxis. 4.6

Against parataxis As discussed above, philologists have traditionally analyzed subordinate clauses headed by an apparent null complementizer as a simple juxtaposition of two main clauses, so-called parataxis. In our view, the mood of the subordinate clauses, whether indicative or subjunctive, provides evidence against the traditional parataxis analysis, as it is clearly lexically selected for by the main verb. This can perhaps best be illustrated by verbs in OF which could take either the subjunctive or the indicative; crucially, an apparent null complementizer is possible in either case. Compare (14) above, repeated as (31) below, with (32); in both examples, there is apparent omission of the complementizer que:10 10 An anonymous reviewer raises the question whether the subordinate phrases which take the indicative can be analyzed in terms of parataxis; we argue that since the mood is lexically determined, whether or not it is indicative or subjunctive, that our analysis holds.

NULL COMPLEMENTIZERS IN OLD FRENCH

31

(31)

Je cui-t [plus sot de ti n ’i a] I believe-1SG more stupid.M.SG.OBJ of you not there has.3SG pro “I think (that) there isn’t anyone more stupid than you.” (Feuillée 341), (Togeby 1974 § 151) (=14)

(32)

Cui-t [ne soi-ent mort thinks-3SG pro NEG.EXPL are-3PL.SUBJ dead.M.PL.NOM l-i autre] the-M.PL.NOM others.M.PL.NOM “I think that the others are dead (but I am mistaken).” (Mort Artu 98, 11) (Jensen 1990 §756)

U

U

As shown by (31) above, the verb cuidier ‘to think’ could be followed by the indicative in OF, in this case the present indicative of the verb avoir. However, particularly in cases indicating false belief, the subjunctive was also regularly found after cuidier, explaining the subjunctive mood of the verb soient ‘they are’ in (32) above.11 In our view, the lexically selected mood of the subordinate clause is evidence against a parataxis analysis. We next turn to diachronic development of apparent null complementizers. 5.

Evolution from OF to MF OF and MF differ in several respects. For example, as has been argued by many scholars, word order has changed dramatically from OF to MF. In OF, V2 order was the norm in main clauses, although in subordinate classes SVO order was typically found, a natural evolution from V2 word order (see especially Vance 1997 for detailed discussion). This paper has discussed subordinate clauses in OF, specifically those not headed by an overt que. We have argued contra Jensen (1990), Foulet (1982), Moignet (1976), among others, that such clauses are not instances of parataxis, because their mood is lexically determined. We have adopted Webelhuth’s (1992) analysis of subordinate clauses not headed by dass in German, arguing that these clauses are not headed by a null complementizer, although they are full CPs, which allows for full V2 movement (cf. fn 5 above). Following Arteaga & Herschensohn (2004, 2006), we have accounted for this possibility by positing a lexically selected EPP feature for OF subordinate clauses. The strong tendency in MF to express que in all subordinate clauses must still be explained. 12 While such clauses are clearly CPs in MF, we adopt the 11

Note that ne serves to maintain V2 word order in (32); see Section 3.2 above for discussion. An anonymous reviewer points out that there are cases of que deletion in colloquial Modern French, mostly regional varieties, as noted by Bauche (1946), Connors (1975), and Martineau (1988), among others. We do not address this issue, due to space limitations, but at any rate, there is no evidence of V2 word order in Modern French. 12

32

DEBORAH ARTEAGA

proposal of Arteaga & Herschensohn (2004, 2006) who have argued that the lexically selected matrix EPP feature in C was lost in the evolution from OF to MF, accounting, in their view, for the loss of V2 word order. If the EPP feature in C ceases to exist in subordinate clauses, then it follows that V2 word order has also ceased to exist. We have therefore followed their proposal, arguing that lexically selected EPP in subordinate C was lost diachronically, accounting for the impossibility of null que in MF. Under our analysis, it is this EPP feature, not the possibility of licensing null complementizers, which was lost diachronically; affixal complementizers were therefore possible in neither OF nor MF, which is to be expected in languages with V to I (to C) raising. Evidence for our proposal comes from expletive pronouns. As we have discussed above in Section 4.3, Arteaga & Herschensohn (2004, 2006) argue that true XP expletives do not exist in most subordinate clauses in OF because most do not carry the EPP feature; in fact, only those subordinate clauses selected for by the main verb assign an EPP feature to C. In matrix clauses, Arteaga & Herschensohn (2004, 2006) argue that the EPP feature in matrix C accounts for the distribution of expletives in OF, as well as V2 word order, in that fronting of an XP to SPEC, CP is required to satisfy the uninterpretable EPP feature in C. In (29a), the true expletive il is needed to check off this feature, under this analysis; in (29b), the uninterpretable EPP feature in C is satisfied by the fronting of the XP mout ‘very much.’ They assume that il is merged at the CP phase to satisfy the EPP of C in (29a). As we have discussed above in Section 5, Arteaga & Herschensohn (2004, 2006) motivate their theoretical proposal by appealing to the fact that OF was a null subject language, and as such, had a richer verbal morphology than MF. They claim that the uninterpretable EPP is a direct function of the richness of morphology of a language, the greater the options for satisfying the [+EPP] of C, either by Merge of XP or Xo. Arteaga & Herschensohn (2004, 2006) appeal to the fact that OF was a null subject language, and as such, had a richer verbal morphology than MF. They claim that the uninterpretable EPP correlates directly with the richness of morphology of the three languages: the richer the language (“rich” Latin, “upper middle class” OF, “poor” Modern French), the greater the options for satisfying the [+EPP] of C, either by Merge of XP or Xo. Following many scholars (cf. Foulet 1982, Jensen 1990, Vance 1997), they link the loss of nominal and verbal inflection to the loss of V2 and null subjects in MF. They argue that the richness of overt morphology determines the availability of optional uninterpretable features, and thus we derive the syntax directly from the morphology of the language. Now as noted above, in Section 3.1, subordinate clauses in OF are generally not V2, so Arteaga & Herschensohn (2004, 2006) assume that they lack this EPP feature which explains the lack of true CP expletives in such clauses; in our view, however, this does not apply to subordinate clauses that are lexically selected. Their analysis, in fact, predicts that where null complementizers are

NULL COMPLEMENTIZERS IN OLD FRENCH

33

found in OF, true XP expletives will also be possible. Although further research is needed, it appears that this prediction is borne out by the data, in that expletives appear to be found in such cases only where necessary to maintain V2 word order, or, in their analysis, to check off the uninterpretable EPP feature in C. Finally, with respect to main clause subjunctives, we propose that there is no EPP feature, although there is a Rizzian C feature (cf. Rizzi 1997), which selects for the subjunctive mood, as in (cf. MF que Dieu ait merci de son âme = 24). This explains why in such clauses in MF, V2 order does not exist, and such clauses must be headed by que. 6.

Conclusion In this paper, we began by reviewing previous analyses of null complementizers in English, including Bošković & Lasnik (2003) and Bošković (1997). We have then presented evidence showing that that OF, unlike most varieties of MF, evinced apparent null complementizers after certain classes of verbs, including verbs of believing, appearance, fear, and prevention, and in subjunctive main clauses. We have shown that in clauses not headed by an overt complementizer, V2 word order is found. We have argued for a CP analysis of such clauses (in favor of Bošković & Lasnik 2003, Kishimoto 2006 but against Bošković 1997). These clauses, in our view, are headed by an XP, whose fronting serves to check off uninterpretable EPP, lexically selected for by the main verb or by a Rizzian C feature, (Rizzi 1997) in the case of main clause subjunctives. This XP can also be a true expletive il, in the sense of Arteaga & Herschensohn (2004, 2006), or the negative expletive ne, which, opposed to negative ne, also occupies CP. Our analysis shares the view, espoused by prior IP analyses of subordinate clauses not headed by a complementizer, that there is need to posit a null complementizer in OF clauses not headed by que. We have further argued that a parataxis analysis of the subordinate clause cannot account for the data, due to the lexically selected mood of the subordinate clause. Our analysis accounts not only for the V2 word found in clauses not headed by que in OF, but also for the loss of such clauses in the evolution from OF to MF, as this lexically selected EPP feature was lost diachronically, as argued independently by Arteaga & Herschensohn (2004, 2006). We can further account for main clause subjunctives, which were also not headed by que in OF. For main clause subjunctives, we have assumed here a Rizzian C feature (cf. Rizzi 1997) which lexically selects the subjunctive mood in addition to the EPP feature of the subordinate C (cf. MF que Dieu ait merci de son âme = 24). This EPP feature, in turn, forces V to I to C movement, resulting in V2 word order. As C is filled by the verb in such structures, there is no empty category to be licensed in main clause subjunctives. Diachronically, it is the EPP

34

DEBORAH ARTEAGA

feature of C, not the Rizzian C feature, which is lost, explaining the lack of main clause subjunctives not headed by que in MF. References Anglade, Joseph. 1965. Grammaire élémentaire de l’ancien français. Paris: Armand Colin. Arteaga, Deborah. 1994. “Impersonal Constructions in Old French”. Issues and Theory in Romance Linguistics: Selected Papers from the Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages XXIII (LSRL), DeKalb, IL, 1-4 April 1993, ed. by Michael Mazzolla, 141-156. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press. Arteaga, Deborah & Julia Herschensohn. 2004. “Case, Agreement and Expletives: A Parametric Difference in Old French and Modern French”. Contemporary Approaches to Romance Linguistics: Selected Papers from the 33rd Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL), Bloomington, IN, April 2003, ed. by Julie Auger, J. Clancy Clements & Barbara Vance, 1-16. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Arteaga, Deborah & Julia Herschensohn. 2006. “Il était une fois: Diachronic Development of Expletives, Case, and Agreement from Latin to Modern French”. Historical Romance Linguistics: Retrospective and Perspectives, ed. by Randall Gess & Deborah Arteaga, 267-286. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Bauche, Henri. 1946. Le langage populaire. Paris: Payot. Boase-Beier, Jean & Ken Lodge. 2003. The German Language: A Linguistic Introduction. Malden, MA: Blackwell. Bošković, Željko. 1997. The Syntax of Nonfinite Complementation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Bošković, Željko & Howard Lasnik. 2003. “On the Distribution of Null Complementizers”. Linguistic Inquiry 34.527-546. Bowers, John. 1987. “Extended X-bar Theory, the ECP, and the Left Branch Condition”. Proceedings of the West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (WCCFL), vol. 6, ed. by Megan Crowhurst, 47-62. Stanford, CA: CSLR Publications. Brunot, Ferdinand. 1966. Histoire de la langue française des origines à nos jours, 12 vols. Paris: Librairie Armand Colin. Chomsky, Noam. 2000. “Minimalist Inquiries: The Framework”. Step by Step: Essays on Minimalist Syntax in Honor of Howard Lasnik, ed. by Roger Martin, David Michaels & Juan Uriagereka, 89-155. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Contreras, Heles. 2003. “Wh-Movement without Intermediate Traces”. Ms., University of Washington.

NULL COMPLEMENTIZERS IN OLD FRENCH

35

Doherty, Cathal. 1997. “Clauses without Complementizers: Finite IP Complements”. The Linguistic Review 14.197-220. Dupuis, Fernande. 1989. L’expression du sujet dans les subordonnées en ancien français. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Montreal. Einhorn, E. 1975. Old French: A Concise Handbook. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Epstein, David, Acrisio Pires & T. Daniel Seely. 2005. “EPP in T: More controversial subjects”. Syntax 8.65-80. Foulet, Lucien. 1982. Petite syntaxe de l'ancien français. Paris: Librairie Honoré Champion. Graeme-Ritchie, Robert Lindsay. 1907. Recherches sur la syntaxe de la conjonction «que» en ancien français. Paris: 1907. Jensen, Frede. 1990. Old French and Comparative Gallo-Romance Syntax. Tübingen: Niemeyer. Kishimoto, Hideki. 2006. “On the Existence of Null Complementizers in Syntax”. Linguistic Inquiry 37.339-345. Lerch, Eugene. 1925-1934. Historsiche französische Syntax, 3 vols. Leipzig: Reisland. Martineau, France. 1988. “Variable Deletion of que in the Spoken French of Ottawa-Hull”. Advances in Romance Linguistics, ed. by David Birdsong & Jean-Pierre Montreuil, 275-287. Dordrecht: Foris. Ménard, Pierre. 1988. Syntaxe de l’ancien français. Paris: Bordeaux Éditions Bière. Moignet, Guy. 1976. Grammaire de l’ancien français. Paris: Klincksieck. Nyrop, Kristoffer. 1930-1935. Grammaire historique de la langue française, 6 vols. Copenhagen: Gyldendalske Boghandel. Pesetsky, David Michael. 1995. Zero Syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Postal, Paul. 1974. On Raising: One Rule of English Grammar and its Implications. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Raynaud de Lage, Guy. 1975. Introduction à l’ancien français. Paris: Sedes. Rizzi, Luigi. 1997. “The Fine Structure of the Left Periphery”. Elements of Grammar: Handbook in Generative Syntax, ed. by Liliane Haegeman, 281-337. Dordrecht & Boston: Kluwer. Roberts, Ian. 1993. Verbs and Diachronic Syntax: A Comparative History of English and French. Dordrecht & Boston: Kluwer. Sebenthall, R.E. 1876. Über die Wortstellung in der französische Prosalitteratur des dreizehnten Jahrhunderts. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Göttingen. Stowell, Timothy Angus. 1981. Origins of Phrase Structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Togeby, Knud. 1974. Précis historique de grammaire française. Odense: Akademisk Forlag. Vance, Barbara. 1997. Syntactic Change in Medieval French. Dordrecht & Boston: Kluwer.

36

DEBORAH ARTEAGA

Webelhuth, Gert. 1992. Principles and Parameters of Syntactic Saturation. New York: Oxford University Press.

ON THE LACK OF TRANSPARENCY EFFECTS IN FRENCH

J.-MARC AUTHIER & LISA A. REED The Pennsylvania State University

Cinque (2002) examines those transparency effects that have been claimed to point to the existence of restructuring in French and concludes that quantifier and adverb climbing depend not on restructuring but, rather, on an irrealis context. In this paper, we show that restructuring does not play an active role in explaining the existence of en ‘of-it’ and y ‘there’ climbing or long movement in ‘easy-to-please’ constructions either, which leads to the conclusion that Modern French has no transparency effects of the restructuring kind. We then present arguments against Cinque’s (2004) thesis that verbs of the restructuring class are universally functional verbs. Instead, we adopt the Cinque (2001)/Cardinaletti & Shlonsky (2004) approach according to which restructuring verbs can be merged either as lexical or functional verbs. We argue that this approach should be parameterized to yield three options that account for the cross-dialectal/linguistic variation associated with restructuring.

1.

Introduction The linking of clitic climbing and auxiliary switch as indicators of restructuring in Italian was first postulated by Rizzi (1976) on the basis of paradigms like (1). (1)

a. Maria ha dovuto venirci molte volte. Maria has had to-come-here many times b. Maria c’è dovuta venire molte volte. Maria here-is had to-come many times c. *Maria ci ha dovuto venire molte volte. Maria here has had to-come many times “Maria has had to come here many times.”

Such paradigms indicate that restructuring is a necessary condition for clitic climbing, hence if clitic climbing has applied, auxiliary switch, which is a manifestation of restructuring, is obligatory. As reported in Pearce (1990), there is substantial evidence suggesting that exactly the same situation obtained in Middle French, as the data in (2) illustrate. During that period, French pouvoir ‘can/be able’ and oser ‘dare’ took avoir ‘have’ as their auxiliary, but (as Modern Italian) took the auxiliary être ‘be’ in the context of clitic climbing.

38 (2)

J.-MARC AUTHIER & LISA A. REED

a. dont les biens leur sont peu venir of-which the goods to-them are been-able to-come “of which the goods could come to them” (16C Le Chevalier qui donna sa femme au dyable, ATF III, 450) b. Au parauant onques ennemi n’y estoit osé entrer to before no enemy neg.-there was dared to-enter en armes. in arms “Never before had an enemy dared to enter there armed.” (16C Amyot, Vies (1594 ed.) fol. 401v)

Modern French, however, does not exhibit transparency effects of the clitic climbing variety as can be seen in (3a), nor does it allow auxiliary switch as can be seen in (3b). (3)

a. *Paul les a/est pu voir. Paul them has/is been-able to-see b. *Paul est voulu entrer. Paul is wanted to-enter

In the late 1970’s-early 1980’s, the total sum of this evidence was taken to indicate that French had lost restructuring altogether (cf. Kayne 1980). However, in recent years, it has become a fairly standard assumption in the literature to consider that some transparency effects due to restructuring exist in Modern French. These are: quantifier climbing as in (4), en and y climbing as in (5), long movement in ‘easy-to-please’ constructions as in (6), and adverb climbing as in (7). (4)

a. Tu you b. *Elle she

vas tout are-going all va tout is-going all

devoir apprendre. to-have to-learn avouer mépriser. to-confess to-despise

(5)

a. J’y voudrais aller. I- there would-like to-go b. *Il y a cru avoir dormi. he there has believed to-have slept

(6)

a. ?(Pour moi), ce livre serait impossible à commencer for me this book would-be impossible to to-begin à lire aujourd’hui. to to-read today

ON THE LACK OF TRANSPARENCY EFFECTS IN FRENCH

39

b. *Ce genre de livre est difficile à promettre de lire. this type of book is difficult to to-promise of to-read (7)

a. ?Vous avez mal dû raccrocher. you must improperly have hung-up b. *Il a mal dit avoir mangé. he has poorly said to-have eaten

Cinque (2002) argues, convincingly in our view, that quantifier climbing and adverb climbing depend not on restructuring but rather, on an irrealis context. This leaves as possible evidence for restructuring in French en and y climbing and long movement in ‘easy-to-please’ constructions. In this paper, we will first demonstrate that this evidence is not sufficiently reliable to warrant the assumption that Modern French has restructuring. We will then discuss how this lack of evidence is to be interpreted in light of recent theories of restructuring. Finally, we will argue that the cross-linguistic variation tied to restructuring can be made to follow from a parameterized version of the Cinque (2001)/Cardinaletti & Shlonsky (2004) approach. 2.

The case of en and y climbing and ‘easy-to-please’ constructions Let us consider first en and y climbing, taking as a point of departure the paradigm in (8) and (9), given in Cinque (2002). (8)

a. J’en voudrais voir beaucoup. I of-them would-like to-see a-lot b. J’y voudrais aller. I there would-like to-go

(9)

a. *Il en a dit avoir vu trois. he of-them has said to-have seen three b. *Il y a dit être resté. he there has said to-be stayed c. *Il en a cru aimer beaucoup. he of-them has believed to-love a-lot d. *Il y a cru avoir dormi. he there has believed to-have slept

This type of paradigm is taken by Cinque to illustrate a restructuring effect in the sense that en and y climbing appears to be possible with verbs like ‘want’, ‘must’, ‘may/can’, ‘dare’, ‘finish’, etc., which correspond to restructuring verbs in Italian and is impossible with verbs like ‘concede’, ‘say’, ‘believe’, ‘admit’, ‘declare’, etc., which correspond to non-restructuring verbs in Italian. However,

40

J.-MARC AUTHIER & LISA A. REED

the paradigm in (8) and (9) cannot be considered solid evidence in favor of restructuring for two reasons. First, sentences like those in (8) are usually judged to no longer be possible in spoken French (as first pointed out in Kayne 1975:chap.2). Such sentences have, however, been used in literary works and journalistic prose as recently as the second half of the XXth century along with instances of clitic climbing involving accusative pronominal clitics. The examples in (10), taken from Grevisse (1988), illustrate this point. (10)

a. [...] Marx, qui en veut démontrer l’action [...] Marx who of-it wants to-show the-influence (E. Faral in Romania, 1952, p.264) b. On n’y peut pas chercher une base suffisante. one there can not to-look-for a basis sufficient (M. Roques in Romania, 1955, p.406) c. Sa vie, il la pouvait citer en exemple. his life he it-could to-hold-up as example (M. Toesca in Le Figaro, June 4, 1971)

The sporadic presence of clitic climbing in literary French explains why sentences like (8) are often judged to be acceptable by native speakers. It does not, however, fully explain the perceived contrast between (8) and (9). But how reliable are such intuitions? Again judging from the data made available by literary works, it is, in fact, doubtful that clitic climbing is systematically restricted to restructuring verbs. Consider in this respect the examples in (11), collected by Grevisse (1988), which display clitic climbing with the nonrestructuring verb ‘believe’. (11)

a. Les malices que j’y croyais lire the roguishness that I-there believed to-read (F. Marceau, Années courtes, p.112, 1968) b. Pour ne pas se placer tout à fait où je l’avais in-order-to not self position exactly where I it-had cru voir [...] believed to-see (Jouhandeau, in Le Figaro littéraire, July 2, 1955)

Presumably, such sentences were thought to be grammatical by the authors who wrote them yet these judgments are at odds with the ungrammatical status attributed by Cinque’s informants to (9c) and (9d), two examples also involving clitic climbing with the non-restructuring verb ‘believe’. Such discrepancies are not altogether unexpected if we are dealing with an archaism since an archaism is, by definition, no longer part of the productive grammar of a speaker. As pointed

ON THE LACK OF TRANSPARENCY EFFECTS IN FRENCH

41

out by a reviewer, examples like (11) were perhaps an attempt by the writer to produce what s/he perceived as a more ‘elegant’ or ‘formal’ register, which resulted in an ungrammatical yet comprehensible output. Either way, it seems clear that clitic climbing cannot be considered to be reliable evidence in favor of restructuring in Modern French. We turn next to instances of long movement in French ‘easy-to-please’ constructions. Such constructions generally do not allow the gap they contain to appear in any kind of embedded clause selected by the infinitive complement to the adjective of the ‘tough’-class, as shown in (12) and (13). (12)

a. Il sera difficile d’admettre it will-be difficult of-to-admit b. *Ce vase sera difficile à this vase will-be difficult of

qu’on a cassé ce vase. that-we have broken this vase admettre qu’on a cassé. to-admit that we have broken

(13)

a. Il sera difficile de demander à it will-be difficult of to-ask to b. *Ces documents seront difficiles these documents will-be difficult à examiner. to to-examine

examiner ces documents. to-examine these documents à demander to to-ask

However, as Rizzi (1982) observes, in Italian, the gap contained in an ‘easy-toplease’ construction can, in fact, be two infinitives distant provided that the higher infinitive belongs to the class of restructuring verbs. This is illustrated in (14): (14)

a. Questa canzone è facile da cominciare a cantare [e]. this song is easy of to-begin to to-sing b. *Questo lavoro è facile da promettere di finire [e]. this work is easy of to-promise of to-finish

Kayne (1989) points out that Rizzi’s generalization seems to have some validity for French as well, given the ungrammaticality of examples like (13b) versus the marginal acceptability of the sentences in (15). (15)

a. ?Ce genre d’article est difficile à savoir this kind of-article is difficult to know b. ?(Pour moi), ce livre serait impossible (for me) this book would-be impossible à lire [e] aujourd’hui. to to-read today

où classer [e]. where to-file à commencer to to-begin

42

J.-MARC AUTHIER & LISA A. REED

Cinque (2002) also takes long movement in French ‘easy-to-please’ constructions to be evidence that restructuring effects exist in that language. Upon closer examination, however, the evidence is not as compelling as it may first appear. First, even if we restrict ourselves to the only two examples given in the literature to illustrate long movement in ‘easy-to-please’ constructions, namely those in (15), it is remarkable that the acceptability of examples like (15a) is sensitive to the type of wh-phrase which appears in the lower infinitival. For example, the degraded status of (16b) and (17b), as opposed to (15a), suggests that much more is involved than the class membership of the higher infinitival verb. (16)

a. Il est difficile de savoir quand/à quelle période de l’année it is difficult of to-know when/at what time of the-year élaguer ces arbustes. to-trim these shrubs b. ?*Ces arbustes sont difficles à savoir quand/à quelle these shrubs are difficult to to-know when/at what période de l’année élaguer. time of the-year to-trim

(17)

a. Il est difficile de savoir jusqu’à quel point croire it is difficult of to-know up-to what extent to-believe ce genre de personne. this kind of person b. ?*Ce genre de personne est difficile à savoir this kind of person is difficult to to-know jusqu’à quel point croire. up-to what extent to-believe

Second, one can construct examples parallel to (15b), except for the fact that the higher infinitive belongs to the class of non-restructuring verbs, and obtain from native speakers similar grammaticality judgments. So, for example, most of our informants did not report a significant contrast in grammaticality between (15b) and the sentences in (18), all of them being judged to be marginally acceptable. (18)

a. ?Le bon vin, c’est difficile à renoncer à boire. the good wine it’s difficult to to-give-up to to-drink b. ?Ce genre de demande est impossible à refuser this kind of request is impossible to to-refuse d’approuver. of-to-approve

ON THE LACK OF TRANSPARENCY EFFECTS IN FRENCH

43

c. ?Ce genre de mensonge est difficile à admettre this kind of lie is difficult to to-admit avoir promulgué. to-have promulgated While the contrast between sentences like (13b) and those in (15) and (18) remains unexplained, it seems clear that restructuring does not play an active role in the creation of such paradigms. 3.

French and the restructuring/non-restructuring distinction We turn now to the question of whether French has restructuring despite the fact that no transparency effects that can be tied to restructuring can be found in this language. The answer to this question depends, in fact, on the particular analysis of restructuring one considers. Roberts (1997) argues that restructuring verbs (VR) have in common the special syntactic property of triggering the raising of the T contained in their CP complement to either the T position or the V position of the clause in which they are merged, as illustrated in (19). This has the consequence of making the latter accessible to otherwise local operations (such as clitic placement) in the lower clause as the two clauses are combined into the same extended projection. (19)

...[AgrS [VRVinf +T] VR] ...[CP ...[AgrSP ...[AgrS Vinf] ...

An interesting feature of this analysis is that it predicts that Modern French lacks restructuring because infinitival AgrS has weak V-features, which means that the infinitival verb + T cannot move to the restructuring verb as in (19) without skipping the lower AgrS in violation of the Head Movement Constraint. Although it crucially depends on Agr phrases, whose status is somewhat controversial, this type of analysis is consistent with the evidence discussed in this paper. Head movement accounts of restructuring, however, face a number of challenges, discussed in Cardinaletti & Shlonsky (2004). Such challenges have led a number of scholars to explore an altogether different type of account, one whose basic tenet is that restructuring verbs are not lexical verbs taking CP complements, as first proposed by Strozer (1976). For example, Cinque (2004) explores the possibility that restructuring verbs are universally always functional verbs that appear with infinitives in a monoclausal configuration like (20). This strong claim entails, of course, that Modern French does have restructuring even though it does not seem to have transparency effects of the relevant kind. (20)

[FP VR...[VP Vinf ZP]]

44

J.-MARC AUTHIER & LISA A. REED

We will now proceed to show that Cinque’s position is untenable. One of the most intriguing pieces of evidence Cinque (2004) adduces in favor of his hypothesis is the fact that when restructuring verbs co-occur, they appear to be subject to a strict ordering even in the absence of transparency effects. So, for instance, when the verb ‘tend’, which encodes the so-called predispositional aspect, and the verb ‘want’, which encodes volitional modality, co-occur, the order is rigidly ‘tend’ before ‘want’ as shown in (21). (21)

a. Patrick tend à vouloir tout faire lui-même. Patrick tends to to-want everything to-do him-self b. *Patrick veut tendre à tout faire lui-même. Patrick wants to-tend to everything to-do him-self

Contrasts of this kind are taken by Cinque to reflect an ordering of the functional heads that harbor the two restructuring verbs. He reasons that if such verbs could also be lexical, it would not be clear how they could determine the choice of verb of their sentential complements, hence he assumes that they are always functional. This argument is, however, invalidated by the fact that it is possible to construct examples like (22) that show that the same ordering constraint obtains across clausal boundaries. (22)

?*Jean veut que Pierre tende à tout faire lui-même. Jean wants that Pierre tend to everything to-do him-self

Further, a consequence of the idea that restructuring verbs are always functional is that, like auxiliary verbs, they should have no arguments of their own. This is, in fact, what Cinque assumes. This means that even restructuring verbs like ‘want’ which are standardly thought of as subject control verbs inherit, just like auxiliary verbs, their “subject” from the infinitival lexical verb with which they co-occur. This view has undesirable consequences, however. Consider in this respect the French modal verbs devoir and falloir which both encode deontic modality (obligation) and are assumed by Cinque (2002) to belong to the class of restructuring verbs. As can be seen in (23), falloir, (but not devoir) occurs in contexts of non-obligatory control, just like be fun in English. (23)

a. Il faut/*doit faire attention où on marche ici. it must to-pay attention where one walks here “One must be careful where one steps here.” b. It is fun to play baseball.

ON THE LACK OF TRANSPARENCY EFFECTS IN FRENCH

45

Consider now the paradigm in (24). (24)

a. De par la loi, il doit y avoir du savon dans as per the law there must be some soap in toutes les toilettes publiques. all the toilets public b. De par la loi, il faut qu’il y ait du savon as per the law it is-necessary that-there be some soap dans toutes les toilettes publiques. in all the toilets public c. *De par la loi, il faut y avoir du as per the law it is-necessary (for there) to-be some savon dans toutes les toilettes publiques. soap in all the toilets public

If we take the expletive subject of y avoir ‘there be’ to be inherited by devoir via raising in (24a) but not by falloir in (24c), as the complement to falloir is a CP containing a PRO, the ungrammaticality of (24c) is expected since PRO can never be expletive. (Note that there is nothing wrong with falloir taking a sentential complement with an overt expletive subject as (24b) shows). If, on the other hand, we adopt Cinque’s (2004) view that restructuring verbs are always functional and inherit the subject of the infinitive, the contrast between (24a) and (24c) remains mysterious or, to put it differently, the distinction between raising and control is lost. Another verb of the restructuring class that constitutes a challenge to Cinque’s (2004) hypothesis is Italian volere/French vouloir ‘want’. First, as Cinque points out, in contexts with volere, adverbs that can only occur once in a single clause such as ‘already’ and ‘always’ can occur twice if no transparency effects obtain but only once in the presence of transparency effects. This is illustrated in (25). (25)

a. Maria vorrebbe già averlo già lasciato. Maria would-want already him-to-have already left b. *Maria lo vorrebbe già aver già Maria him would-want already to-have already lasciato. left “Maria already would like to have already left him.”

Paradigms such as (25) suggest, of course, that the presence of transparency effects signals a monoclausal structure where volere is a functional verb, while the absence of transparency effects signals a biclausal structure where volere, being a

46

J.-MARC AUTHIER & LISA A. REED

lexical verb under V, takes a CP complement. The fact that volere appears to have lexical usages; that is, it takes a DP or a CP internal argument as in (26), also militates in favor of the claim that it cannot always be a functional verb. (26)

a. Maria vuole una bicicletta. “Maria wants a bicycle.” b. Gianni vuole che Maria resti. Gianni wants that Maria stay “Gianni wants Maria to stay.”

Cinque (2004) addresses these potential problems as follows. First, he assumes that volere does not take a direct object but rather, a verbal complement with a null head that can be paraphrased as HAVE in (26a) and OBTAIN in (26b). On this view, it is not volere, which is a functional verbal element, but the phonologically null lexical verbal head HAVE or OBTAIN that takes the DP or CP as its object, as illustrated in (27). (27)

a. Maria vuole [VP HAVE [DP una bicicletta]] b. Gianni vuole [VP OBTAIN [CP che Maria resti]]

When volere is followed by an infinitive, there are two possibilities: either the infinitive occupies the V slot of HAVE in (27) as illustrated in (28a), or it is part of an infinitival CP clause complement to the abstract verb OBTAIN as in (28b). (28)

a. Gianni [FP vuole [VP restare]] b. Gianni [FP vuole [VP OBTAIN [CP PRO restare]]]

Cinque is now in a position to correctly predict the facts in (25). Clitic climbing is only compatible with the structure in (28a), a monoclausal structure, hence only one adverb is allowed. The presence of two adverbs in (25b) signals a biclausal structure like (28b), a structure which disallows clitic climbing because the latter is clause bounded, hence (25b) is correctly predicted to be ungrammatical. We will now show, however, that Cinque’s treatment makes the wrong predictions with respect to French. In cases like (29a), French vouloir ‘want’ must, according to Cinque’s analysis, be associated with the structure in (29b). (29)

a. Jean veut cette moto. Jean wants that motorcycle b. Jean veut [VP HAVE [DP cette moto]]

One can, of course, cliticize the internal DP argument in (29a), in which case the structure is as in (30).

ON THE LACK OF TRANSPARENCY EFFECTS IN FRENCH

(30)

47

Jean lai veut [VP HAVE [DP ei]] Jean it wants

Notice now that (30) is an instance of clitic climbing; in fact, this is what Cinque assumes for similar examples in Italian. Modern French does not, however, allow clitic climbing, which means that accounting for the grammaticality of (30) versus the ungrammaticality of the structurally parallel (according to Cinque’s theory) (31) becomes problematic. (31) *Jean lai veut [VP acheter [DP ei]] (cf. Jean veut l’acheter.) Jean it wants to-buy Jean wants it-to-buy If, on the other hand, one assumes that in French all restructuring verbs, including vouloir, are lexical verbs, then the contrast between (30) and (31) follows from the resulting structures in (32), as does the presence of the two adverbs toujours ‘always’ in (33): (32)

a. Jean lai veutj [VP ej [DP ei]] b. *Jean lai veutj [VP ej [CP PRO acheter ei]]

(33)

Jean veut toujours [PRO toujours dire la vérité] Jean wants always always to-tell the truth

It thus appears that verbs of the restructuring class must be allowed, at least in some cases, to be lexical rather than functional. In fact, both Cinque (2001) and Cardinaletti & Shlonsky (2004) argue that restructuring verbs admit two distinct possibilities. They can either be merged under V and take a CP complement or they can be inserted in the functional head position, the semantic content of which they happen to match. 4.

On the cross-linguistic status of restructuring Assuming that this approach to restructuring is basically correct, how then is the lack of transparency effects in Modern French to be interpreted? There are two basic possibilities. First, we could hypothesize that Modern French, just like Italian and Spanish allows verbs of the restructuring class to be merged either as lexical or functional verbs. This is possible on the assumption that the option of inserting such verbs in the functional domain is a necessary but not sufficient condition for transparency effects to obtain. This hypothesis leaves open the question of why French lost transparency effects in the XVIIth century, however. It also seems to entail that the dual lexical/functional status of restructuring verbs is universal or, to put it differently, that UG does not allow languages to select more restrictive options for restructuring verbs (e.g., treat them as exclusively

48

J.-MARC AUTHIER & LISA A. REED

lexical or as exclusively functional). This is because, given the absence of transparency effects in Modern French, the language learner does not have access to positive evidence that restructuring verbs can have functional status and must therefore rely on an invariant principle of UG to have access to this knowledge. While this is not an outright impossibility, it is nevertheless somewhat surprising given the numerous instances in which options made available by UG lead to parametric choices in natural language. There is, however, a more straightforward, less problematic interpretation of the facts, one that consists in allowing the dual lexical/functional status of restructuring verbs to be subject to parameterization, resulting in the three basic options in (34). (34)

a. Option A: restructuring verbs are either lexical or functional. b. Option B: restructuring verbs are lexical. c. Option C: restructuring verbs are functional.

Note first that of the three options in (34), Option A is the unmarked one, while Option B and Option C are more restrictive. Further, the possibility exists that the class of restructuring verbs may be divisible among options within a given language or dialect of a language. This, it seems to us, is the situation that obtains in Italian: while most Italian dialects select Option A for the entire class of restructuring verbs, for some speakers, there is a subclass of desideratives (including desiderare ‘desire’ and preferire ‘prefer’) that falls under Option B, hence such verbs are incompatible with transparency effects. English also appears to exhibit a split of this type as desideratives such as want arguably fall under Option B whereas the subset of non-periphrastic modal verbs known as modal auxiliaries falls under Option C. Diachronic change can also be viewed in this light. The complete loss of transparency effects in French can now be simply characterized as a shift from Option A (Middle French) to Option B (Modern French), a shift encompassing the class of restructuring verbs as a whole.

References Cardinaletti, Anna & Ur Shlonsky. 2004. “Clitic Positions and Restructuring in Italian”. Linguistic Inquiry 35.519-557. Cinque, Guglielmo. 2001. “Restructuring and the Order of Aspectual and Root Modal Heads”. Current Studies in Italian Syntax: Essays Offered to Lorenzo Renzi, ed. by Guglielmo Cinque & Giampaolo Salvi, 137-155. Amsterdam: Elsevier. Cinque, Guglielmo. 2002. “A Note on ‘Restructuring’ and Quantifier Climbing in French”. Linguistic Inquiry 33.617-636. Cinque, Guglielmo. 2004. “Restructuring and Functional Structure”. Structures and Beyond: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, vol. 3, ed. by Adriana Belletti, 132-191. New York: Oxford University Press.

ON THE LACK OF TRANSPARENCY EFFECTS IN FRENCH

49

Grevisse, Maurice. 1988. Le bon usage: Douzième édition refondue par André Goosse. Paris: Duculot. Kayne, Richard. 1975. French Syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Kayne, Richard. 1980. “Vers une solution d’un problème grammatical: *Je l’ai voulu lire, j’ai tout voulu lire”. Langue française 46.32-40. Kayne, Richard. 1989. “Null Subjects and Clitic Climbing”. The Null Subject Parameter, ed. by Osvaldo Jaeggli & Kenneth Safir, 239-261. Dordrecht & Boston: Kluwer. Pearce, Elizabeth. 1990. Parameters in Old French Syntax: Infinitival Complements. Dordrecht & Boston: Kluwer. Rizzi, Luigi. 1976. “Ristrutturazione”. Rivista di Grammatica Generativa 1.1-54. Rizzi, Luigi. 1982. Issues in Italian Syntax. Dordrecht: Foris. Roberts, Ian. 1997. “Restructuring, Head Movement, and Locality”. Linguistic Inquiry 28.423-460. Strozer, Judith. 1976. Clitics in Spanish. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles.

ON THE SYLLABIFICATION OF PREVOCALIC /w/ IN JUDEO-SPANISH *

TRAVIS G. BRADLEY University of California, Davis

Spanish prevocalic glides belong to the syllable nucleus except when no less sonorous segment is available to serve as onset (Harris 1983, Harris & Kaisse 1999, Hualde 1989, 1991). Phonological innovations in a particular group of Judeo-Spanish dialects point to a novel generalization regarding the labiovelar glide, namely that /w/ is realized as secondary labialization on a preceding consonant. Evidence supporting this structural innovation comes from an asymmetry in the distribution of labialization. In these dialects, prevocalic /w/ strengthens to a labialized dorsal obstruent in syllable-initial position (ɡʷéso ‘bone’) but is realized as a secondary articulation on a preceding labial (pʷéðe ‘can’) or dorsal (kʷé.ðɾa ‘rope’). Labialized coronals are disallowed and show several historical reflexes depending on the coronal’s manner of articulation: nasal place assimilation (nwe>mʷe), medial vowel epenthesis (twe>tuɣʷe), and prothesis (swe>esʍʷe). These innovations are analyzed in Optimality Theory in terms of interacting markedness and faithfulness constraints. The proposed account has implications for the issue of possible repair strategies, a.k.a. the “too-many-solutions” problem.

1.

Introduction In modern Spanish (henceforth, MS), prevocalic glides syllabify as onsets when no preceding consonant is available (1a) but are part of the syllable nucleus after a consonantal onset (1b) (Harris 1983, Harris & Kaisse 1999, Hualde 1989, 1991). (1)

*

a. [G[V]N]σ

b. [C[GV]N]σ

For helpful comments and discussion, I would like to thank Gary Baker, Sonia Colina, CarlosEduardo Piñeros, and audience members at the 37th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages, held March 15-18, 2007, by the University of Pittsburgh. This paper has also benefited from the comments of three anonymous reviewers. I am responsible for any shortcomings. This research was partially supported by funding from a Small Grant in Aid of Research, “Variation and Change in the Sound System of Judeo-Spanish” (Academic Senate, UC Davis).

TRAVIS G. BRADLEY

52

Patterns of glide fortition provide supporting evidence for the difference in glide syllabification. In most dialects, the glides exhibit strengthened variants in syllable-initial position (2a) but not after a tautosyllabic consonant (2b). (2)

a. kɾe.jó, kɾe.ʝó, kɾe.ɟó, kɾe.ʒó, kɾe.ʤó wé.so, ɡʷé.so b. kɾe.sjó pwén.te twéɾ.to kwéɾ.ða

creyó hueso creció puente tuerto cuerda

‘believed’ ‘bone’ ‘grew’ ‘bridge’ ‘twisted’ ‘rope’

Recent studies in phonological acquisition suggest the possibility of microparametric variation in the syllabification of postconsonantal glides in Spanish (Anderson 2002, Barlow 2005, Kehoe et al. 2008). For some children, glides seem to pattern as onsets even after a preceding consonant (3a). Another logical possibility, amply attested in other languages, is the realization of the glide as a secondary articulation on the preceding consonant (3b). Whereas the glide belongs to a complex onset cluster in (3a), it is part of a complex segment in (3b). (3)

a. [CG[V]N]σ

b. [CG[V]N]σ

This paper offers further evidence of (3b), based on phonological innovations involving the labiovelar glide in Judeo-Spanish (henceforth, JS) dialects. Data show that /w/ forms a complex segment with preceding labial or dorsal consonants but not with coronals. Inherited words that would have contained labialized coronals now show several historical reflexes depending on the manner of articulation of the coronal consonant. I propose an account of these innovations in Optimality Theory in terms of interacting markedness and faithfulness constraints. The analysis has implications for a larger theoretical debate regarding the overgeneration of possible repair strategies for a given structural constraint. Factorial typology predicts that vowel epenthesis can serve as a back-up repair for a markedness constraint that is otherwise responsible for place assimilation. Some researchers have denied the typological existence of such a repair, but empirical counterevidence comes from the innovations in coronal-/w/ sequences in JS: coronal /n/ undergoes regressive place assimilation, but non-nasals are resyllabified into a preceding syllable by vowel epenthesis. 2.

Data In a survey of synchronic variation within JS, Quintana (2006) identifies four dialect zones differing in the treatment of prevocalic /w/, summarized in Table 1. The present study focuses on type A varieties, which show strengthened velar variants word-initially and after coronal stops and affricates. For simplicity,

PREVOCALIC /w/ IN JUDEO-SPANISH

53

the label ‘JS’ henceforth denotes type A varieties, unless stated otherwise. Data sources include Crews (1935), Crews & Vinay (1939), Luria (1930), Penny (1992, 2000), Quintana (2006), Sala (1971), and Wagner (1914). Dialect zone of JS A. Turkey, southeast Bulgaria, Greece, Macedonia, Jerusalem B. Greece, north Bulgaria, Rhodes, Jerusalem C. Bosnia, Serbia, Croatia, Romania, south central Bulgaria, Greece, Israel

Word-initial

After coronal stop/affricate

ɡw-

-uɣw-

bw- ~ ɡw-

-uv-

ɡw-

-w-

w-

-w-

D. Hebron, Jerusalem, Salonika

Table 1: Diatopic variation in prevocalic /w/ (Quintana 2006:33-40)

Diphthongization of the Latin short stressed /o/ ultimately produced /we/ in words like MS hueso < Latin ossum. Unstressed [o] and stressed [wé] are also found in morphophonological alternations in MS, e.g., [o.léɾ] oler ‘to smell’ vs. [wé.le] huele ‘(it) smells’, [po.ðéɾ] poder ‘to be able’ vs. [pwé.ðe] puede ‘can’. The examples in (4) illustrate syllable-initial glide strengthening in JS and MS. In many MS varieties, there is variation between [we] and [ɡwe]/[ɣwe] in the absence of a preceding tautosyllabic consonant (Hualde 2005:171-172). In JS, however, syllable-initial [ɡwe]/[ɣwe] is obligatory and even reflected in the spelling: guele, gueko, etc. (cf. MS huele, hueco).1 (4)

JS ɡwé.le ɡwé.ko ɡwéɾ.ta ɡwé.vo ɡwé.so

MS wé.le ~ ɡwé.le wé.ko ~ ɡwé.ko wéɾ.ta ~ ɡwéɾ.ta wé.βo ~ ɡwé.βo wé.so ~ ɡwé.so

‘(it) smells’ ‘hollow’ ‘garden’ ‘egg’ ‘bone’

In both MS and JS, [w] appears after labial and dorsal onsets, as in (5a,b). Whereas Latin short stressed /o/ is the etymological source of [we]/[ɡwe] in (4), the word-initial [ɡw] in (5b) derives from the /w/ of Germanic wardan.

1 In most JS dialects, the voiced obstruents /bdɡ/ show the same allophonic distribution as in Peninsular Hispano-Romance varieties, with approximant [βðɣ] appearing in most positions and stop [bdɡ] only after a pause or nasal, and also after a lateral in the case of /d/ (Penny 1992:137). In the JS and MS data, strengthened /w/ shows the same distribution between [ɣw] and [ɡw].

TRAVIS G. BRADLEY

54 (5)

JS a. pwé.ðe bwen.dá(ð) fwén.te b. kwé.ðɾa ɡwa.ðɾáɾ

MS pwé.ðe bon.dáð (cf. bwé.no ‘good’) fwén.te kwéɾ.ða ɡwaɾ.ðáɾ

‘can’ ‘goodness’ ‘fountain’ ‘rope’ ‘to keep’

In JS, [w] is often inserted after labials and dorsals in the context of a preceding /u/, as seen in phrasal alternations (6a) and in word-internal contexts (6b). Quintana (2006:38) documents the innovative form [mwax.ke.mé], based on Turkish mahkeme ‘trial, hearing’. Wagner (1914:114) explains the development of [w] on labials and velars after /u/ in Istanbul JS as a carryover effect of lip rounding. Crews & Vinay (1939:222) observe strong labialization of velar [ɣ] in contact with /u/ in Salonika JS. To my knowledge, glide insertion after coronals is not attested in the descriptive literature. (6)

JS a. tu pwá.ðɾe el pá.ðɾe tu mwá.ðɾe la má.ðɾe uŋ ɡwá.to es.te ɣá.to b. a.sú.kwaɾ xa.nu.kwá le.ʧú.ɣwa lu.ɣwáɾ taɾ.tú.ɣwa

MS tu pá.ðɾe el pá.ðɾe tu má.ðɾe la má.ðɾe uŋ ɡá.to es.te ɣá.to a.sú.kaɾ xa.nu.ká le.ʧú.ɣa lu.ɣáɾ toɾ.tú.ɣa

‘your father’ ‘the father’ ‘your mother’ ‘the mother’ ‘a cat’ ‘this cat’ ‘sugar’ ‘Hanukah’ ‘lettuce’ ‘place’ ‘turtle’

MS and JS differ with respect to coronal-/w/ sequences. In MS, [w] shows no sensitivity to the place of articulation of a preceding consonant and can appear freely after labials, coronals, and dorsals. In JS, however, the glide no longer appears after coronals, and inherited words that would have contained coronal-[w] sequences now have several historical reflexes.2 First, medial vowel epenthesis and glide strengthening are observed in sequences that contained an initial stop (7a), affricate (7b), or trill (7c). Second, sequences containing /l/ or /s/ show prothesis, with fortition of the glide to [ɣw] after [l] (8a) and to partially voiceless [ʍw] after [s] (8b).3 2

For a discussion of the relative chronology of most of these changes, see Quintana (2006:37-40). I transcribe the JS forms in (8b) following Penny (1992:137; see also Crews 1935:228), who argues that /w/ after word-initial /s/ was initially reinforced to a voiceless labiovelar fricative [ʍ],

3

PREVOCALIC /w/ IN JUDEO-SPANISH

(7)

(8)

55

JS a. tu.ɣwéɾ.to tu.ɣwéɾ.se tɾu.ɣwé.no, tuɾ.ɣwé.lo du.ɣwé.le du.ɣwéɾ.me b. ʤu.ɣwé.ɣo ʤu.ɣwé.ves c. ru.ɣwé.ða

MS twéɾ.to twéɾ.se tɾwé.no dwé.le dwéɾ.me xwé.ɣo xwé.βes rwé.ða

‘twisted’ ‘twists’ ‘thunder’ ‘hurts’ ‘sleeps’ ‘game’ ‘Thursday’ ‘wheel’

JS a. al.ɣwéŋ.ɡa (S, S>O) students

O irmão the brother *Viu-oi saw him

do Paulo of Paulo o irmão the brother

viu-oi. saw him do Paulo of Paulo

HELES CONTRERAS

86

In my discussion I will use Spanish examples. Consider first the argument based on quantifier scope. The Spanish version of Costa’s example (40) is also ambiguous in terms of quantifier scope: (i)

Leyeron read

un libro a book

dos alumnos. two students

However, if un libro “a book” is replaced by a different quantifier, say pocos libros “few books”, this is no longer the case: the only possible interpretation assigns wide scope to the subject. Consider now the following VSO sentences: (ii)

a. Leyeron dos alumnos un libro. read two students a book b. Leyeron dos alumnos pocos libros. read two students few books

In (iia), either the subject or the object may have wide scope, while in (iib) only the subject has wide scope. Since in (iia), the object clearly does not ccommand the subject, that cannot be the basis for its ability to have wide scope. So the facts in Costa’s (40) do not establish that the object c-commands the subject. See Beghelli (1993) and Beghelli & Stowell (1997) for the properties of different quantifiers. Consider now the Principle C effects illustrated in (41). In (41a), there is no violation of principle C of the Binding Theory because the object (actually a clitic) pronoun does not c-command the DP Paulo contained in the subject DP o irmão do Paulo “the brother of Paulo.” Since in (41b) coreference between the object clitic and Paulo is disallowed, Costa concludes that the object c-commands the subject. Consider, however, what happens if we have an anaphor in object position: (iii)

(No sé si) se conoce a sí misma María. “I don’t know if Mary knows herself.”

There are two issues here: a) how does the anaphor sí misma comply with principle A?; b) why is there no violation of principle C? Under a movement theory, the first problem might be solved by resorting to reconstruction. It is not clear, however, how the second problem can be solved under the view that the object c-commands the subject. If María and sí misma “herself” are coreferential, how is it that (iii) does not violate principle C? It must be, contrary to Costa’s claim, that the object does not c-command the subject in VOS sentences, and that the ill-formedness of Costa’s (41b) has a different explanation, perhaps related to

WORD ORDER AND MINIMALISM

87

the fact that the potential antecedent of the object pronoun carries the main stress and is interpreted as focus. Consider the following sentence which is parallel to Costa’s (41b): (iv)

No lo firmó el autor de ese cuadro. not it signed the author of that painting “The author of that painting did not sign it.”

Just as in Costa’s example, it is hard to get a reading where lo and ese cuadro are coreferential. However, if ese cuadro “that painting” is not the most deeply embedded element, coreference seems to be possible: (v)

No lo firmó el autor del cuadro que se vendió ayer. not it signed the author of-the painting that REFL sold yesterday “The author of the painting that was sold yesterday did not sign it.” This is unexpected under Costa’s analysis.

THE STATUS OF OLD FRENCH CLITICS IN THE 12TH CENTURY

JENNIFER CULBERTSON Johns Hopkins University This paper proposes a new analysis of 12th century Old French clitic pronouns as enclitics obeying independent constraints on positioning rather than simple proclitics on the finite verb, as they are traditionally considered. Several characteristics of 12th century OF clitics suggest that they are second position elements, and should be treated as independent from the verb, including their enclisis to preceding elements, sensitivity to the Tobler-Mussafia law, and clustering in second position. These behaviors are analyzed within an alignment approach to second-position effects, with clitics treated as instantiating agreement features and positioned post-syntactically (following Legendre 1998). The verb-second pattern in the language is given a parallel analysis where finite verb positioning is constrained by syntax but motivated by feature alignment.

1.

Introduction This paper proposes an analysis of 12th century Old French (OF) clitics as enclitics obeying independent constraints on positioning rather than simple proclitics on the finite verb. Research to date on OF has often focused on its V2 character, with clitics being analyzed as completely dependent on the verb for position (Adams 1989; Roberts 1992; Vance 1998; Cardinaletti & Roberts 2002). However, some characteristics of 12th century OF clitics suggest that they are second position elements, and should be treated at least in some sense independently from the verb. The behavior of these clitics in light of crosslinguistic evidence lends support to an analysis of second-position effects as the result of conflicting constraints on the alignment of functional features at PF. Three main arguments, focusing on evidence from main clause patterns in the early 12th century text Chanson de Roland, will be put forth in support of this analysis of clitic pronouns: (1) clitic pronouns incorporate phonologically with preceding elements, and obey the Tobler-Mussafia law suggesting that they are enclitics whose host need not be the verb, (2) these clitics appear, cluster, and climb to linear second position in their domain suggesting that they obey verbindependent constraints on positioning, and (3) clitic pronouns compete with finite verbs for second position, supporting an analysis in which clitic-second and verbsecond interact.

JENNIFER CULBERTSON

90

Taken together, these arguments provide strong evidence that at this point in the history of the language clitic pronouns are governed by several alignment constraints which are separate from but interacting with those of the verb. The specific analysis proposed below within an Optimality Theoretic framework will follow Legendre (1998) and others (Legendre 2000, 2001; Anderson 2005) in taking the second position effects of both clitics and verbs to be constraints on alignment at the level of PF which restrict the linear order of the clause. The conflicting constraints governing the positioning of syntactic elements (verbs) and clitics, which are here treated as non-syntactic elements, reveals an interaction between syntax and morpho-phonology in the word order patterns of Old French. 2.

OF clitic pronouns Old French of the 12th century exhibits a strong V2 pattern, particularly in main clauses, a typical example of which is shown in (1). At this time, pronouns were arguably different from their counterparts in Modern French. For example, the status of subject pronouns as clitics is not yet well-established (see e.g. Vance 1989 for discussion). This analysis therefore treats only the set of weak object, reflexive, and locative pronouns (shown in Table 1) which were in fact clitics. (1) Vers dulce France chevalchet l' emperere. toward sweet France rode the emperor “Toward sweet France rode the emperor.”

(Chanson de Roland 706)

Case

Singular

2.1

Oblique Reflexive Locative

me, te, le, la me, te, se en, i

nos, vos, les nos, vos, se

Plural

Table 1: OF pronominal clitics

The treatment of Romance clitics in general is controversial; both the mechanism in the grammar which positions clitics and what category they should be assigned – a syntactic category like head or XP, or a morphological category like agreement. – are frequently debated in the literature. Previous analyses of OF clitics have traditionally placed them in the syntax as heads positioned by incorporation with the verb (e.g. Cardinaletti & Roberts 2002). However, Hirschbühler & Labelle (2000) suggest that although clitics may be syntactic elements, they are actually positioned by forces independent of the verb. This present paper argues for a third possible analysis, namely that OF clitics are feature carrying markers of agreement, and that they are positioned postsyntactically by PF constraints. The motivation for seeking a new take on OF clitics is based on several positional restrictions which these clitics are subject to.

OF CLITICS IN THE 12TH CENTURY

91

First, it is well known that clitics in many Romance languages, were sensitive to the Tobler-Mussafia law at some point in their history (Benincà 1995), that is they generally appeared preverbally except when this would place them in clause-initial position. While this restriction is limited in Modern French, OF clitics can never appear in initial position in their clause. For example, in V1 contexts (a somewhat common although not basic word order pattern in OF) the typical ordering of the clitic and verb (as in 2a) systematically switches to prevent the clitic from appearing clause-initially. This is shown in (2b,c), note that clitics will be underlined throughout in lieu of traditional gloss notation. (2) a. Li reis Marsilie la tient. the king Marsilie it holds “The king Marsilie holds it.” b. Dunez li l' arc. give him the sword “Give him the sword!” c. Faites le vos de gred? do it you now “Will you do it now?”

(CDR 7)

(CDR 780)

(CDR 2001)

The second relevant piece of evidence is that most 12th century OF clitics show a regular (although optional) pattern of enclisis with preceding elements of a certain class. Both object and reflexive clitics exhibit two different types of behavior with respect to neighboring words.1 First, if the following word begins with a vowel, the clitic will undergo elision with that word, regardless of whether it is a verb or some other element (e.g. a locative particle). This behavior is typically called proclisis, shown in (3a). Second, elision is also found with a number of other types of words including non-clitics (e.g. conjunctions, subject pronouns, negative markers, determiners), all of which show different distributional patterns from clitic pronouns (most importantly they do not show the same positional restrictions). The latter type of behavior, sometimes called enclisis, is shown in (3b), and occurs when the clitic combines with any preceding mono-morphemic word to form a new prosodic word (e.g. je+li = jel, si+les=sis). (3) a. Ne l' amerai…(CDR 323) not him love “I will not love him…”

1

b. Sil receit Blancandrin.(CDR 464) thus+them holds Blancandrin “Thus Blancandrin holds them.”

Locative clitics do not undergo either of these processes; they are of a different phonological form than object and reflexive clitics, for example ‘en’ is consonant final, and ‘y’ is composed of a single vowel, making both processes impossible.

92

JENNIFER CULBERTSON

These two types of behavior provide potentially contradicting evidence as to whether the clitic takes a left or right host. However, proclisis is a more general mechanism which provides a way of phonologically resolving hiatus and thus may be independent of host status for these clitics. On the other hand, the fact that object and reflexive clitics commonly encliticize phonologically with preceding elements suggests that they may not truly be dependent on the verb for positioning since their phonological host need not be the verb. There is of course an important interaction between enclisis and the Tobler-Mussafia law which has been noted for OF and many other old Romance languages. As shown in (3b,c) above, OF clitics always appear to the right of the verb when the verb is clause initial, and it is generally agreed that OF showed enclisis when the verb was clause-initial (Hirschbühler & Labelle 2000; Benincà 2004). The traditional explanation for this is that enclitic elements by definition require a host to the left, so naturally when they would otherwise appear clause initially, they must switch positions so that a left host is available. However, given that OF clitics have been widely assumed to be proclitics and therefore dependent only on the verb for positioning, explaining the unexpected switch to enclisis for verb-initial contexts alone is much less straightforward. There is no clear reason why clitics would be prohibited from appearing in clause-initial position under the view that they are proclitics; in fact this would predict that the clitic-verb order should be preserved in V1 contexts. Certainly the fact that clitics are never attested clause initially and must always have an XP to the left makes OF at the very least unlike most other languages with simple proclitics (Klavans 1985, Fontana 1993, although see Pancheva 2005 for a discussion of clitics in Bulgarian which behave similarly). Modern French proclitics, for example, no longer exhibit this restriction. They can appear initially, for example, in questions formed by verb-fronting. Previous attempts have been made to explain Tobler-Mussafia effects in OF (assuming a V in C analysis of OF V2) while maintaining the proclitic status of clitics. Benincà (1995), for example, suggests that the verb moves to C when this specCP is empty, leaving the clitic below it. Cardinaletti & Roberts (2002) argue instead that in clitic-V orders the verb picks up the clitic on its way to C, while in V-clitic orders, the verb skips the position occupied by the clitic. However, clitic positioning in OF may be more naturally accounted for if clitics are taken to be driven by independent requirements rather than those of the verb. Hirschbühler & Labelle (2000) argues for an analysis along these lines, claiming that OF clitics are subject to several of their own structural restrictions. 2 The authors advocate a constraint-based approach (although it is not formally developed) where the clitic positions itself with respect to the verb to satisfy its

2

Another possible analysis which I do not discuss here is the notion of Prosodic Inversion as proposed by Halpern (1995), although for a critical discussion see Anderson (2005).

OF CLITICS IN THE 12TH CENTURY

93

own requirements. They use the set of constraints listed in (i), derived from previous work on clitics within Optimality Theory. (i) {Cl, [+T]}, clitics adjoin to terminal elements with feature [+T] [NONINITIAL, CPMIN], clitics are non-initial in the minimal clause [+LEFTMOST], clitics are leftmost in the minimal clause The NONINITIAL and LEFTMOST constraints interact to ensure that clitics are preverbal unless this would force them to be initial in the clause. When taken within an OT framework at least, the combination of constraints used in Hirschbühler & Labelle (2000) forces the clitic to be in linear second position, both in exceptional cases where the verb is clause initial, and when the verb is in its more typical position following some initial XP. In other words, the clitic will systematically follow the first constituent, either verb or XP. In their analysis Hirschbühler & Labelle (2000) take clitics to be syntactic elements, i.e. placed into the structure and moved around by the syntax. Accordingly their constraints are formulated as purely syntactic. However, these constraints were originally construed as governing the post-syntactic alignment of features. Within this framework clitics are not syntactic elements but rather phrasal affixes which instantiate functional features and are positioned postsyntactically at PF (e.g. Klavans 1985; Legendre 1998, 2000; Anderson 1999, 2005). Syntactic accounts of clitics have long been challenged, and the motivation for positioning clitics at PF rather than in the syntax comes from a wide range of evidence brought forward for many languages. Generally, similarities between some clitics and word level affixes suggests a more straightforward parallel between them. Phenomena like clitic doubling, clitic clustering, clitic climbing, and constituent-internal insertion which commonly coincide with second position effects, have been argued to support a morphological analysis of clitics rather than a syntactic one (Jaeggli 1982, Suñer 1988, Anderson 1999, 2005, Legendre 1998, 2000, 2003). In addition, clitics are often subject to fixed ordering in clusters (even in languages with free word order of arguments), similar to the fixed order to morphemes (Legendre 2003). Further, the role of prosody in clitic placement cross-linguistically and the syntactic ‘inertness’ of clitics in some languages relative to other syntactic elements conspire to support the claim that clitics are placed in their domain by mechanisms of the phonological component. 3 This makes them parallel to word-level affixes, at a phrasal level. For a more complete discussion of the arguments supporting this view of clitics see Anderson (2005).

3

For example, the claim put forth in Legendre (2000) regarding the syntactic inertness of clitics pertains to the fact that (at least) in a number of Balkan languages (i) clitics do not undergo the types of movement expected under a syntactic analysis, (ii) auxiliary clitics are impervious to principles of syntax governing verbal elements and (iii) this is also true of clitic pronouns despite the fact that they appear to satisfy subcategorization properties of verbs.

94

JENNIFER CULBERTSON

This alternative take on the status of clitics is particularly suggestive with respect to clitics in OF since they are subject to a number of the patterns listed above. OF clitics, at least in the early 12th century text analyzed here, show a robust pattern of second position effects. A typical example of a clitic appearing in linear second position is shown in (4a), along with clustering in (4b,c) and climbing (4d). It is of note that the clitics in the clusters always exhibit the same order, consistent with the claim that these clitics are governed by constraints on linear order. (4) a. Demi Espaigne vus durat il. (CDR 472) half Spain you give he “Half Spain he will give you.” b. Jo t’en muvrai. c. Dunez m’en. (CDR 290, 268) I you+there follow giveIMP me+here “I will follow you there.” “Give me here!” d. En Sarraguce vus vendrat aseger; (CDR 476) in Sarraguce you comes to beseige “He comes into Sarraguce to besiege you.” Taking the view that clitics are essentially morphological elements positioned at PF opens up alternative analyses of second-position and ToblerMussafia effects. The PF alignment approach which will be developed for OF below uses constraints which are similar to those used in Hirschbühler & Labelle (2000), but based on the original analysis following Legendre 1998, and Anderson 1999. In other words, the analysis, within a fully specified OT framework, treats clitics as phrasal affixes and second-position effects as the resolution of a conflict between alignment constraints, which regulate the appearance of different features at the edge of a particular domain. This approach has been used for example by Legendre (2000) and Anderson (2005) to analyze clitic-second effects in a number of other languages, and it is derived from generalized morphological alignment developed by McCarthy & Prince (1994) within the Optimality Theoretic framework. The constraints themselves are shown in (ii) below. (ii) NONINITIAL(X): violated by candidates with the feature [X] at the left edge of the domain EDGEMOST(X): gradiently violated by candidates with feature [X] not aligned with left edge of the domain4 In languages where NONINITIAL(X) outranks EDGEMOST(X), second position (P2) clitic effects will be produced, since the element instantiating the 4

The label “gradiently violable” refers to constraints which can be violated multiple times per candidate. Here for example the EDGEMOST constraint is taken to assign one violation per word between the left edge of the domain and the element instantiating the relevant feature.

OF CLITICS IN THE 12TH CENTURY

95

relevant feature, in this case the clitic, will align as close as possible to the left edge without appearing domain-initially. Note that the reverse ranking results in clitics which occur in initial position (e.g. Romanian verbal clitics, and subject clitics in Modern French). Because the alignment approach takes clitic-second to be a result of feature alignment at PF, it is essentially a constraint on linear order and null elements like pro will not constitute EDGEMOST(X) violations. The features of interest here are phi-features (number, gender, and case) which clitics are taken to instantiate. The alignment domain is potentially language specific, and there is evidence in OF (as well as many other languages, see Legendre 1998, 2000, 2001) that the relevant domain is the intonational phrase as shown in (5a), where the clitic appears after the first constituent following the intonational break. This indicates that clitic feature alignment is within the intonational phrase, on which syntactic domains like IP and CP are assumed to map. However, it could also be argued that the domain is the ‘minimal clause’ as in Hirschbühler & Labelle (2000) based on examples like (5b). (5) a. En dulce France, seignurs, vos en irez. (CDR 360) into sweet France sires you there go “Into sweet France, sires, you will go.” b. Quan l' ot Marsilie, si l’ ad baiset; (CDR 601) when it heard Marsilie [break] thus him+has kissed “When Marsilie heard it, thus he kissed him.” While the concept ‘minimal clause’ is not clearly defined in syntax, a syntactic characterization of the domain should require using labels like IP, CP. On the other hand, a post-syntactic characterization of the domain simply appeals to an existing concept – intonational phrase – which is, as mentioned above, the domain for second-position effects in many languages. Therefore, since the set of constraints argued for here apply post-syntactically, I will assume that the domain in OF is the intonational phrase. 3.

OF verb-second This same approach is naturally extended to analyze V2, since it is also a second-position effect. However, several additional distinctions need to be made since unlike clitics, verbs are syntactic elements, respecting syntactic constraints on clause structure. Further, there is a long tradition of treating V2 in a very different way, namely as a result of verb movement to C alone. Therefore before continuing with the analysis proposed here, I will outline two previous analyses of V2 in OF and present the key motivations for using the alignment approach instead. Many Germanic languages show the V2 pattern, including German, Dutch, Icelandic and others, and the traditional V-to-C analysis, was largely driven by the fact that V2 and overt complementizers are in complementary

96

JENNIFER CULBERTSON

distribution in German. In Roberts (1992), OF is analyzed as parallel to the Germanic-based V-in-C pattern. Specifically, V must move to C to license nominative case assignment under government, (another possibility is that movement checks an abstract feature in C). More recently however, it has been claimed that V moves to C only in non-SVO clauses, subject-initial clauses being IPs (Vance 1998, following Travis 1984). This is based on the assumption that subjects must be in the specifier of IP. Several theoretical and empirical points of evidence in fact support an alignment approach over a strict V-in-C approach. Specifically, under this analysis V2 parallels clitic-second, since both are argued to be concerned with the alignment of agreement features. In the case of verbs, finiteness encodes agreement information, similar to phi-features of clitics, as well as tense information. This is theoretically desirable since these phenomena are strikingly similar (see Anderson 2005 for a full discussion). In addition, although it is sometimes neglected, a significant aspect of V2, and the reason the pattern was first noted, is its sensitivity to the number of constituents or words preceding the verb. This is captured quite naturally by an alignment approach as will be shown below. For OF in particular, dummy or arbitrary elements frequently appear in first position. In example (6) below, si ‘thus’ is clearly not topicalized or focused, but rather seems to show up expressly for the purpose of satisfying V2. The presence of dummy elements at the left edge of the domain is straightforwardly accounted for by an alignment approach to V2 since regardless of its structural position, the verb must be protected from the edge by some element. Exactly which element is expected to be at least to some extent arbitrary, although this is likely related to the discourse status of the clausal constituents as well. (6) Si recevrai la chrestïene lei. so receive the Christian law “So I will receive the Christian law.”

(CDR 85)

Lastly, by default, unless other constraints on movement intervene, symmetric V2 is expected. In languages like German there are independent reasons, likely related to V-to-C movement, which prevent V2 in embedded clauses. This kind of structural pattern can be accommodated under the alignment approach (Anderson 2005), however like several other Germanic languages including Yiddish, Icelandic, as well as Old Spanish, OF regularly exhibits second-position effects in embedded clauses in the presence of a complementizer as in (7). (7) Carles comandet [que face sun servise] Charles commands that do his service “Charles commands that I do his service.”

(CDR 298)

OF CLITICS IN THE 12TH CENTURY

97

4.

OT analysis of OF clitic-second and verb-second Using a feature alignment approach to clitic-second as well as V2 creates a theoretically unified notion of second-position effects and captures a number of empirical facts more elegantly. The constraints shown in (ii) above will therefore also apply to the alignment of finiteness features of verbs along with phi-features of clitics. These constraints will interact with one another to produce secondposition effects in languages with the crucial ranking, NONINITIAL >> EDGEMOST. However, because the constraints are active independently for verbs and clitics, there are actually two pairs of constraints, NONINITIAL(Cl), EDGEMOST(Cl) for clitics, and NONINITIAL(F), EDGEMOST(F) for verbs. When the ranking of constraints obtains both for clitics and for verbs, clitic-second and verb-second effects will emerge. As will be shown for OF, the relative ranking of the constraint pairs will determine whether verbs or clitics appear closer to the edge when both are present in a given clause. This type of resolution of conflict between second position elements is not in fact unique to OF, for a similar discussion of Macedonian see Legendre (1998). It is important to note that this approach, although it does produce secondposition effects, does not on its own determine the structure of the clause in a language. Since second-position here means linear second-position, the structural instantiation of that position must be dependent on other constraints in the language that govern where verbs or other elements may be placed in the syntax. Evidence for verb movement to C in OF is based on the analysis in Vance (1998), where subjects are assumed to be located in specIP. However it has been argued that specIP is actually a mixed A/A’ position in some V2 languages (see for example Diesing 1990 for Yiddish, and Lemieux & Dupuis 1995 for Middle French, Fontana 1993 for Old Spanish). Based on these proposals, a constraint called EPP will be used here to assign violations to candidates with an empty specIP. This is modeled on the constraint SUBJECT, widely used in OT syntax and first used in Grimshaw (1997), however it is modified in the formulation of EPP to incorporate the fact that specIP can be filled with non-subjects (e.g. objects, prepositional phrases). Evidence for the conclusion that specIP is a mixed A/A’ position in OF comes from the fact that any element can occur between the verb and the complementizer in embedded clauses, as in (8). There is no reason to assume that this position is anything but specIP. I will take V-to-I movement in OF to be a result of the EPP constraint, since forcing specIP to be filled creates an I head that must also then be filled (see Grimshaw 1997 for independent evidence of an OBLIGATORY HEAD constraint). Therefore the analysis proposed here will take V-to-I movement to occur regularly in OF, but not V-to-C movement. (8) …que li Franceis asmastes a ferir; that the Franks gather to fight “…that you will fight the Franks.”

(CDR 454)

98

JENNIFER CULBERTSON

Additional independently motivated constraints will also be at work for OF. The constraint INTEGRITY(XP) prevents second-position elements like clitics, which unlike verbs are placed in their domain post-syntactically, from breaking apart syntactic constituents. This is not violated in OF, finite verbs and clitics will appear following the first constituent rather than word, but it is in other cliticsecond languages (e.g. Croatian, see Anderson 2005) and provides a strong piece of support for analyzing clitics as PF elements as mentioned above. The last constraint used is the economy constraint *t, which is violated by candidates with traces of movement, and has also been widely used in OT syntax (also called STAY, Grimshaw 1997). The general word order patterns in 12th OF can be shown to result from the following constraint ranking: INTEGRITY(XP), EPP >> E(Cl) >> NI(Cl) >>NI(F) >> E(F) >> *t The relative ordering of the finite verb and clitic(s) in OF is a result of the ranking of EDGEMOST(Cl) over EDGEMOST(F), in other words the alignment constraints active for clitics outrank those active for finite verbs. Therefore when a clitic is present it will appear closer to the edge than the verb unless other constraints intervene (as will be shown for V1 contexts). The effect of the ranking of the alignment constraints can be illustrated first simply for a basic V2 clause with no clitic as in (1), repeated in (9) below. In this XP-V-S clause, the optimal candidate will satisfy the higher ranked NONINITIAL(F) constraints while incurring the fewest violations of EDGEMOST(F). Since the claim here is that V-to-C movement is not forced by any constraint active in OF, this type of clause will be analyzed as an IP, incurring fewer violations of *t. Tableau 1 shows this result. (9) Vers dulce France chevalchet l' emperere. toward sweet France rode the emperor “Toward sweet France rode the emperor.” Input: V (x), x=l’emperere, PP = +top a. [CP Vers dulce Francek chevalchetj [IP l’empererei tj [VP ti tj tk]]] b. [IP chevalchetj [VP l’emperere tj Vers dulce France]] )c. [IP Vers dulce Francek chevalchetj [VP l’emperere tj tk]]

(CDR 706)

NI(F)

E(F)

*t

***

****! * **

*! ***

Tableau 1: Simple V2 clause

A similar analysis holds for subject-initial main clauses, since their structure is posited to be essentially identical. However, in clauses where the clitic and verb compete for linear second position, the relative ranking of the clitic and verb alignments causes the clitic to gain the position closer to the edge. This optimization is shown in Tableau 2 for example 5b, repeated in (10).

OF CLITICS IN THE 12TH CENTURY

(10) Demi Espaigne vus durat il. half Spain you give him “Half of Spain he will give you.”

99 (CDR 472)

Input: V (x,y,z), x=il, y = demi Espaigne, z = vus

E(Cl)

E(F)

*t

a. [CP Demi Espaignek vus duratj [IP ili tj [VP ti tj tk proobj]]] b. [IP Demi Espaignek duratj vus [VP il tj tk proobj]] )c. [IP Demi Espaignek vus duratj [VP il tj tk proobj ]]

** ***! **

*** ** ***

****! ** **

Tableau 2: Clitic-second

Here candidate (c) wins over (b) with fewer violations of the higher ranked EDGEMOST(Cl) even though it has more violations of EDGEMOST(F). Notice that since object clitics are treated as agreement markers both candidates include object pro to satisfy subcategorization requirements of the verb. Clitic climbing as in (4d) above is also the direct result of EDGEMOST(Cl) since the clitic is driven to align with the left edge of the clause rather than remain adjacent to the lexical verb. This of course is no longer the case in Modern French which has undergone a historical change involving the re-ranking of these constraints. The important role played by INTEGRITY(XP) is shown for the same example in Tableau 3. Clitics could potentially break apart syntactic constituents since, unlike verbs, they are not characterizable in terms of syntactic position. Undominated, the EDGEMOST(Cl) would force this result, however in OF, since INTEGRITY(XP) outranks EDGEMOST(Cl), candidates with violations of INTEGRITY(XP) will lose to candidates which satisfy it, regardless of additional EDGEMOST(Cl) violations. Input: V (x,y,z), x=il, y = demi Espaigne+top, z = vus

INT(XP)

E(Cl)

a. [IP Demik vus Espaignek duratj [VP il tj tk proobj]]] )b. [IP Demi Espaignek vus duratj [VP il tj tk proobj]]

*!

* **

Tableau 3: Illustration of INTEGRITY(XP)

Clitic clustering is driven by the same constraint interactions which have come into play for single-clitic clauses. The fixed ordering of clitics in clusters shows that EDGEMOST(Cl) is in fact a cover term for a family of constraints governing the alignment of each clitic type. Tableau 4 shows the optimization for (4b) repeated in (11), which exhibits the typical order of object and locative clitics in a cluster. The ranking of EDGEMOST(ClOBJ) over EDGEMOST(ClLOC) results in object clitics appearing systematically closer to the edge than locative clitics.

JENNIFER CULBERTSON

100

(11) Jo t’ en muvrai. I you there follow “I will follow you there.”

(CDR 290)

Input: V (x), x= jo, T= fut

NI(Cl)

)a. [IP Jok te en muvraii [VP tk ti proobj]] b. [IP Jok en te muvraii [VP tk ti proobj]] c. [IP te en Jok muvraii [VP tk ti proobj]]

E(ClO)

E(ClL)

* **!

** * *

*!

Tableau 4: Clitic-clustering

Although clitic-second does not appear to be systematically violated, V2 is, for example in V1 contexts like imperatives, direct quote introductions and questions (as in 2b,c,d above). These contexts typically involve special illocutionary force, and there are potentially several different ways of analyzing these types of clauses. I will provide here only one potential solution for analyzing V1 imperatives. 5 Following Legendre (1998), I will assume that an additional alignment constraint, EDGEMOST(IMP), requiring imperatives to be at the left edge of the clause is at work, and is crucially higher ranked than NI(F) in OF. Similar constraints could presumably be used to explain other V1 contexts, the main intuition is simply that some feature of these verbs attracts it to the edge of the clause. The alignment analysis predicts that in cases like these, the constraints operating on the clitic alone will force the clitic-verb order to switch. This is exactly what happens in all cases of V1, regardless of what motivates the verb to appear in first position. The optimization for a V1 imperative is shown for (2b) repeated in (12) in tableau 5, where the verb appears at the left edge in order to satisfy EDGEMOST(IMP) even though this constitutes a violation of NONINITIAL(F). As predicted, the clitic occurs in second position. (12) Dunez li l' arc. give him the sword “Give him the sword!”

(CDR 780)

Input: V (x,y,z), x=pro, y = l’arc, z = li

E(IMP)

NI(Cl)

a. [IP proi li dunezj [VP ti tj l’arc proobj]]] )b. [IP proi dunezj li [VP ti tj l’arc proobj]]]

*!

*

E(Cl)

NI(F)

E(F) *

*

*

Tableau 5: V1 imperative

5

Note that non-V1 imperatives also exist, suggesting the possible need for a more complex solution to imperative formation in OF than I am able to offer here.

OF CLITICS IN THE 12TH CENTURY

5.

101

Conclusion These main clause word order patterns, at least the most frequent ones attested in 12th century OF texts, are successfully captured by the OT alignment approach to clitic-second and verb-second effects. In particular, the pattern of clitic positioning both with respect to the entire intonational phrase and with respect to the finite verb is motivated by the conflict between EDGEMOST(Cl) and NONINITIAL(Cl), and the ranking of the clitic alignment constraints over the finite verb alignment constraints. These interactions straightforwardly account for the second-position effects shown by clitics in this time-period including strict adherence to the Tobler-Mussafia law, as well as systematic clitic-clustering and climbing. By extension, enclisis to preceding elements can also be explained since this may constitute an optimal way to appear as close as possible to the edge of the domain at PF without appearing initially (or violating INTEGRITY(XP)). The success of this approach lends additional backing to the analysis of clitics as agreement marking phrasal affixes as opposed to syntactic elements. Although the second-position effects analyzed here are successfully captured by an alignment approach, only evidence for main clause word order patterns has been presented. More work remains to be done toward a full account of embedded clauses in the language, which I have suggested also exhibit secondposition effects for clitics and finite verbs (unlike German). The EPP constraint, which is not crucial for determining the word order in main clauses, clearly comes into play for embedded clauses. This is essentially due to the fact that the NONINITIAL constraint is automatically satisfied by the domain-initial complementizer which is required in 12th century OF. The expected pattern is then comp-(clitic)-verb-XP. However, although this pattern is well-attested a common pattern as well is comp-XP-(clitic)-verb. This pushes the clitic and verb farther from the left edge of the domain, an outcome that requires some further explanation. This pattern can in fact be seen as a result of the EPP, which forces specIP to be filled. In the case of null subject embedded clauses, the EPP is satisfied by pro without causing any additional EDGEMOST violations. However when an overt subject or other discourse-marked element is present, it will fill specIP and satisfy the EPP. The pattern is similar when clitics are added to the picture, however in cases where an overt element fills specIP, clitics still appear immediately before the verb. This is unexpected since post-syntactic placement should allow them to appear in linear second position, preceding the element in specIP. The expected order is attested (along with the OF-type order) for example for Old Spanish P2 clitics, (Fontana 1993). However, patterns similar to those found in OF are also found in Ancient Greek (Taylor 1990) and Serbo-Croatian (Franks & King 2000), P2 clitics are found in third position in certain clauses, and have been suggested to be the result of the complementizer (for example) not always counting for linear position (Pancheva 2005). Still, the fact that the text analyzed here does not include any instances of the clitic being separated from the

102

JENNIFER CULBERTSON

verb as is possible for Old Spanish clitics may be significant. Hirschbühler & Labelle (2000) for example include a constraint forcing clitics to align next to the verb which I have not adapted for this analysis. Alternatively, it is possible that the domain of EDGEMOST(Cl) in OF is in fact more restricted than the intonational phrase, perhaps IP. Legendre (2000) argues along these lines for Romanian, whose clitics align with the edge of V’, even though they are non-initial in the intonational phrase. Given that OF clitics clearly become verb-bound in later stages, OF at this point may have lost what Fontana (1993) calls the “interpolation” feature of P2 clitics (although it retains the other two key features he cites, namely encliticization to preceding words and strict adherence of ToblerMussafia). Together, the evidence presented here supports a new take on 12th century OF clitics, including new motivations for their position in the clause and their interaction with OF V2. Further research will hopefully provide a more complete explanation of embedded V2 and clitic-second. In addition, since at this time OF was undergoing changes in both clausal architecture and the status of both clitic and non-clitic pronouns (like subject pronouns), further analysis will ideally consider more fully the impact of diachronic change on OF as well.

References Adams, Marianne 1989. “Verb Second Effects in Medieval French”. Studies in Romance Linguistics: Selected Proceedings from the XVII Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL), New Brunswick, 27-29 March 1987, ed. by C. Kischner & J. Decesaris, 1-31. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Anderson, Stephen R. 2000. “Towards an Optimal Account of Second Position Phenomena”. Optimality Theory: Phonology, Syntax, and Acquisition, ed. by J. Dekkers, F. Van der Leeuw & J. Van der Weijer, 302-333. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Anderson, Stephen R. 2005. Aspects of the Theory of Clitics. New York: Oxford University Press. Benincà, Paola. 1995. “Complement Clitics in Medieval Romance: The ToblerMussafia Law”. Clause Structure and Language Change, ed. by A. Battye & I. Roberts, 325-334. New York: Oxford University Press. Benincà, Paola. 2004. “The Left Periphery of Medieval Romance”. Studi Linguistici e Filologici Online 2.243-297. Cardinaletti, Anna & Ian Roberts. 2002. “Clause Structure and X-Second”. Functional Structure in DP and IP: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, vol. 1, ed. by G. Cinque, 123-166. New York: Oxford University Press. Diesing, Molly. 1990. “Verb Movement and the Subject Position in Yiddish”. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 8:1.41-81.

OF CLITICS IN THE 12TH CENTURY

103

Fontana, Joseph. 1993. Phrase Structure and the Syntax of Clitics in the History of Spanish. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania. Franks, Steven & Tracy King. 2000. A Handbook of Slavic Clitics. New York: Oxford University Press. Grimshaw, Jane. 1997. “Projections, Heads, and Optimality”. Linguistic Inquiry 28.373-422. Halpern, Aaron. 1995. On the Placement and Morphology of Clitics. Stanford: CSLI Publications. Hirschbühler, Paul & Marie Labelle. 2000. “Evolving Tobler-Mussafia Effects in the Placement of French Clitics”. New Approaches to Old Problems: Issues in Romance Historical Linguistics, ed. by S. Dworkin & D. Wanner, 165-182. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Jaeggli, Osvaldo. 1982. Topics in Romance Syntax. Dordrecht: Foris. Klavans, Judith. 1985. “The Independence of Syntax and Phonology in Cliticization”. Language 61.95-120. Legendre, Géraldine. 1998. “Second Position Clitics in a Verb-Second Language: Conflict Resolution in Macedonian”. Proceedings of the Eastern States Conference on Linguistics (ESCOL), New Haven, 21-23 November 1997, ed. by Jennifer Austin & Aaron Lawson, 139-149. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, CLC Publications. Legendre, Géraldine. 2000. “Positioning Romanian Verbal Clitics at PF”. Clitics in Phonology, Morphology and Syntax (= Linguistik Aktuell / Linguistics Today, 36), ed. by B. Gerlach & J. Grijzenhout, 219-254. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Legendre, Géraldine. 2001. “Masked V2 Effects and the Linearization of Functional Features”. Optimality-Theoretic Syntax, ed. by G. Legendre, J. Grimshaw & S. Vikner, 241-277. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Legendre, Géraldine. 2003. “What are Clitics? Evidence from Balkan Languages”. Phonological Studies (Journal of the Phonological Society of Japan) 6.89-96. Lemieux, Monique & Fernande Dupuis. 1995. “The Locus of Verb Movement in Non-Asymmetric Verb-Second Languages: The Case of Middle French”. Clause Structure and Language Change, ed. by A. Battye & I. Roberts, 80-109. New York: Oxford University Press. McCarthy, John & Alan Prince. 1994. “The Emergence of the Unmarked: Optimality in Prosodic Morphology”. Proceedings of the 24th North East Linguistic Society (NELS), University of Massachusetts, Amherst, 1993, ed. by M. Gonzàlez, 333-379. Amherst, MA: GLSA Publications. Pancheva, Roumyana. 2005. “The Rise and Fall of Second Position Clitics”. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 23:1.103-167. Roberts, Ian. 1992. Verbs and Diachronic Syntax: A Comparative History of English and French. Dordretch & Boston: Kluwer.

104 Suñer,

JENNIFER CULBERTSON

Margarita. 1988. “The Role of Agreement in Clitic-Doubled Constructions”. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 6.391-434. Taylor, Ann. 1990. Clitics and Configurationality in Ancient Greek. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania. Travis, Lisa. 1984. Parameters and Effects of Word Order Variation. Ph.D. dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge. Vance, Barbara. 1998. Syntactic Change in Medieval French Verb-Second and Null Subjects. Dordrecht & Boston: Kluwer.

TOWARDS A UNIFIED ACCOUNT OF POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE POLARITY EVIDENCE FROM ROMANIAN

ANAMARIA FĂLĂUŞ University of Nantes, LLING EA 3827

It has been recently argued (Szabolcsi 2004) that the distribution of positive polarity items can be accounted for in terms of negative polarity items-licensing. I present empirical evidence in favor of the strong relation between NPIs and PPIs on the basis of two types of polarity items in Romanian: n-words and the PPI oarecare. I argue that these dependent elements are sensitive to the same semantic property, namely antimorphy: the former are licensed only in antimorphic contexts, the latter are anti-licensed in the same anti-morphic environments. This generalization provides strong support for Szabolcsi’s claim that positive polarity is not just a prohibition to appear in the scope of negation, but rather “halfway licensing” of polarity sensitive items. At a more theoretical level, I argue that resumptive quantification is the semantic mechanism underlying the interpretation of both positive and negative polarity.

1.

Introduction In this paper, I present evidence in favor of a unifying account of positive and negative polarity. While negative polarity is a well-attested phenomenon and there are many different analyses that try to account for the restrictions on the distribution and interpretation of negative polarity items, positive polarity has received much less attention in the literature. Recently, however, Szabolcsi (2004) has put forth a unifying account of these two phenomena and defended the hypothesis that positive polarity is not just a prohibition to appear in the scope of negation, but rather “halfway licensing” of polarity-sensitive items. More specifically, the positive polarity item, together with the semantic operator that normally anti-licenses it, behaves like a negative polarity item (NPI), subject to familiar constraints on NPI-licensing. On the empirical side, this study focuses on the properties of two semantically dependent types of items in Romanian: n-words and oarecare-indefinites. I argue that these elements are both sensitive to the same semantic property, namely antimorphy: the former are licensed only in antimorphic contexts, the latter are anti-licensed in the same anti-morphic environments. The existence of such correspondences, together with the shared distributional properties, provides strong support for the relation between negative and positive polarity items, as implemented in Szabolcsi’s proposal. At a more

106

ANAMARIA FĂLĂUŞ

theoretical level, I argue that resumptive quantification is the semantic mechanism underlying the interpretation of both positive and negative polarity. 2.

A typological view Polarity items are typically classified according to the negative strength of the contexts that determine their distribution: Negative Polarity Items (NPIs) need to be licensed by a ‘negative’ operator, whereas Positive Polarity Items (PPIs) cannot be in the scope of such an operator. One of the most influential views of negative polarity maintains that the relevant semantic property for the licensing of NPIs is downward entailingness (Ladusaw 1980). Subsequent research has shown that different types of polarity items are sensitive to different types of licensers (Zwarts 1993) and therefore several classes need to be distinguished. In this paper, I adopt van der Wouden’s (1997) classification of polarity items according to three types of operators: downward entailing, anti-additive and anti-morphic. The definitions of these properties are given in (1): (1)

a. An operator Op is DOWNWARD ENTAILING iff: Op (X or Y) → Op (X) and Op (Y) b. An operator Op is ANTI-ADDITIVE iff: Op (X or Y) ↔ Op (X) and Op (Y) c. An operator Op is ANTI-MORPHIC iff (i) and (ii): (i) Op (X or Y) ↔ Op (X) and Op (Y) (ii) Op (X and Y) ↔ Op (X) or Op (Y) Downward entailing contexts allow inferences from sets to subsets. If Few children like vegetables is true, we can infer that Few children like carrots is also true, and therefore few children creates a downward entailing context. Antiadditive operators like nobody and anti-morphic functions like the sentential negation not are even stronger forms of negation, relevant for the distribution of polarity items (see section 3 for further details on these semantic properties). Van der Wouden’s classification of polarity-sensitive items is given in Table 1 and Table 2: Negation/Operators Minimal/Downward entailing (few) Regular/Anti-additive (nobody) Classical/Anti-Morphic (not)

Strong * * *

Table 1: Positive polarity items

Medium √ * *

Weak √ √ *

TOWARDS A UNIFIED ACCOUNT OF POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE POLARITY 107

Negation/Operators Minimal/Downward entailing (few) Regular/Anti-additive (nobody) Classical/Anti-Morphic (not)

Strong * * √

Medium * √ √

Weak √ √ √

Table 2: Negative polarity items

The two tables above indicate that NPIs and PPIs are not in complementary distribution, but rather show a mirror image typology: for example, weak NPIs are licensed in all types of negative contexts, whereas strong PPIs are ruled out from the scope of downward entailing, anti-additive and anti-morphic operators. Thus, each class of NPIs has a positive polarity counterpart. Take, for instance, polaritysensitive items of medium strength, whose distribution is illustrated in (2)-(3) below: (2) a. *Few people have come yet. b. Nobody has come yet.

(3) a. Few people would rather eat fish. b. *Nobody would rather eat fish.

NPIs like yet are illegitimate in the scope of a downward entailing operator (2a) and need to be licensed by an anti-additive operator (2b). On the other hand, the PPI would rather can occur in the scope of the downward entailing few (3a), but is anti-licensed by the anti-additive operator nobody (3b). This classification suggests that the connection between positive and negative polarity can’t be accidental: the fact that negative polarity items are licensed in exactly the same contexts that anti-license positive polarity items should be taken as a starting point for developing a unifying theory of polarity. This is precisely the line of argumentation pursued by Szabolcsi (2004). On the basis of the distributional properties of someone-like PPIs, she puts forth a theory of positive polarity which is shown not to be just a prohibition to appear in the scope of negation, but rather ‘halfway licensing’ of polarity-sensitive items. Specifically, Szabolcsi shows that PPIs - together with the semantic operator that normally anti-licenses them - form a non-lexical NPI, subject to familiar constraints on NPI-licensing. (4) Unlicensed NPIs a. *He met [anyone]. b. *He [didn’t meet someone].

Licensed NPIs a’. I don’t think he met [anyone]. b’. I don’t think he [didn’t meet someone].

As illustrated in (4), the PPI someone is anti-licensed by negation (4b). However, when further embedded in an NPI-licensing context, as in (4b’), someone can take

108

ANAMARIA FĂLĂUŞ

scope below negation. The distribution of the cluster NOT + someone is in fact parallel to that of typical NPIs like any. Szabolcsi’s discussion of the distributional properties of something-PPIs shows that negative and positive polarity are not independent phenomena and therefore a unifying theory is desirable. Furthermore, once we adopt van der Wouden’s typology of polarity items, Szabolcsi’s proposal leads to the expectation that “whatever property is desired by some NPI will turn out to be detested by some PPI and/or to function as a rescuer thereof” (Szabolcsi 2004: 430) In the following sections, I show that this prediction is borne out in Romanian by discussing the distribution of two types of polarity-sensitive items: n-words and PPIs un N oarecare (‘whatsoever’), whose respective distribution I argue to be sensitive to antimorphy. 3.

Negative concord in Romanian N-words are morphologically negative elements that need to be licensed by negation. In this respect, Romanian qualifies as a strict negative concord language, in which n-words obligatorily co-occur with sentential negation, regardless of whether they appear in preverbal (5a) or postverbal position (5b): (5) a. Nimeni *(nu) a venit. nobody neg has come “Nobody has come.”

b. *(Nu) stiu nimic. neg know.1sg nothing “I don’t know anything.”

[NC]

(6) *Nu am zis ca ai vorbit cu nimeni. Neg have.1sg said that have.2sg talked with nobody The sentences in (5) show that n-words need to be licensed by negation. In this respect, they are just like NPIs, which are also semantically deficient expressions. The ungrammaticality of the sentence in (6) indicates that the licensing relation is subject to locality constraints: n-words need to co-occur with clausemate sentential negation. Furthermore, just like in the case of typical NPIs, the licensing of n-words is subject to intervention effects (Linebarger 1987), as illustrated in (7) below, where the universal quantifier every intervenes between the sentential negation and the n-word: (7) a. *Nu am intalnit in fiecare zi niciun student. neg have.1sg met on every day no student b. *I didn’t always invite anyone. However, the distribution of Romanian n-words is much more restricted than that of typical NPIs, like any in English. More specifically, they cannot occur in other

TOWARDS A UNIFIED ACCOUNT OF POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE POLARITY 109

polarity contexts, such as the scope of a downward entailing operator (8), scope of negative predicates (9), the antecedent of conditionals, before-clauses or restriction of a universal quantifier: (8) *Putini studenti au citit nimic. *scope of downward entailing operator Few students have.3pl read nothing “Few students have read anything.” (9) *Maria refuza sa spuna nimic. Maria refuses subj say nothing “Maria refuses to say anything.”

*scope of negative predicates

The ungrammaticality of Romanian n-words in polarity contexts indicates that their licensing condition is much stricter than that governing the distribution of NPIs like any. Besides clausemate negation, the only other context which licenses Romanian n-words is the operator fǎrǎ (‘without’): (10) Silvia a plecat fǎrǎ sǎ vorbeascǎ cu nimeni. Silvia have.3sg left without subj talk with nobody “Silvia left without talking to anyone.” The question that arises at this point is what is the common semantic property of sentential negation and the operator without that is relevant for the licensing of nwords. I argue that the semantic feature responsible for the licensing of n-words in Romanian is antimorphy, the strongest form of negation. The validity of the inferences in (11) illustrates the antimorphy of sentential negation. For reasons of convenience, I use English examples, but the same conclusion holds for Romanian: (11) a. John doesn’t smoke or drink. ↔ John doesn’t smoke and doesn’t drink. b. John doesn’t smoke and drink. ↔ John doesn’t smoke or doesn’t drink. The following inferences show that fără (‘without’) is also an anti-morphic operator (Giannakidou 2002, Błaszczak 2002, Pereltsvaig 2004): (12) a. Paul a plecat fǎrǎ sǎ doarmǎ sau ↔ sǎ mǎnânce. Paul left without sleeping or eating.

Paul a plecat fǎrǎ sǎ doarmǎ si fǎrǎ sǎ mǎnânce. Paul left without sleeping and without eating.

110

ANAMARIA FĂLĂUŞ

b. Paul a plecat fǎrǎ sǎ doarmǎ si ↔ sǎ mǎnânce. Paul left without sleeping and eating.

Paul a plecat fǎrǎ sǎ doarmǎ sau fǎrǎ sǎ mǎnânce. Paul left without sleeping or without eating.

Both the inferences in (11a-12a) and (11b-12b) need to be valid in order for an operator to create an anti-morphic context. The only operators that meet this condition are sentential negation and without. The contexts in which n-words are ungrammatical are either merely downward entailing, as in (8) or anti-additive (9), as illustrated below for the scope of negative predicates: (13) a. He refuses to eat or sleep. ↔ He refuses to eat and refuses to sleep. b. He refuses to eat and sleep. Å/Æ He refuses to eat or refuses to sleep. The fact that the inference in (13b) is not valid clearly shows that this context is not anti-morphic. The same conclusion holds for if-antecedents, restriction of a universal quantifier or before-clauses, which are all contexts where n-words are ungrammatical. The anti-additivity of these contexts, together with the antimorphy of sentential negation and without, indicate that n-words are subject to the licensing condition in (14): (14) Romanian n-words are only licensed in the immediate scope of an antimorphic operator, i.e. they are strong NPIs This generalization captures the restricted distribution of n-words in Romanian and provides support for a typological view of NPIs, which are shown to be sensitive to different semantic operators. 4.

Positive polarity in Romanian We have identified one class of NPIs whose distribution is governed by anti-morphic operators. On Szabolcsi’s proposal, we expect to find a positive polarity class which is also sensitive to this type of operator. In this section, I show that this prediction is borne out. I discuss the distribution of un N oarecare in Romanian and I argue that this type of indefinite is also sensitive to antimorphy. 4.1

Un N oarecare-indefinites As discussed in Savescu-Ciucivara (2005), the indefinite un NP oarecare contains the indefinite article un (masculine)/o (feminine) and the morphological complex determiner oarecare, which is made up from the interrogative pronoun care (‘which’) and the (interrogative) particle oare. It is generally used to indicate

TOWARDS A UNIFIED ACCOUNT OF POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE POLARITY 111

lack of knowledge or indifference with respect to the identity of the individual variable introduced by the noun it modifies: (15) A: Cu cine vorbeai la telefon? “Who were you talking to on the phone?” B: O femeie oarecare, gresise numarul. “Some woman, she had the wrong number.” The sentence with oarecare in (15) conveys that the speaker does not know the identity of the individual on the phone. In modal contexts, un N oarecare acquires a free-choice reading, as in (16)-(17): (16) Alege un articol oarecare si fa o prezentare! “Pick any article whatsoever and make a presentation!” (17) Maria poate să rezolve o problemă oarecare. “Mary can solve any problem whatsoever.” The use of oarecare in (16) indicates that any article in the domain of quantification is a good option. As shown in Savescu-Ciucivara, the sentence in (17) is ambiguous between two possible readings: either it means There is a certain problem that Mary can solve; the speaker does not know which problem it is or, under the free-choice reading, the sentence gets interpreted as No matter what problem Mary is faced with, she is able to solve it. 1 Although in modal contexts the use of oarecare signals that any individual in the domain of discourse can satisfy the existential claim, it cannot be argued to be simply a free-choice item, as it freely occurs in episodic contexts (unlike FC any, which can appear in an episodic sentence only in subtrigging contexts, as discussed in Dayal 1998): (18) Ieri am iesit din casa sub un pretext oarecare si am trecut sa te vad. “Yesterday I went out under some excuse and I dropped by to see you.” Elaborating on Savescu-Ciucivara’s proposal, I argue that the distribution of oarecare-indefinites is that of a positive polarity item and I show that the semantic property that they are sensitive to is antimorphy.

1

Adopting Kratzer & Shimoyama’s (2002) analysis of German irgendein, the free-choice flavor of oarecare-indefinites can be derived via Gricean reasoning. As a domain widening indefinite, the use of un N oarecare indicates the existence of a set of individual alternatives without any further restriction on the domain of quantification. It follows that o problema oarecare denotes the set of all problems. On hearing the sentence in (17), one can infer there is no subset of problems that Mary cannot solve and consequently, that she can solve any problem in the domain.

112

ANAMARIA FĂLĂUŞ

4.2

PPI properties of oarecare-indefinites Several distributional properties show that un N oarecare is a PPI in Romanian. First, just like someone-PPIs discussed in Szabolcsi (2004), un N oarecare can’t be in the scope of negation:2 (19) * John didn’t invite someone. * Paul nu a vorbit cu un student oarecare. Paul not have.3sg talked to a student whatsoever “Paul didn’t talk to any student.”

* not > some * not > oarecare

This is only true for clausemate negation: as illustrated in (20), both someone-PPIs and un N oarecare can scope below superordinate negation: (20) I don’t think that John called someone. √ not > [CP/IP some Nu cred ca Paul a vorbit cu un student oarecare. √ not > [CP/IP oarecare not think that Paul have.3sg talked to a student whatsoever “I don't think that Paul talked to any student.” Furthermore, both someone-PPIs and un N oarecare can take scope below merely downward entailing operators, as in the sentences in (21) below: (21) Few boys contacted someone. √ few > some Puţine state au o solutie oarecare pentru incalzirea planetei. √ few > oarecare few countries have a solution whatever for warming planet.GEN “Few countries have a solution whatsoever for global warming.” So far, it seems that both these types of items are anti-licensed only by clausemate negation. However, there are two more properties that support the analysis of oarecare as a genuine PPI - an item that is not simply prohibited from appearing in the scope of negation. First, the relation between oarecare and the negation is subject to intervention effects: both someone-PPIs and un N oarecare can scope below negation if there is another operator intervening (the phenomenon is also known as shielding):

2 Un N oarecare can appear in the immediate scope of clausemate negation if focused, acquiring a not-just-any reading. As mentioned by Szabolcsi, the properties of someone are also different in denial/contrastive contexts. In this paper, I set aside the issue of the relation between focus and PPIs and abstract away from the not-just-any–reading of un N oarecare (see Savescu-Ciucivara 2005 for a possible account of this interpretation)

TOWARDS A UNIFIED ACCOUNT OF POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE POLARITY 113

(22) John doesn’t always invite someone. √ not > always >some Mircea nu a plecat de la fiecare sedinta sub un pretext oarecare. √ not>every>oarecare Mircea neg have.3sg left from every meeting under a pretext whatsoever “Mircea hasn’t left every meeting under some pretext.” These facts lead to the conclusion that PPIs like someone and oarecare avoid being in the immediate scope of clausemate negation. However, this conclusion cannot account for so-called rescuing effects. Consider the examples in (23)-(24): (23) a. Few boys didn’t invite someone. b. If we don’t ask someone, we’ll never know.

√few >not >someone √if >not >someone

(24) a. Putini studenti nu au contactat un profesor oarecare pentru lucrarea lor. √few>not>oarecare “Few students didn’t contact some professor for their dissertation.” b. Daca nu ai un merit oarecare, vei fi ignorat. √if>not>oarecare “If you don’t have a merit whatsoever, you’ll be ignored.” In all of these sentences, the PPI can be in the immediate scope of clausemate negation when further embedded in an NPI-licensing context (downward entailing like the scope of few, as in (23a) and (24a) or anti-additive like if-antecedents, in (23b) and (24b)). The rescuing effects constitute a strong argument in favor of an analysis of positive polarity as a more complex phenomenon. Although the facts have been known ever since Jespersen (1939) and later mentioned in Baker (1970), Szabolcsi was the first to discuss them in detail and to propose a fullfledged theory of positive polarity. In the following subsection, I introduce Szabolcsi’s proposal for positive polarity and show that the relevant property for the distribution of oarecare is antimorphy. 4.3

(Anti-)licensing condition of oarecare-indefinites The sentences with someone and oarecare above show that reducing the distribution of PPIs to a prohibition to appear in the scope of negation is a simplistic view. More specifically, PPIs are ruled out in the immediate scope of clausemate negation only (super-ordinate negation and intervention/shielding effects), and, moreover, they can happily scope below a clausemate negation if further embedded in an NPI-licensing context (rescuing). On the other hand, we have seen (section 3) that there are classes of NPIs that need precisely the type of licenser that PPIs avoid: clausemate negation without intervention. All of these distributional properties indicate a strong connection between positive and negative polarity.

114

ANAMARIA FĂLĂUŞ

On the basis of these similarities, Szabolcsi argues that someone-PPIs are double NPIs, whose distribution is governed by the following licensing condition: (25) PPIs do not occur in the immediate scope of a clausemate anti-additive operator AA-Op, unless [AA-Op > PPI] itself is in a (weak) NPI-licensing context. On the basis of the striking distributional similarities between someone and un N oarecare illustrated in the previous section, we could conclude that this generalization also applies to Romanian oarecare-indefinites. However, the sentences in (26)-(27) show that un N oarecare can take scope below an antiadditive operator, such as a negative predicate or the operator before: (26) Am refuzat o bursa oarecare fără sa stiu exact ce fac. √ Refuse > oarecare “I refused some grant without knowing exactly what I was doing.” (27) Inaintea unui examen oarecare, trebuie sa iti citesti cursurile. √ Before > oarecare “Before any exam whatsoever, you must read your classnotes.” The fact that oarecare can occur in the scope of these operators indicates that this PPI is subject to a stronger licensing requirement than someone-PPIs. The licensing condition of un N oarecare must therefore be reformulated. I propose the following generalization: (28) oarecare-PPIs do not occur in the immediate scope of a clausemate antimorphic operator AM-Op, unless [AM-Op > PPI] itself is in a (weak) NPIlicensing context. We have already seen that un N oarecare is anti-licensed by the anti-morphic sentential negation. As expected under this condition, the only other operator that anti-licenses Romanian un N oarecare is without, which I have argued to be an anti-morphic operator. (29) *Am venit la petrecere fără un prieten oarecare. *without>oarecare Have.1sg come to party without a friend whatever “I came to the party without any friend whatsoever.” The analysis of oarecare as a PPI subject to the licensing condition in (28) also predicts that this configuration can be rescued when further embedded in an NPIlicensing context. This prediction is borne out, as illustrated in (30), where the presence of the negation nu allows oarecare to take scope below fără (‘without’):

TOWARDS A UNIFIED ACCOUNT OF POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE POLARITY 115

(30) Am ajuns cunoscut nu fără un merit oarecare. √ not>without>oarecare Have.1sg became famous not without a merit whatever “I have become famous not without some merit.” These facts support the conclusion that the semantic property that oarecareindefinites are sensitive to is antimorphy. In this respect, they constitute the positive polarity counterpart of n-words, which I have shown to be strong NPIs, that is NPIs that need to be licensed by anti-morphic operators (see (14)). The existence of this type of PPIs provides further empirical support for a typological view of polarity items (van der Wouden 1997), as well as for Szabolcsi’s account of positive polarity as halfway-NPI-licensing. 5.

Interpreting negative and positive polarity - resumptive quantification In the previous sections, I have shown that there are two classes of semantically dependent items in Romanian that are sensitive to antimorphy: on the one hand, n-words need to be in the immediate scope of an anti-morphic operator (sentential negation and the operator without) and on the other hand, oarecareindefinites are PPIs that are excluded from the immediate scope of this type of operator, unless further embedded in an NPI-licensing context. I now adopt Szabolcsi’s analysis of PPIs and defend the hypothesis that the relevant semantic mechanism of interpretation for polarity, both positive and negative, is resumptive quantification. 5.1

Negative concord The hypothesis that resumptive quantification is the relevant mode of composition for negative concord has already been defended in the literature (Zanuttini 1991, Déprez 2000, de Swart & Sag 2002). The basic intuition underlying these approaches is that n-words are negation-containing elements and through resumption, they combine and form one polyadic negative quantifier. I have argued elsewhere (Fălăuş 2007), adopting the approach developed by de Swart & Sag (2002), that resumption is responsible for the interpretation of strict negative concord in Romanian. The derivation in (31) (using de Swart & Sag’s notation) illustrates this for a sentence with two n-words: (31) a. Niciun copil nu stie nicio poveste. No child neg knows no story b. Nox,y (Child x, Story y, Know) c. ∃x, x: child, ∃y, y: story, Know (x,y) d. It is not the case that there is a pair x: child, y: story, such that x knows y Under one of the two possible readings of (31a), the two n-words combine and are reinterpreted as only one complex negative quantifier that ranges over pairs, as in

116

ANAMARIA FĂLĂUŞ

(31b). The resumptive negative quantifier thus binds the sum of all the variables of the composing monadic quantifiers, in this case the two n-words. The sentence ends up having an interpretation with only one negation, also called the negative concord reading, paraphrased in (31d). Szabolcsi argues that NPI-licensing also involves the formation of a resumptive quantifier. Thus, the same mechanism as in (31) is responsible for interpretation of the sentence in (32), where weak NPIs like any are involved:3 (32) Nobody talked to any man about any woman on any day. Note that once we assume resumptive quantification for NPI-licensing, we can account for intervention effects. Since resumption factors out the negative component of the NPI, the presence of an intervening operator separates the negation from its restriction (Linebarger 1987). The configuration relevant for both (strict) negative concord and NPIlicensing is given in (33) (taken from Szabolcsi 2004:435): (33) [[licenser neg ...] ... [NPI neg ...]] → no<x,y> …[[licenser ... x ...] ... [NPI ... y ...]] At this stage of the discussion, we have reached two important conclusions. On the one hand, we have seen that resumptive quantification can derive the interpretation of sentences involving NPIs, either strong (Romanian nwords) or weak (like any). On the other hand, the distributional properties of the two classes of polarity-sensitive items in Romanian (n-words and oarecareindefinites) provide support in favor of a unifying account of negative and positive polarity, such as the one defended in Szabolcsi (2004). The next step is to extend the analysis to PPIs and to show how they can be analyzed against this general background. 5.2

Positive polarity In order to derive the distribution of someone-PPIs, and to derive the connection between positive and negative polarity, Szabolcsi analyzes the PPI as a double NPI, more specifically she makes the assumption it contains two negations

3

The question of whether negative concord and typical NPI-licensing are different phenomena is a complex issue. Szabolcsi distinguishes NPI-licensing as involving binary quantification from negative concord, which (adopting de Swart & Sag’s analysis) is assumed to be n-ary resumption. Note however, than (strict) negative concord also involves a licensing step – n-words are strong NPIs than need an anti-morphic operator. Although there are several distinctions (e.g., locality, quantificational properties) between any-NPIs and n-words, this does not invalidate the hypothesis that the same interpretation mechanism is relevant for the two types of NPIs. I believe a unifying account is possible, but I will have to leave the details of this issue for further research.

TOWARDS A UNIFIED ACCOUNT OF POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE POLARITY 117

or NPI-features. Consequently, the underlying representation of a PPI is ¬¬∃.4 Once we assume this lexical semantics for PPIs like un N oarecare, we can account for its distribution, subject to the licensing condition established in section 4.3 and repeated below as (34): (34) oarecare-PPIs do not occur in the immediate scope of a clausemate antimorphic operator AM-Op, unless [AM-Op > PPI] itself is in a (weak) NPIlicensing context. In a positive context like (35) or in the scope of a downward-entailing operator (36), the two negations in the representation of oarecare stay in situ, cancel each other out semantically and the PPI gets an existential interpretation: (35) Am intalnit un prieten oarecare. “I met some friend.”

¬¬∃x [friend(x) & I_met(x)]

(36) Putini studenti au scris un articol oarecare. “Few students wrote some article or other.” Few x[student(x)] & [¬¬∃y[article(y) & wrote(x,y)]] Szabolcsi identifies the two negations in contexts like (35)-(36) with semantically negative features5, and assumes that in these contexts, the features are “inactive”. Something different happens when the negative features in the representation of the PPI are in the immediate scope of a clausemate anti-additive (in the case of someone) or anti-morphic (for un N oarecare) operator, as in (37). In this case, the features get activated and need to be licensed. And for Szabolcsi, this licensing relation is achieved through binary resumption. (37) Nu am scris un articol oarecare. neg have.1sg written an article whatsoever “I didn’t write any article whatsoever.”

*not > oarecare

In (37), both negative features in the representation of the PPI get activated, but, crucially, only one can be licensed by resumption with the higher operator not. 4

Adopting the system developed in Postal (2000), Szabolcsi assumes that some is just one of the possible Spell-out forms of the configuration ¬¬∃. In this respect, some-any-no form a paradigm and the way it gets spelled out will depend on the context where this occurs. For the purposes of this paper, I will focus on PPIs, but I think the proposal can be extended to different types of polarity items (n-words, vreun) in Romanian (for details, see Fălăuş (in preparation)). 5 Szabolcsi shows that in the case of PPIs like someone, the first negative feature needs to be checked by an anti-additive operator, whereas the second negative feature can be checked by a merely downward entailing licenser. Oarecare-indefinites have the same underlying representation ∃, but the first feature needs to be checked by an anti-morphic operator.

ANAMARIA FĂLĂUŞ

118

The only way to rescue this illegitimate configuration is to embed it in a context where there is another NPI-licenser, as in (38):6 (38) a. Putini studenti nu au scris un articol oarecare. “Few students didn’t write any article whatsoever.” b. Few x[student(x)] & [¬ [¬¬∃y[article(y) & wrote(x,y)]]] The downward-entailing operator few in (38) can check the negative feature which remained unlicensed in a sentence like (37). Thus, the mechanism that allows the rescuing of a PPI is the same as the one at work for NPI-licensing/negative concord, as represented in (39) below: (39) NPI-licensing

[[licenser neg ...] ... [NPI neg ...]] no<x,y> …[[licenser ... x ...] ... [NPI ... y ...]] PPI-rescuing [[licenser neg ….] [licenser neg …[PPI neg neg…]] no<x,y>…[licenser …x … no [licenser z…w...y] ]

The analysis of PPI-rescuing as NPI-licensing is further supported by the fact that rescuing is subject to familiar intervention effects (see example (7), section 3), as illustrated by the ungrammaticality of (40), where the universal quantifier every intervenes between the licenser few and the negative feature in the PPI: (40) *Putini studenti din fiecare universitate nu au scris un articol oarecare “Few students from every university didn’t write any article whatsoever.” We can conclude that positing the existence of two negative features in the semantic representation of PPIs accounts for their distribution and their similarities with NPIs.7 6.

Conclusions and further issues In this study, I have provided empirical support for Szabolcsi’s analysis of positive polarity as halfway-licensing, by discussing the licensing conditions of two classes of polarity-sensitive items in Romanian: n-words and un N oarecare, which are both shown to be sensitive to antimorphy. Thus, Romanian provides further empirical arguments for the link between positive and negative polarity, which cannot be viewed as accidental. Consequently, I defend the claim that an 6

For ease of exposition, I simply represent licensing as negation cancellation, but recall that licensing is binary resumption: each negation in the PPI forms a binary resumptive quantifier with its licenser. 7 With respect to the well-known cross-linguistic variation in the licensing of polarity-sensitive items, Szabolcsi suggests that it can be implemented by positing semantically different negative features in their syntactic representations.

TOWARDS A UNIFIED ACCOUNT OF POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE POLARITY 119

analysis that postulates the same mechanism of interpretation for both negative and positive polarity is empirically and theoretically superior. One of the most important points of Szabolcsi’s analysis (elaborating on a proposal put forth in Postal 2000) is the assumption that positive and negative polarity are both interpreted through resumptive quantification. While this has been an influential position in the literature on negative concord (NPI-licensing), the extension to positive polarity is a recent move and constitutes an important step towards a unifying account of the polarity phenomenon. Another important advantage is that polarity-sensitive negation-containing expressions approach is neutral as to how additional lexical properties of the NPI may result in scalar implicatures. This is a welcome result for NPIs that denote scale-endpoints, such as any or a bit, as it has already been shown that the computation of ordered alternatives plays a crucial role in the interpretation of these items. Moreover, the free-choice reading of a PPI like un N oarecare is not surprising and can be derived through Gricean reasoning without necessarily extending the scalar implicature approach to all polarity-sensitive items. This way of connecting positive and negative polarity on the one hand, and positive polarity and free-choice effects, on the other, is a step further in the understanding of the distribution and interpretation of semantically dependent items.

References Błaszczak, Joanna. 2002. “On Licensing Conditions for N-Words in Polish”. Beiträge der Europäischen Slavistischen Linguistik (POLYSLAV) 5, ed. by R. Blankenhorn, S. Dönninghaus & R. Marzari, 31-40. München: Sagner. Baker, Carl Lee. 1970. “Double Negatives”. Linguistic Inquiry 1.169–186. Dayal, Veneeta. 1998. “Any as Inherently Modal”. Linguistics & Philosophy 21.433-476. Déprez, Viviane. 2000. “Parallel (A)symmetries and the Internal Structure of Negative Expressions”. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 18.253-342. Fălăuş, Anamaria. 2007. “Double Negation and Negative Concord: The Romanian puzzle”. Romance Linguistics 2006, ed. by J. Camacho et al., 135-148. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Fălăuş, Anamaria. In preparation. Polarity Items and Dependent Indefinites. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Nantes. Giannakidou, Anastasia. 1997. The Landscape of Polarity Items. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Groningen. Jespersen, Otto. 1909–1949. A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles. London: George, Allen, and Unwin Ltd.

120

ANAMARIA FĂLĂUŞ

Kratzer, Angelika & Junko Shimoyama. 2002. “Indeterminate Pronouns: The View from Japanese”. The Proceedings of the Third Tokyo Conference on Psycholinguistics (TCP 2002), ed. by Y. Otsu, 1-25. Tokyo: Hituzi Syobo. Ladusaw, William. 1980. Polarity Sensitivity as Inherent Scope Relations. New York: Garland. Linebarger, Marcia. 1987. “Negative Polarity and Grammatical Representation”. Linguistics and Philosophy 10.325-387. Pereltsvaig, Asya. 2004. “Negative Polarity Items in Russian and the ‘Bagel Problem’”. Negation in Slavic, ed. by A. Przepiorkowski & S. Brown. Bloomington, IN: Slavica Publishers. Postal, Paul M. 2000. The Ohio Lectures on Squat. Ms., New York University. Savescu–Ciucivara, Oana. 2005. “Oarecare Indefinites Are Not Just Any Indefinites”. Ms., New York University. de Swart, Henriette & Ivan Sag. 2002. “Negation and Negative Concord in Romance”. Linguistics & Philosophy 25.373-417. Szabolcsi, Anna. 2004. “Positive Polarity—Negative Polarity”. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 22.409-452. van der Wouden, Ton. 1997. Negative Contexts: Collocation, Polarity and Multiple Negation. (= Routledge Studies in German Linguistics, 1). London: Routledge. Zanuttini, Raffaella. 1991. Syntactic Properties of Sentential Negation. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania. Zwarts, Frans. 1993. “Three Types of Polarity”. Pluralilty and Quantification, ed. by F. Hamm & E. Hinrichs, 177-238. Dordrecht & Boston: Kluwer.

CORRELATIVIZATION AND DEGREE QUANTIFICATION IN SPANISH

JAVIER GUTIÉRREZ-REXACH The Ohio State University

This article develops an analysis of the syntactic and semantic properties of Spanish degree-correlative constructions. A movement analysis for the construction is defended, along the lines of recent proposals on correlatives cross-linguistically. At the semantic level, the wh-form is claimed to behave as an unselective operator heading a tripartite quantificational structure on degrees. Several empirical properties are claimed to follow from this characterization.

1.

Correlativization There has been a surge in interest in the study of correlativization in the last decade, given its numerous ramifications at the syntactic and semantic levels. Nevertheless, a generalization that has remained unchallenged until recently is that correlativization is a strategy mostly limited to Indo-Aryan languages, possibly related to head-finality (Keenan 1985, Srivastav 1991, Bhatt 2003). Consider the Hindi example of a correlativization structure in (1): (1)

Jo CD sale-par hai, Maya us CD-ko khari:d-egi. rel CD sale-on be-PRES, Maya DEM CD buy-FUT “Maya will buy the CD that is on sale.” lit. “Which CD is on sale, Maya will buy that CD.”

This sentence instantiates a correlativization process, where the relativized constituent has as its correlate not an empty element but rather an overt constituent (the demonstrative phrase that CD): [[ …Rel-XPi …] … Dem-XPi …] In this paper, I will argue that Romance languages, more concretely Spanish, also have correlative structures. Furthermore, correlativization is semantically restricted to relativization on degrees, as illustrated in (2): (2) a. Cuanto más lo miro, (tanto) más me gusta. how-much more it look-I, (so-much) more me like-I “The more I look at it, the more I like it.”

122

JAVIER GUTIÉRREZ-REXACH

b. Cuanto menos bebo, (tanto) menos me enfado. how-much less drink-I, (so-much) less me get-angry-I “The less I drink, the less angry I get.” As the above examples show, the overt presence of the correlate tanto “so-much” is optional. The sentences in (2) and others of a similar nature instantiate the following pattern: [[ …Rel-XP/degi …] … DemPron-XP/degi …] As will be explained later, there are also other sentential variants of the degree correlativization schema, such as (3): (3)

A menos bulto, más claridad. to less clutter, more clarity “The less cluttered things are, the more clarity there is.”

This would show that correlativization is quite productive in Spanish. These cases should not be confused with others in which correlativization is only apparent: (4)

Quien mal anda, mal acaba. who bad walks, bad ends “Whoever misbehaves (to degree d), fails (to degree d).”

Here a parallel is established between degrees but, as will be argued, correlative structures satisfy more stringent syntactic and semantic requirements. In what follows, I will be detailing the criteria that help us elucidate why (2) and (3) are correlative structures but (4) fails to meet the relevant conditions. In (4) we do not have a correlation between a constituent and a pronominal degree demonstrative, which is essential for the emergence of the ‘dependent’ correlative reading of (2).The repetition of the manner adverb mal “bad” in (3) is optional, and any other word can be substituted for it, as in (5a). The dependence between degrees is also optional. For example in (5b) there is no dependence or correlation between degrees. (5) a. Quien come demasiado, acaba mal. who eats too-much ends bad “Whoever eats too much, ends up in trouble.” b. Quien come demasiado, se acaba indisponiendo. who eats too much, REFL ends getting-sick “Whoever eats too much, gets sick.” The paper will be structured as follows: First, the fundamental structural properties of Spanish degree correlatives will be laid out; a syntactic analysis based on movement of the degree terms involved will be defended; and finally, the

CORRELATIVIZATION AND DEGREE QUANTIFICATION IN SPANISH

123

semantic properties of these constructions and others related to them will be analyzed. Overall, additional goals are to highlight the importance of syntactic edges in the computation of semantic properties at the syntax/semantics interface and to show how degree-related features are associated with quantificational structures instantiating well-known patterns in other domains. 2.

Basic structural facts The degree correlative construction can take several shapes. Generally, a strict repetition of the comparative degree proform occurs(más…más “more…more”; menos ... menos “less…less”): (6)

Cuanto más hablas, más te equivocas. how-much more talk-you more you are-wrong “The more you talk, the more mistakes you make.”

(7)

Cuanto menos gano, menos quiero trabajar. how-much less earn-I less want-I work “The less money I make, the less I want to work.”

A cross-polar correlation of degree terms is possible too (más...menos; menos…más): (8)

Cuanto más comía, menos hablaba. how-much more ate-he less talked-he “The more he ate, the less he was able to talk.”

As shown by Kennedy (1997), cross-polar elements denote degrees in scales of opposite directions. A correlation is established between two opposite scales (positive: increasing – negative: decreasing). In essence, the critical point is to have a correlation between extents or extent shifts or changes. The fact that the extents instantiate contrasting monotonicity directions does not seem to be relevant. Finally, the correlate in the main clause may be a synthetic comparative (mejor, peor): (9)

Cuanto menos trabajo, peor me siento. how-much less work-I worse me feel “The less I work, the worse I feel.”

There is ample evidence showing that this structure is an instance of (single headed) correlativization and that it is related to matching or identity of degrees or degree changes. First, if the degree proform is absent either in the relative clause or in the main clause, the sentence becomes ungrammatical:

124

JAVIER GUTIÉRREZ-REXACH

(10) a. *Cuanto lo miro, más me gusta. how-much it look-I, more me like-I “*The I look at it, I like it more.” b. *Cuanto menos corro, ando. how-much less run-I walk-I “*The less I work, I walk.” The omission of más in the relative clause in (10a) or of menos in the matrix clause of (10b) renders the sentences ungrammatical. The degree demonstrative tanto “such” is allowed as a modifier restricting the proform, whereas other degree quantifiers are blocked. For example, tres veces “three times” is not allowed in (11a), and the elative muchísimo “a lot-ELATIVE” is not possible in (11b). Scalar modifiers are also excluded, as (12) shows. (11) a. *Cuanto más lo miro, tres veces más me gusta. how-much more it look-I three times more me like “*The more I look at it, three times more I like it.” b. *Cuanto menos trabajo, muchísimo más me canso. how-much less work-I much-ELAT more me get-tired-I “*The less I work, I get tired a lot more.” (12)

*Cuanto mucho peor te portes, menos regalos te daré. how-much a-lot worse you behave, fewer presents you will-give-I “The much worse you behave, I’ll give you fewer presents.”

Full comparatives are excluded, as in (13). Amount quantifiers, such as pocos libros in (14), are not allowed in the correlative clause either. (13) *Cuanto peor te portes, menos regalos te daré que ayer. how-much worse you behave, fewer presents you will-give-I than yesterday “The much worse you behave, I’ll give you fewer presents than yesterday.” (14) *Cuantos pocos libros más lees, menos te educas. how-many few books more read-you less you become-educated “The fewer additional books you read, the less educated you become.” This is a specific characterizing property of the correlative construction. Relative clauses in general or other constructions with inter-clausal dependents do not trigger this restriction. In other words, unrestricted semantic comparison or correlation with degree quantifiers is possible and common in other structures, such as the coordinate structure in (15a) or the subordinate (rationale/concessive) clauses in (15b, c):

CORRELATIVIZATION AND DEGREE QUANTIFICATION IN SPANISH

125

(15) a. Lo miré mucho y me gustó tres veces más que antes. it looked lot and me liked three times more than before “I took a hard look at it, and I liked it three times more.” b. Parece que porque trabajo menos me canso muchísimo más. seems that because work-I less me get-tired much-ELAT more “It looks like, since I work less, I get a lot more tired.” c. Cuantos más libros lees, aunque sean pocos, más te educas. how-many more books read-you although are-they few more you educate “The fewer additional books you read, the less educated you become.” We may conclude from this asymmetry that there has to be a ‘matching’ correlation between degrees in correlative constructions, a property that we will be explaining later in more detail. This matching requirement can be related to a claim originally made by Srivastav’s (1991), namely that the wh-degree term is coindexed with a pronoun. Finally, notice that there are no ‘multiple-headed’ degree correlatives in Spanish: (16) *Cuantos más libros … más ... más … how-many more books … more … more … This contrasts with the situation in other languages, where multiple-headed correlatives are allowed. One possible explanation for this property is the fact that correlativization is restricted to degree elements in Spanish and, as we will be arguing later, the corresponding degree quantifier only binds one degree variable. In this respect, it should be noticed that constructions such as the one in (17) are instances of a coordinated structure, not multiple-headed correlatives, and as such they do not count as exceptions to this generalization: (17)

3.

Cuanto mejor te comportes y más deberes cumplas, más te recompensarán. how-much better you behave and more duties fulfill-you more you will-reward-they “The better you behave and fulfill your duties, the more rewards you will receive.”

Arguments for a movement analysis There are two main competing analyses of correlative structures: (A) A base-generated adjunction analysis (defended by Srivastav 1991); and (B) A movement analysis (argued for in Mahajan 2000, Bhatt 2003, Pancheva & Bhatt 2004). For a theory of type (A), the relative CP is base-generated as an adjunct to the matrix TP (IP in pre-minimalist terms). Thus, we would have an analysis such as (18):

126 (18)

JAVIER GUTIÉRREZ-REXACH

[TP [CP cuanto DegPi …] [TP

pronouni ]]

The CP denotes a generalized quantifier over degrees and binds a variable within the TP(IP) domain it is adjoined to. The “matching” property is thus reduced to the quantifier-pronominal variable relation. On the other hand, those defending a movement analysis propose the base structural analysis schematized in (19a): (19) a. [TP [DemP [CP cuant- DegP ] [DemP …] ]] b. [TP [CP cuant- DegP …]i [TP [DemP copyi [DemP …]] ]] (19b) would be the structure derived after movement of the relative CP. Thus, for (B)-theorists the relative CP is generated as an adjunct to the Demonstrative Phrase (DemP) in the matrix clause, and subsequently moves to an A-bar position, namely as an adjunct to TP. The matching property can be related to the binder-trace(copy) relation. In general, the relevant issue at stake here is how to elucidate which one of these two analyses is the correct one, as applied to Spanish degree correlatives. In what follows, I will present several arguments showing that an analysis of type (B) is to be preferred and that there is syntactic movement involved in the derivation of degree correlatives in Spanish. Evidence for the raising analysis comes from positional data and also from island-violation data. With respect to constituent positional data, it can be easily observed that degree elements have to occur in preverbal position. This generalization applies both to the degree pronoun in the matrix clause and to the degree pronoun in the relative CP. Sentence (20a) becomes ungrammatical in (20b) (aprendo precedes más in the matrix clause); (20c) is ungrammatical because leo precedes más in the correlative clause. (20) a. Cuanto más leo, más aprendo. how-much more read-I more learn-I “The more I read, the more I learn.” b. *Cuanto más leo, aprendo más. how-much more read-I learn-I more c. *Cuanto leo más, más aprendo. how-much read-I more, more learn-I A similar reasoning can be applied to the patterns in (21). The NP más libros “more books” cannot be split from the degree wh-word cuantos “how much”, as shown in (21b, c). In a parallel fashion, the Degree Phrase más cosas interesantes “more interesting things” has to be displaced to a peripheral position. It is not possible to leave in situ the NP cosas interesantes “interesting things”—as in (21d)— or the whole DegP —as in (21e):

CORRELATIVIZATION AND DEGREE QUANTIFICATION IN SPANISH

127

(21) a. Cuantos más libros leo, más cosas interesantes aprendo. how-many more books read-I, more things interesting I-learn “The more books I read, the more interesting things I learn.” b. *Cuantos leo más libros, más cosas interesantes aprendo. c. *Cuantos más leo libros, más cosas interesantes aprendo. d. *Cuantos más libros leo, más aprendo cosas interesantes. e. *Cuantos más libros leo, aprendo más cosas interesantes. Finally, movement of the DegP to the preverbal field is associated with subject inversion: (22) a. Cuanto más lee, más aprende Pedro. how-much more read-he, more learns Pedro “The more Pedro reads, the more he learns.” b. *Cuanto más lee, más Pedro aprende. The preverbal placement of a displaced constituent and subject-verb inversion generally indicates movement to a left-peripheral position (Torrego 1984, Suñer 1994, Gutiérrez-Rexach 1999, Rizzi 1997). This leads to the hypothesis that the relative constituent [cuant- más/más XP] is a displaced constituent in Spec CP. The correlate más is also in a displaced position (as a ‘matching’ degree copy/variable) in Degree Phrase (DegP). Thus, we would have the structure in (23):1 (23)

[TP [CP cuanto más …]i [TP

[DegP copyi másj [TP …copyj…]] ]]

Both the degree CP (denoting a generalized quantifier) and the degree pronoun occupy specifiers of the same degree phrase at one point in the derivation (in a multiple-specifiers configuration, as we are arguing here). The degree generalized quantifier moves one step further to check a feature related to sentential scope, given that degree quantifiers obligatorily take sentential scope (Heim 1996, Bhatt 2003). Further evidence of movement of the ‘lower’ degree pronoun/XP (the one in the matrix TP) is provided by island-violation data. The displacement of the degree element cannot escape strong islands. For example, sentence (24b) instantiates a violation of the complex-NP island constraint; and a sentential adjunct island is crossed in (24c):

1

For expository purposes, we use structural analyses with constituent labels and explicitly marking the points in the derivation where the copy is visible. Nevertheless, what we are saying could be easily implemented in a framework in which categorial labels where not used and derivations are driven by probe/goal requirements. Similarly, the movement operations advocated here (for consistency with the literature on the topic), can be more properly viewed as instances of internal merge along minimalist lines.

128

JAVIER GUTIÉRREZ-REXACH

(24) a. Cuanto más tiempo tengo, más libros creo que leo. how-much more time have-I more books believe-I that read-I “The more time I have, the more books I believe I read.” b. *Cuanto más tiempo tengo, más libros reconozco el hecho de que leo. how-much more time have-I more books see-I the fact of that read-I “*The more time I have, the more books I see the fact that I read.” c. *Cuanto más tiempo tengo, más libros me alegro si leo. how-much more time have-I more books me be-happy if read-I “*The more time I have, the more books I am happy if I read.” The displacement of the DegP in the correlative clause is also constrained in strong-island environments, as the ungrammaticality of the examples in (25) illustrates. Movement of the degree relative wh-phrase also triggers weak-island violations, especially negation, as shown in (26). (25) a. *Cuantos más libros es evidente la posibilidad de que lea, más voy a aprender. how-many more books is evident the possibility of that read-I more go-I to learn “*The more books it is clear the possibility that I read, the more I am going to learn.” b. *Cuantos más libros me alegro si leo, más aprendo. how-many more books me be-happy if read-I more learn-I “*The more books I am happy if I read, the more I learn.” (26) *Cuanto más no pidas, más te daré. how-much more not ask-you, more you will-give-I “*The more you don’t ask for, the more I’ll give you.” This property is expected when movement of a degree quantifier is involved, as observed by Rizzi (1990), Szabolcsi & Zwarts (1993) and Bosque (1998), among several authors. The explanation of what triggers sensitivity to weak islands developed by Szabolcsi & Zwarts (1993) is that there is an incompatibility between the denotational domain associated with degrees (a linear order) and the meaning corresponding to negation (the operation of complementation). Degrees have a scalar structure, so they denote a linear order. On the other hand, the negation operator denotes a function performing a complementation operation over a given domain. Thus, negation and degree quantification are incompatible; there is no element that can be identified as the complement of other in a linear order. Syntactically, movement of the degree terms leaves associated degree copies

CORRELATIVIZATION AND DEGREE QUANTIFICATION IN SPANISH

129

(traces) behind. Thus, the matching requirement that has been observed between degree elements has to be a match of all the relevant copies. Since there are two degree elements —one in the lower clause and another one in the preposed relative clause, as we mentioned above—, these two terms have to be under the same projection at some point in the derivation (Koopman 2000, Kayne 2005). Actually the derivation advocated here bears a certain resemblance to the one proposed by Sportiche (1998) for clitic constructions. We will assume that the degree proform moves to a DegP projection to check its degree feature (Corver 1997, Neeleman et al. 2004). Thus, the matching requirement between degree elements is syntactically expressed, as it is also the case with free relatives (Groos & van Riemsdijk 1981, Harbert 1983, Suñer 1984, etc). We postulate that the relevant semantic matching of degree terms takes place in a multiple-specifier configuration in DegP —cf. Koizumi (1995) for multiple specifiers in general; Matushansky (2002) for justification of the idea of movement of degree terms; and Gutiérrez-Rexach (1999) for its application in other constructions. The proposed structure is represented in (27): (27)

[DegP [CP DegQP] DegPi [TP … copyi…]]

We now have all the ingredients needed in order to characterize the derivation of a degree correlative construction such as (28). The derivational steps are given in (29). (28)

Cuanto más leo, más aprendo. How-much more read-I more learn-I “The more I read, the more I learn.”

(29) a. [TP aprendo más [CP cuanto más leo]] b. [DegP [CP cuanto más leo] i másj [TP … copyj … copyi …]] c. [TP [CP cuanto más …]i [TP [DegP copyi másj [TP …copyj…copyi …] ]] ] The first step, sketched in (29b), would be the movement of the degree relative CP and the degree pronoun to the specifier positions of the left peripheral DegP, deriving the matching requirement. A subsequent movement operation is shown in (29c): The relative clause would target the adjunct position of the matrix TP, in consonance with the raising analysis of correlatives advocated here. This would derive the expected Spell-Out order. As pointed out by a reviewer, the ungrammaticality of (12) and (14) above suggests that the wh-word and the scalar modifier compete for the same structural position (i.e. [Spec, mas/menos]) at some point of the derivation, cf. Brucart (2004) for the position of scalar modifiers with comparative operators.

130

JAVIER GUTIÉRREZ-REXACH

We noted at the beginning of the paper that correlativization is restricted to degree terms and that there are no nominal correlative structures. Nevertheless, there are a few constructions that might appear to be possible candidates. Sentences such as the one in (30), which are very common in sayings or ‘refranes’, appear to be nominal correlatives. The same would apply to (31)): (30)

Dime con quién andas y te diré quién eres. tell-me with who go-you and you will-tell-I who are-you “Tell me who you hang around with, and I’ll tell you who you really are.”

(31)

Dime de qué presumes y te diré de lo que careces. Tell-me of what brag-about-you and you will-tell-I of the that lack-you “Tell me what you brag about, and I’ll tell you what you are lacking.”

Nevertheless, this idea can be easily dismissed once one realizes that the relationship between the two wh-terms in (30), and quien “who” and lo (que) “the (that)” in (31), is not one of correlativization. First, the two sentential fragments are connected by coordination, and there is no adjunction of one clause to the other one. Secondly, there does not have to be a correlation or matching between both wh-terms. As a matter of fact, probably they could even be of different types. Although the refranes correlate terms of the same type, changing one of them to include terms of different types or denoting different entities is still unproblematic. Finally, the positional and movement-related restrictions attested in degree correlatives are not observed in this case. The presence of the second wh-term is not obligatory either. For example, Dime de qué presumes y te diré que careces de muchas cosas ‘Tell me what you brag about, and I’ll tell you that you lack many things’ is grammatical. 4.

The semantics of degree correlatives In what follows, I will claim that the interpretation of degree correlatives is very similar to that of comparative conditionals (McCawley 1988, Beck 1997). Consider sentence (32): (32)

The more you read the more you learn.

The comparative conditional in (32) is interpreted as ‘There is a degree/quantity d such that if there is an increase in the number d of books that you read, there is a corresponding increase d in what you learn’. Formally, we can treat the as denoting a determiner function on degrees. As such, it takes a degree argument to form a generalized quantifier on degrees (Heim 2006). This generalized quantifier combines with a second degree property (the main TP property) to yield a truth value.

CORRELATIVIZATION AND DEGREE QUANTIFICATION IN SPANISH

(33)

131

[The d](you read d-more)(you learn d-more)

The meaning of the can be taken to be the standard one associated with definite descriptions, namely the Russellian iota operator conveying uniqueness, existence and salience. We can treat these properties as presupposed content, as done in standard treatments by Heim (1982), and Roberts (2003) among others (this position is nevertheless subject to debate). (34)

[Iota d](you read d-more)(you learn d-more)

Thus, the operator corresponding to the determiner combines with two degree properties and binds two occurrences of the degree variable d. These occurrences are associated to the copies of the displaced degree terms in overt syntax. Let us now consider how this preliminary treatment of comparative conditionals can be applied to Spanish degree correlatives. In this case, we do not have an overt definite determiner. Rather, the correlative clause is headed by the wh-word cuanto. We have two options at this point. One possibility is to say that wh-elements do not have quantificational force of their own (Berman 1991). According to this hypothesis, wh-words would behave like indefinites in contributing free variables to the logical form of a sentence. These variables would be bound by an adverb of quantification or by a covert operator present in the surrounding context (hierarchically c-commanding the relevant variables). A prediction of this account is that quantificational variability effects are to be expected. In other words, since the wh-word does not have quantificational force of its own, the force of the sentence is to be determined by a covert/overt operator. Let us check whether this is the case for degree correlatives. Consider sentence (35): (35)

Generalmente, cuantos más libros leo, menos películas veo. generally how-many more books read-I fewer movies watch-I “Generally, the more books I read, the fewer movies I watch.”

Here the presence of generalmente “generally” should be associated with the proportional (“most”-like) reading of the wh-variable. If generalmente “generally” were an unselective binder in this example, i.e. an adverb of quantification binding more than one variable, the associated logical form would be as in (36), where the generic operator (Gen) binds both the individual variables x,y associated with libros “books”/películas “movies” and the degree variable d: (36)

[Gen x, y, d ](I read books(x) d-more)(I watch movies (y) d-fewer)

132

JAVIER GUTIÉRREZ-REXACH

Nevertheless, if we consider the actual reading of (35), it is clear that it would not be the one corresponding to (36). Rather, the correct logical form for the intended reading of (35) is (37): (37) [Gen e][Iota d][Exist x, y](I read(e) books(x) d-more)(I watch(e) movies(y) d-fewer) (37) can be paraphrased as “In general, there is a number (degree) d such that if I read more books to that number (d-more books), I watch fewer movies in that amount (d-fewer movies)”. The generic quantifier (Gen) associated with generally is a selective binder quantifying over events. Similarly, the force of the quantifier associated with the individual variable restricted by the bare plurals is existential. Finally, the degree variable is bound by a definite determiner: In (35) we are referring to a unique degree (number or number interval). Thus, we have to conclude that a proposal that would leave the degree variable free (subject to external binding) would not make the correct empirical predictions with respect to the semantics of (35). In general, definites do not give raise to pure unselective readings. Compare (38a) and (38b). (38b) lacks a reading with a generic/universal interpretation of the definite determiners, whereas (38a) is the paradigmatic example showing that indefinites do have generic/universal interpretations. (38) a. If a farmer owns a donkey he beats it. b. If the farmer owns the donkey, he beats it. The variant with a definite determiner only has the felicitous reading in which the uniqueness and familiarity presuppositions of the definites are satisfied: We are talking about a particular (unique and familiar) farmer who beats the donkey he owns. In this respect, we have an almost complete parallelism with the comparative correlative construction from a semantic point of view. Cuantos “how many” is not associated with a free variable lacking quantificational force. Rather, in (37) there is a iota operator (corresponding to a definite determiner) on degrees, as in (34). This property would also make degree correlatives similar in quantificational force to most free relatives, as defended by Jacobson (1995) among others —see also Caponigro (2003) on this issue, and Gutiérrez-Rexach (2000) on how some variation may arise. For example, the free relative in (39) has the quantificational force of a definite: (39)

Lo que leas es tu problema. the that read-you is your problem “What (i.e. the things) you read is your problem.”

CORRELATIVIZATION AND DEGREE QUANTIFICATION IN SPANISH

133

Amount relatives (Carlson 1977) are headed by the wh-word cuanto(s) “how much/many” and also behave like definite descriptions quantificationally. In (40) we are saying that “The amount of books you read is your problem”, where cuantos again has the force of a definite. (40)

Cuantos libros leas es tu problema. How-many books read-you is your problem “The number of books you read is your problem.”

The hypothesis that seems to be more natural and consistent with the empirical evidence seen so far is that the degree correlative is part of a tripartite quantificational structure headed by a degree definite determiner. The degree correlative thus denotes a generalized quantifier on degrees. The semantic representation of sentence (41) would be (42): (41)

(42)

Cuanto más lees, más aprendes. how-much more read-you more learn-you “The more your read, the more you learn.” [Cuanto d](lees d-más)(aprendes d-más)

As, can be inferred from (42), the wh-determiner simultaneously binds the degree variable in the free relative and the variable corresponding to the degree proform in the main clause. Binding of both occurrences of the degree variable forces the interpretive ‘correlation’ or match between the two degree terms. Intuitively, (41) means that, if you increase your reading by a certain amount, what you learn will also increase accordingly. In other words, there is a match or correlation between what you read and what you learn. Let us explain why this is so. Recently, it has been proposed (Kennedy 1997, Schwarzschild & Wilkinson 2002) that degree variables do not necessarily range over points but rather over intervals. In this respect, the ontological structure of degrees is similar to the structure of times, where the denotation of a variable t is a time interval not a moment. What this means is that the denotation assigned to a variable d would be a degree interval. Then —assuming that our proposal on the quantificational nature of cuantos is correct— the definite determiner would bind both degree variables in (42), and, as a consequence, d in (42) would be referring to a (unique and salient) degree interval d such that if your read d-more, you learn d-more. This is exactly the intended reading of (41). There are a number of additional predictions that follow from this hypothesis. First, if the degree variables in (42) are bound by the determiner associated with cuanto, it is expected that no other degree quantifiers can occur in this sentence, given that they would lack a variable to bind. This would explain why a sentence such as (11a), repeated here as (43), is ungrammatical:

134 (43)

JAVIER GUTIÉRREZ-REXACH

*Cuanto más lo miro, tres veces más me gusta. how much more it look-at-I, three times more me like “*The more I look at it, three times more I like it.”

In this case, tres veces “three times” would bind the occurrence of d in its most immediate scope and, as a consequence, cuanto “how much” would fail to bind a variable in its nuclear scope, violating the principle against vacuous quantification (quantifiers must bind a variable in their restriction and nuclear scope). The corresponding logical form would be ill-formed as shown in (44): (44)

*[Cuanto d](I look x d-more)([three times d] (I like x d-more))

Notice that it is not possible for one of the occurrences of the degree variable to be bound by a comparative operator either, as shown in (45): (45)

*Cuanto más cansado está que Pedro, más grita. how-much more tired is-he than Pedro, more shouts-he “*The more tired he is than Pedro, the more he shouts.”

This would follow from the commonly accepted idea that comparative operators bind degree variables (cf. Moltmann 1992 among many others). In (45), the comparative operator corresponding to más .. que “more …than” would bind the degree variable, preventing cuantos from doing so. Nevertheless, there are a few apparent exceptions to the generalization that we have just stated about the incompatibility of degree correlatives and other quantificational elements on degrees. For some speakers, sentences such as (45) improve if the complement of the two quantifiers is made explicit, as observed by a reviewer: Cuanto más cansado está que Pedro, más grita que Ana “lit. The more tired he is than Pedro, the louder he shouts than Ana”; Cuanto peor te portes que tu hermano, menos regalos te daré que a tu hermana “lit. The worse you behave than your brother, I’ll give you fewer presents than to your sister”. These sentences are not grammatical in my own dialect, and in those of a majority of speakers I have asked. A more interesting case is represented by sentences such as (46): (46)

Cuanto peor te portas, aún más te odio. how-much worse you behave, even more you hate-I “The worse you behave, even more I hate you.”

It would seem that (46) contradicts what we have said with respect to (43) and (45). Nevertheless, this is only apparent, since in this case aún is a modifier, not a genuine quantifier. Aún does not bind the degree variable of te odio “I hate you”. Its only role is to restrict the range of this variable to a contextually determined

CORRELATIVIZATION AND DEGREE QUANTIFICATION IN SPANISH

135

subdomain. It is not coincidental that aun also works as a focus particle, more or less equivalent to even. For example, in Aun Pedro lo sabe “Even Pedro knows it”. Without getting into this connection in detail, —there are several prosodic, syntactic and semantic differences between the focal adverb aun and the modifying aún—, the role of modifying aún seems to also be related to evoking a set of degree alternatives (Rooth 1992) and choosing one of them, leading to the relevant restriction. This is not the only particle with a similar function. In a related fashion, notice that the role of más “more” and menos “less” in (35) or más “more” and más “more” in (41), and so on, is precisely to restrict the range of the degree variable. This role is not incompatible with the quantificational requirements imposed by cuanto. Hence, the variable can be restricted by opposite degree modifiers, and we still get the required matching. For example, the simplified logical form of (47) would look like (48): (47)

(48)

Cuanto más comas, menos vivirás. how-much more eat-you less will-live-you “The more you eat now, the less you will live.” [Cuanto d](comas d-más)(vivirás d-menos)

The modifiers más/menos “more/less” restrict the range of the variable and indicate the relevant direction within the denotational domain of degrees (a linear order, cf. Szabolcsi & Zwarts 1993). An interesting issue that will not be pursued here in detail for reasons of space is whether in some instances there is only indirect or functional dependence between the variables, in other words, whether there is an intermediate functional variable bound by an existential quantifier taking the second occurrence of the degree variable as its argument. This would allow for more flexible forms of correlation so that d-increments or changes in the restriction and the nuclear scope would not necessarily be identical. The logical form of (47) would be (49): (49)

[Cuanto d](comas d-más)[Exist f](vivirás f(d)-menos)

5.

Correlation and dependence Since our main hypothesis is that the force of cuanto is that of a definite determiner, it would be interesting to check whether a true definite determiner would be able to substitute for this wh-word in a correlative construction. There is one clear candidate in this respect, namely the neuter determiner lo, which participates in a majority of degree relatives (Gutiérrez-Rexach 1999): (50)

No sé lo alto que es. not know the tall that is-he “I don’t know how tall he is.”

136

JAVIER GUTIÉRREZ-REXACH

Interestingly, correlativization is not possible when a degree correlative clause is headed by lo, as shown in (51): (51)

*Lo más que compras, más quieres. the-neut more that buy-you, more want-you “The more you buy, the more you want.”

This incompatibility can be related to the different semantic content of cuanto “how much” and lo “the-neut.” It is true that they both function as definite determiners, i.e. they have uniqueness, familiarity, and salience preconditions (presuppositions) associated to them. Nevertheless, there is an important difference. The degree determiner lo imposes an additional condition (it carries an additional presupposition) of epistemic acquaintance (specificity). Notice that it is commonly used in exclamative constructions (Gutiérrez-Rexach 2001), which normally require this presupposition: (52)

¡Lo alto que es! the-neut tall that is-he “How tall he is!”

An utterance of (52) by a speaker would be felicitous only if she has a specific degree interval (height) in mind and she expresses surprise, amazement or some other emotional attitude towards that degree. Normally, what (52) expresses is that the person in question is very tall. On the other hand, cuanto más “the more” tends to lack a specificity presupposition and behaves like a weak definite (Carlson 2001). The main characteristic of weak definites is that they normally support dependent readings. For example, the reference of the bride in (53) is not fixed to a ‘specific’ individual. Rather, it varies with the different situations (weddings) under consideration: (53)

Whenever I go to a wedding, I kiss the bride.

In Spanish, free-relative constructions with wh-terms tend to be associated with dependent readings (Gutiérrez-Rexach 2000, Caponigro 2003). In the case of correlatives, the dependent reading is forced, since a correlation is established between two terms. There is another construction in which the dependent nature of cuanto is highlighted. It involves instances where a semantic correlation is established between two degree wh-terms (cuanto … cuanto). Here we talk only about semantic correlation because —as we mentioned before— these constructions do not meet the syntactic requirements needed to qualify as degree correlatives of the sort studied in this paper. Here is an example:

CORRELATIVIZATION AND DEGREE QUANTIFICATION IN SPANISH

(54)

137

Tanto en cuanto me pides tanto en cuanto te presto. so-much in how-much me ask-you so-much in how-much you lend-I “I’ll lend you as much as you ask me.”

In this case, we have a correlation or dependency between what is being asked for and what is lent. Nevertheless, the syntactic derivation previously described does not apply here: There are no movement restrictions; the presence of the second correlative term is also optional, as shown in (55); etc. (55)

Te prestaré dinero, tanto en cuanto me sea de utilidad. you lend-I money, so-much in how-much me is of utility “I’ll lend you as much money as I find it useful to me.”

In (55), the correlation or dependence of cuanto is with respect to a hidden modal/temporal operator: i.e. in future situations, I will lend you as much money as I see fit. Thus, this type of dependent degree relatives does not appear to need a correlative term in order to trigger the required quantificational association. Another difference is that degree directional modifiers are not allowed: (56)

*Tanto en cuanto más me pidas… so-much in how-much more me ask-you

Nevertheless, the main semantic difference with the standard correlative construction seems to be that in this case there is no quantification over interval/amount increases, but rather over fixed amounts/degrees. The logical form of (54) would be (57): (57)

[Cuanto d](you ask me for d)(I’ll give you d)

We have just examined a case of correlation that does not follow the pattern examined in this paper. Nevertheless, it seems legitimate to inquire whether there are other constructions where the combination of syntactic and semantic properties that we have spelled out so far is also observed. Interestingly enough, there is one. Consider the sentence in (58):2 (58)

A más guerra, más dolor. to more war, more pain “The more war there is, the more pain there is.”

In (58), the same type of correlation or dependence between degree properties is satisfied, and the quantificational force of the sentence is that of a definite 2

There are also additional dialectal variants: entre más.., más; contra más .. más…

138

JAVIER GUTIÉRREZ-REXACH

determiner. The most interesting property of (58) is that there is no overt wh-term. The correlate degree pronoun is required: (59)

*A más guerra, dolor. to more war, pain

The most natural explanation for this asymmetry is that in (58) there is a hidden degree quantifier. As a matter of fact, the presence of a in the correlative clause seems to indicate this property. Recall that it has been claimed that a is in Romance a prepositional complementizer, with evidence coming from different constructions (Kayne 1994, Rivero 1994). For example, Rivero (1994) claims that Spanish infinitival imperatives —such as (60)— are complementizers headed by a, with an empty illocutionary force operator (61): (60)

(61)

¡A correr! to run “Run!” [CP Op [a PRO correr]]

We can extend this proposal to (58), claiming that [a más… ] is a correlative CP. In this case, the null or covert operator would be one equivalent to cuanto, namely a definite description (iota) operator. This property would result in the identity in meaning with respect to standard degree correlatives. 6.

Conclusion In this paper, it has been shown that Spanish has a productive correlativization construction: the degree correlative. This construction has very particular syntactic and semantic properties that have not been studied so far in detail, to the best of my knowledge. A movement analysis for the construction is argued for, relying on movement of two degree operators. Semantically, the wh-form is claimed to head a tripartite quantificational structure on degrees. Several properties have been shown to follow from this characterization. From a cross-linguistic viewpoint, the study of this type of correlatives also bears some interest, since it may show that correlativization involves more strategies than previously thought. Ultimately, this hypothesis would crucially depend on the nature of the entities quantified over, which will give raise to different matching effects (cf. Bhatt 2006 for a comparison of Hindi and Hungarian on this point).

CORRELATIVIZATION AND DEGREE QUANTIFICATION IN SPANISH

139

References Beck, Sigrid. 1997. “On the Semantics of Comparative Conditionals”. Linguistics & Philosophy 20.229-271. Berman, Steve. 1991. On the Semantics and Logical Form of Wh-Clauses. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Bhatt, Rajesh. 2003. “Locality in Correlatives”. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 21.485-541. Bhatt, Rajesh. 2006. “Relativizing in Space and Time”. Ms., University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Bosque, Ignacio. 1998. “Sobre los Complementos de Medida”. Estudios en honor del profesor Josse de Kock, ed. by Nicole Delbecque & Christian de Paepe, 57-72. Leuven: Leuven University Press. Brucart, Josep Maria. 2004. “Adición, Sustracción y Comparación: Un análisis composicional de las construcciones aditivo-sustractivas del español”. Barcelona: UAB Research Reports. Caponigro, Ivano. 2003. Free Not to Ask: On the Semantics of Free Relatives and Wh-Words Cross-linguistically. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles. Carlson, Greg. 1977. “Amount Relatives”. Language 53.520-542. Carlson, Greg. 2001. “Weak Indefinites”. From NP to DP, ed. by Martine Coene & Yves D’hulst, 195-210. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Corver, Norbert. 1997. “The Internal Syntax of the Dutch Extended Adjectival Projection”. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 15.289-368. Groos, Maurice & Henk van Riemsdijk. 1978. “Matching Effects in Free Relatives”. Theory of Markedness in Generative Grammar, ed. by Adriana Belletti, 171-216. Pisa: Scuola Normale Superiore. Gutiérrez-Rexach, Javier. 1999. “The Structure and Interpretation of Spanish Neuter Degree Constructions". Lingua 109.35-63. Gutiérrez-Rexach, Javier. 2000. “The Quantificational Variability of Free Relatives”. Proceedings of the Chicago Linguistics Society 35.109-123. Gutiérrez-Rexach, Javier. 2001. “Spanish Exclamatives and the Semantics of the Left Periphery”. Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 1999: Selected papers from ‘Going Romance’ 1999, Leiden, 9–11 December 1999, ed. by Yves D’hulst, Johan Rooryck & Jan Schroten, 167-194. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Harbert, Wayne. 1983. “On the Nature of the Matching Parameter”. The Linguistic Review 2.237-284. Heim, Irene. 1982. The Semantics of Definite and Indefinite NPs. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Heim, Irene. 1996. “On the Logical Syntax of Degree Operators”. Ms., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.

140

JAVIER GUTIÉRREZ-REXACH

Heim, Irene. 2006. “Remarks on Comparative Clauses as Generalized Quantifiers”. Ms., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge. Izvorsky, Roumyana. 1997. “Syntax and Semantics of Correlative Proforms”. Proceedings of the 26th Annual Meeting of the North Eastern Linguistic Society (NELS) 26.133-147. Amherst, MA: GLSA Publications. Jacobson, Polly. 1995. “The Quantificational Force of Free Relative Clauses”. Quantification in Natural Languages, ed. by Emmon Bach et al., 451-486. Dordrecht & Boston: Kluwer. Kayne, Richard. 1994. The Antisymmetry of Syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Kayne, Richard. 2005. Movement and Silence. New York: Oxford University Press. Keenan, Edward. 1985. “Relative Clauses”. Language Typology and Syntactic Description, ed. by Tim Shopen, 141-170. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Kennedy, Chris. 1997. Projecting the Adjective. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Santa Cruz. Koizumi, Masatoshi. 1995. Phrase Structure in Minimalist Syntax. Ph.D. dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge. Koopman, Hilda J. 2000. The Syntax of Specifiers and Heads. London: Routledge. Mahajan, Anoop. 2000. “Relative Asymmetries and Hindi Correlatives”. The Syntax of Relative Clauses, ed. by Artemis Alexiadou et al., 201-229. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Matushansky, Ora. 2002. Movement of Degree/Degree of Movement. Ph.D. dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge. McCawley, James. 1988. “The Comparative Conditional Construction in English, German and Chinese”. Proceedings of the Fourteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistic Society, 176-187. Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Linguistics Society. Moltmann, Friederike. 1992. Coordination and Comparatives. Ph.D. dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge. Neeleman, Ad., Hans van de Koot & Jenny Doetjes. 2004. “Degree Expressions”. The Linguistic Review 21.1-66. Pancheva, Roumyana & Rakesh Bhatt. 2004. “Late Merger of Degree Clauses”. Linguistic Inquiry 35.1-45. Rizzi, Luigi. 1990. Relativized Minimality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Rizzi, Luigi. 1997. “The Fine Structure of the Left Periphery”. Elements of Grammar: Handbook in Generative Syntax, ed. by Liliane Haegeman, 281-338. Dordrecht & Boston: Kluwer. Rivero, María-Luisa. 1994 “On Indirect Questions, Commands, and Spanish Quotative que”. Linguistic Inquiry 25.547-554. Roberts, Craige. 2003 “Uniqueness in Definite Noun Phrases”. Linguistics & Philosophy 26.287-350.

CORRELATIVIZATION AND DEGREE QUANTIFICATION IN SPANISH

141

Rooth, Mats. 1992. “A Theory of Focus Interpretation”. Natural Language Semantics 1.75-116. Schwarzschild, Roger & Karina Wilkinson. 2002. “Quantifiers in Comparatives: A Semantics of Degree Based on Intervals”. Natural Language Semantics 10.1-41. Sportiche, Dominique. 1998. Partitions and Atoms of Clause Structure. London: Routledge. Srivastav, Veneeta. 1991. “The Syntax and Semantics of Correlatives”. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 9.637-686. Suñer, Margarita. 1984. “Free Relatives and the Matching Parameter”. The Linguistic Review 3.363-387. Szabolcsi, Anna & Frans Zwarts. 1993. “Weak Islands and an Algebraic Semantics for Scope Taking”. Natural Language Semantics 1.235-284. Torrego, Esther. 1984. “On Inversion in Spanish and Some of its Effects”. Linguistic Inquiry 15.103-129.

IMPERFECT VARIATION AND CLASS MARKING IN THE OLD SPANISH THIRD CONJUGATION ∗

NICHOLAS C. HENRIKSEN Indiana University

This paper builds on insights first laid out in Penny’s (1972) work on Old Spanish root vowel morphology. Specifically, it examines the role that verb class had in determining Old Spanish imperfect ending (i.e., -ie vs. -ia). It draws on the knowledge that -ie existed in variation with etymological -ia during the 14th and 15th centuries (cf. Henriksen 2008; Imhoff 1996, 1998) and examines the influence that this alternation exerted on the raising of Old Spanish third conjugation root vowels. The analysis is based on data extracted from four Old Spanish texts. In section 1, I review the basic principle behind Penny’s thesis on root vowel morphology. In section 2, I provide background on the development of the Old Spanish imperfect. I present information about the current study in section 3. I organize the results in section 4 and interpret them in section 5, where I advocate for the incorporation of the Old Spanish imperfect in -ie within the general framework of Penny’s thesis. I conclude in section 6.

1.

Old Spanish root vowel morphology In one of the most well-known works on the interaction between phonetic change and verb class marking known to affect the verbal paradigm in Spanish, Penny (1972) contends that root vowels morphologically distinguished second and third conjugation verbs in Old Spanish such that mid vowels remained categorical in second conjugation stems. Both mid and high vowels were permissible in third conjugation stems when the theme vowel was present. Crucially, when the theme vowel of a second or third conjugation verb had undergone syncope, the height of the root vowel was categorical: mid vowels surfaced in second conjugation roots, and high vowels surfaced in third conjugation roots. An illustrative example can be found in the case of the Old Spanish future, for which syncope of the theme vowel was a regular development. Penny shows that mid vowels surfaced in the stem of syncopated second conjugation verb forms (i.e., com(b)ra “s/he will eat,” never cum(b)ra for comer “to eat”) and that high vowels surfaced in the stem of syncopated third conjugation verb forms (i.e., subra “s/he will go up,” never ∗

I wish to thank Mary Clayton for the guidance that she has offered throughout the research process. I am also grateful to Lorenzo García-Amaya, Kimberly Geeslin, and two anonymous reviewers for their comments on previous versions of this paper. All errors remain my own.

144

NICHOLAS C. HENRIKSEN

sobra for sobir~subir “to go up”). Since the theme vowel had been lost, there was no way to communicate information about the conjugation to which the verb belonged other than to do so via the height of the root vowel.1 Penny’s case for verb class marking by means of the root vowel is well-stated: “There seems to be no other reason for this preponderance of high vowels in syncopated forms [of third conjugation verbs] than the desire to distinguish -er verbs from -ir verbs” (1972:353).2 As regards the morphological structure of the Old Spanish imperfect, a similar phenomenon could have played out, given that two endings were available for use during this period. Specifically, the etymological imperfect paradigm in -ia, used in both the second and third conjugations, would have disallowed raising of third conjugation front root vowels, since the dissimilatory process /i/…/í/ > /e/…/í/, a phenomenon known to affect all verbal paradigms, operated when the -ia ending (pronounced [í.a]) was concatenated to the verb stem. What is most striking about the case of the imperfect in -ia is that its Old Spanish competitor in -ie (pronounced [jé]) would have allowed for verb class distinction (i.e., metie “s/he was putting in” for meter “to put in,” compared to midie “s/he was measuring” for medir “to measure”), since stress on final -e in forms like midie (and not on -i- as in media) circumvented front vowel dissimilation in third conjugation verbs.3 Thus, third conjugation imperfects in -ie would have been allowed to raise their root vowels to /i/, simultaneously marking their conjugation by means of a high vowel. The question that arises in light of this observation is whether or not third conjugation imperfect verbs that were known to have front vowels in their stem did indeed exhibit a stronger correlation to -ie than to -ia. What is especially interesting about the case of the Old Spanish imperfect is that the paradigm in -ie was quickly disappearing from the morphology during the 14th century. Keeping this in mind, we ask whether or not there was an impetus for third conjugation verbs to employ the paradigm in -ie with greater frequencies during this time, since -ie would have been a more felicitous alternative in terms of verb class marking. Before we consider this possibility, however, it is necessary to review the proposals that have been put forth to account for the development of -ie, in order to obtain a better understanding of the linguistic variables that 1 Penny provides information on the formation of the present, weak preterite, future, and conditional as well. 2 Penny (2002b) considers the effect that lexical aspect had in determining the nature of root vowels in the Old Spanish second and third conjugations. It is worth noting that the general thesis presented in Penny (1972) was not put in question in Penny (2002b), but that the latter publication investigated the effect of a new variable ‘lexical aspect’. The current study, however, will not examine the interaction between lexical aspect and imperfect paradigm choice since the scope of its analysis is limited to historical morphology and phonology. 3 I follow the common belief that the pronunciation of -ie was [jé] (see Malkiel (1959), for example). Nevertheless, it has been reported that [í.e] existed (Penny 2002a), although it is my contention that this latter option was most probably employed in poetry to adhere to metrical conventions. For further discussion, see section 5 of this paper.

IMPERFECT VARIATION IN THE OLD SPANISH THIRD CONJUGATION

145

governed its use during the Old Spanish period. Section 2 is provided with this goal in mind. 2.

The Old Spanish imperfect in -ie There is little doubt that the modern paradigm in -ía developed from the Latin second, third, and fourth conjugation paradigms in -ĒBAM and -ĪBAM (Penny 2002a). The Old Spanish imperfect in -ie, however, was not an etymological paradigm, and numerous accounts have been put forth to explain its 11th century appearance in the verbal morphology. The earliest attempts to explain the emergence of -ie were based on Neo-Grammarian principles and sought to discover a phonetic sound law capable of both vowel change and accent shift in what had been believed to be a rapid evolution from /ía/ to /ié/ (Gassner 1897; Hanssen 1894). Additionally, it was believed that the change back to /ía/ was abrupt, occurring not too long after the turn of the fourteenth century. Ford (1906), however, was bothered by limitations that pervaded explanations grounded solely in phonological theory, citing that many Spanish nouns had consistently maintained a hiatus in /ía/ throughout the course of time. Although Ford was unable to propose an analogical solution to the emergence of the -ie paradigm, his ideas were very much in line with what Malkiel (1959) proposed a half-century later. According to Malkiel (1959), the rise of -ie was due to analogy from the Old Spanish conjugation of dar and verbs derived from its Latin etymon (i.e., perder, vender), all of which exhibited the /ié/ sequence in the preterite. He claimed that -ie’s shift from the preterite into the imperfect originated in the first person plural. Displacement of etymological -ia next occurred in the remaining plural grammatical persons, and finally in the third and second persons singular. Potential homonymy between first and third persons singular would have thwarted total displacement of -ia in the former. In order to account for -ie’s rapid disappearance from imperfect morphology, Malkiel contended that analogy with the final -a in the first conjugation imperfect -ava and potential frequency effects from the resilient first person singular in -ia operated simultaneously to eradicate ie from the imperfect morphology. More recently, Imhoff (1998) noted that -ie and -ia coexisted well beyond the turn of the fourteenth century. For example, a quantitative analysis of imperfect forms extracted from texts dating beyond 1450 yielded distributions for -ie between 5% and 10%, an unexpected finding in light of the proposals set forth in Hanssen (1894) and Malkiel (1959), for example. Additionally, Imhoff cited a 1625 Spanish grammar written by Gonzalo de Correas, who associated the use of the imperfect in -ie with unsophisticated and archaic speech patterns prevalent in Castile-La Mancha and Extremadura. Correas made explicit references to the use of -ie in spoken seventeenth century vernacular, a confirmation that textual alternations between -ie and -ia were orthographic conventions devised to reflect an oral tradition present in the Old Spanish history of centuries past. González

146

NICHOLAS C. HENRIKSEN

Ollé (2000), Lapesa (1980), and Penny (2002a) have put forth similar proposals, and in fact, González Ollé and Penny have noted that -ie forms were attested in 16th century literature.4 Henriksen (2008) continued the study of the -ie ~ -ia alternation by examining four texts whose original date of composition ranged between 1295 and 1410. 5 14th century texts rendered distributions for -ie between 10% and 70%, and one 15th century text employed -ie at a rate of 2%. This was the first known study to extract more than 1000 imperfect tokens from a single text, a result which allowed Henriksen to run a multivariate analysis for each text’s total set of tokens. In doing so, he coded for five independent linguistic variables with the goal of understanding which combinations of phonological and morphological variables contributed to the downfall of -ie and to the subsequent return of -ia during the 14th century. He coded for three independent phonological variables (root vowel height, root vowel frontness, and root-final segment) and two independent morphological variables (conjugation and grammatical person). The use of -ie vs. -ia was found to be principled in each text, being governed by different combinations of variables at each point in time. Most relevant for the current study, the variables coded for root vowel height, root vowel frontness, and conjugation were found to influence the choice between -ie and -ia at multiple points in time. Crucially, these three variables contributed to the choice of imperfect paradigm for the set of tokens extracted from one of the four texts (titled Crónica de Alfonso X, 1300-1400). Follow-up cross tabulations and chi-square tests showed that third conjugation verbs, front root vowels, and high root vowels triggered the use of -ie significantly more than did second conjugation verbs, back root vowels, and mid root vowels respectively. Although the results of Henriksen (2008) provide some evidence that the motivation behind these interactions might have been tied to the morphological principle developed in Penny (1972), a more detailed analysis of third conjugation verb forms is required to make definitive claims. The current study is motivated by certain findings reported in Henriksen (2008) as well as by Penny’s (1972) work on the history of Spanish morphology. Accordingly, it analyzes a specific subset of the tokens extracted in Henriksen (2008) in order to more precisely determine the nature of the relationship between root vowel variation (i.e., mid or high) and imperfect paradigm variation (i.e., -ie or -ia) in the Old Spanish third conjugation. Second conjugation verbs are not included here, since their root vowels were categorically mid. 6 This approach treats the third conjugation independently of the second; previous works on the 4

For a discussion of the possible influence that the Old Aragonese preterite may have had in allowing -ie to appear in the Old Spanish imperfect, see Imhoff (2000). 5 For a more detailed description of the four texts used in Henriksen (2008), see section 3 of this paper. 6 For discussion of a unique set of second conjugation imperfect verb forms that surfaced with high root vowels during the Old Spanish period, see Henriksen (2007).

IMPERFECT VARIATION IN THE OLD SPANISH THIRD CONJUGATION

147

Old Spanish imperfect and on Old Spanish morphology in general that have not oriented their analyses towards differentiating these two conjugations may have missed empirically significant differences between the two. Lastly, imperfect tokens whose roots contain the low vowel /a/ are not considered in the current analysis, since these were inert to the processes of metaphony and dissimilation within the verbal paradigm, as reported in Penny (1972). 3.

The current study The current study looks to position Penny’s (1972) thesis on root vowel morphology within the context of the alternation that occurred between -ie and -ia in the Old Spanish imperfect. The goal is to understand the relationship between the two variable structures (i.e., root vowels and imperfect paradigms) since both were allowed to alternate in Old Spanish third conjugation verbs. Additionally, it is imperative to determine if the strength in relationship between the two variables is an indicator of the drive to mark third conjugation imperfects with a high vowel. The study is thus guided by the following three research questions:7 (1)

What patterns of dissimilation can be observed when third conjugation imperfect verbs with front root vowels are compared to third conjugation verbs with back root vowels at four different points in time?

(2)

What is the relationship between root vowel height and imperfect ending in the Old Spanish third conjugation when forms with high root vowels are compared to forms with mid root vowels at four different points in time?

(3)

What is the relationship between root vowel frontness and imperfect ending in the Old Spanish third conjugation when forms with front root vowels are compared to forms with back root vowels at four different points in time?

3.1

Texts In total, four texts were selected from the ADMYTE, or Archivo digital de manuscritos y textos españoles, a CD-ROM produced in Spain by Micronet S.A. in conjunction with the Biblioteca Nacional y la Sociedad Estatal para la Ejecución de Programas del Quinto Centenario and scholars from various North American and European universities.8 Forms extracted from chivalry works and chronicles were used for the current analysis, since these types of historical 7

As concerns the question of whether or not third conjugation imperfect verbs used -ie significantly more than -ia, this information was provided in Henriksen (2008), where it was shown that in certain texts third conjugation verbs triggered the use of -ie significantly more than second conjugation verbs. These results motivated the present investigation, which studies the behavior of third conjugation forms only. 8 See Feustle (1994) for a full review of ADMYTE.

NICHOLAS C. HENRIKSEN

148

narratives led to elevated uses of past tense narration and did not adhere to metric conventions (see Imhoff (1996) for more discussion on the influence of meter). Finally, manuscripts copied considerably later than the original date of composition were discarded. The data in Table 1 present information for each criterion that guided the text selection process. Text9 Gran conquista de Ultramar (GCU) Crónica de veinte reyes (CVR) Crónica de Alfonso X (CAX) Cuento de Tristán de Leonis (CTL)

Year of composition 1295

Date of copy 1300-1400

Text type Chivalry

1320

1300-1400

Chronicle

1300-1400

1489

Chronicle

1410

1410

Chivalry

Table 1: Texts analyzed in current study

3.2

Data collection and analysis Tokens of all possible third conjugation variants of -ie and of -ia were systematically extracted from each text, adhering to the same data search criteria throughout.10 Each token was coded for three variables: imperfect ending (i.e., -ie or -ia); root vowel height (i.e., mid or high); and root vowel frontness (i.e., front or back). First person singular forms were not included in the current analysis. Since it was known a priori that this grammatical person categorically triggered the use of -ia, it was determined that these forms would not help to answer the research questions presented above. 11 The data in Table 2 present general information about the total number of imperfect tokens that were gathered from each text as well as information about the tokens that were analyzed in the current study. As can be seen, 1151 of the total 6093 imperfect tokens were third conjugation verbs that contained either a mid or a high root vowel. We recall that only these 1151 tokens were subject to analysis in the present study. To answer the first research question, each third conjugation imperfect form was tabulated for the frontness and the height of its root vowel. This allowed for a comparison of the number of dissimilated front root vowels to that of dissimilated back root vowels for each text.12 The second research question seeks to determine whether or not there was a relationship between root vowel height 9 The abbreviations provided here are conventions devised by the researcher to facilitate reference to each text throughout this paper. 10 Searches included variant orthographic conventions such as ie, ia, je, ja, ye, ya, and so forth. 11 This is corroborated by decisions made in Imhoff (1998). 12 Although the process of root vowel dissimilation has been documented to affect front vowels only, I use the term ‘dissimilation’ here to refer to the general lowering of front or back root vowels.

IMPERFECT VARIATION IN THE OLD SPANISH THIRD CONJUGATION

149

and imperfect ending in each of the four texts. To examine frequency of use, a cross tabulation for root vowel height and imperfect ending was conducted. A chisquare (χ2) correlation test was also carried out to determine whether or not there was a significant difference in the frequency of use of mid or high root vowels between imperfect endings. Finally, the last research question asks whether there was a relationship between root vowel frontness and imperfect ending in each of the four texts. A cross tabulation for root vowel frontness and imperfect ending was conducted to determine the frequency of use. A χ2 test was performed to determine whether or not there was a significant difference in the frequency of use of front or back root vowels between imperfect endings. Text

Gran conquista de Ultramar (GCU) Crónica de veinte reyes (CVR) Crónica de Alfonso X (CAX) Cuento de Tristán de Leonis (CTL) Totals

Total imperfect tokens n 2320

Imperfect tokens in -ie n 2298

Imperfect tokens in -ie % 99.1

Third conjugation imperfect tokens with mid/high root vowel n 425

1097

793

72.3

159

1194

123

10.3

205

1482

31

2.1

362

6093

3245

53.2

1151

Table 2: Token data relevant to current study

4.

Results It will be recalled that third conjugation verb imperfect forms containing either mid or high root vowels were extracted from four Old Spanish chivalry and chronicle texts whose original date of composition was between 1295 and 1410. We begin this section with a brief summary of the distribution of imperfect forms that contained mid or high root vowels only per conjugation per text. This is provided in order to gain more insight into the ratio of imperfect forms with mid or high root vowels as compared to those with low root vowels. The results are reported in Table 3. As can be seen, imperfect tokens with mid or high root vowels made up a considerably larger portion of the total number of third conjugation tokens than they did of the total number of second conjugation tokens. In fact, in some texts, the percentage of third conjugation forms with mid or high root vowels more than doubled that of second conjugation forms. These results help to motivate the ensuing tests, which examine the behavior of the majority of third conjugation verbs (i.e., those with mid or high vowel roots).

NICHOLAS C. HENRIKSEN

150 Text Year Conjugation Second Third

GCU 1295 n 876/1864 425/476

CVR 1320 % 47.0 89.2

n 422/924 159/173

% 45.7 91.9

CAX 1300-1400 n % 441/981 45.0 205/213 96.2

CTL 1410 n 415/1092 362/390

% 38.0 92.8

Table 3: Distribution of imperfect forms with mid or high vowels only per conjugation per text

The first research question that this study was designed to answer was whether or not imperfect verb forms with front root vowels underwent dissimilation at the same time as imperfect verb forms with back root vowels. Table 4 presents the distribution of imperfect forms with mid root vowels for front and back vowels separately. There, it can be seen that front vowels suffered the largest change in lowering rates between CVR and CAX (30.6% and 82.1% respectively), and there is little doubt that this is due to an overall greater use of -ia in CAX (see Table 2). 13 A different pattern emerges for the back vowels, however, as the change from a majority of /u/ to a majority of /o/ occurred at a later time, between CAX and CTL (23.8% and 78.9% respectively). What this means is that although both front and back vowels underwent a process of lowering during the Old Spanish period, the front vowels did so at an earlier time. RV /e/ /o/

GCU n % 43/383 11.2 6/42 14.2

CVR n % 44/144 30.6 4/15 26.6

CAX n % 151/184 82.1 5/21 23.8

CTL n % 279/324 86.1 30/38 78.9

Table 4: Frequency of use of root vowels /e/ and /o/, vs. root vowels /i/ and /u/ respectively

The second research question was designed with the goal of understanding the relationship between the Old Spanish imperfect paradigm in -ie and root vowel height for third conjugation verbs. Table 5 shows these results and presents important statistical details for each text’s distribution. While little differences were evidenced in the distribution for GCU, high vowels were shown to maintain a statistically significant relationship with imperfect ending in the last three texts. Specifically, in each of these texts, imperfect verb forms with high root vowels demonstrated a particularly greater preference for the paradigm in -ie (85.6% for CVR, 51.0% for CAX, and 9.4% for CTL) than did imperfect verb forms with mid root vowels (60.4% for CVR, 1.3% for CAX, and 1.0% for CTL). Each of these distributions was shown to be significant.

13

We recall that this is an expected outcome, considering that -ia, pronounced as [í.a], would have provoked dissimilation in front vowels.

IMPERFECT VARIATION IN THE OLD SPANISH THIRD CONJUGATION

151

The last research question was geared towards understanding the relationship between the imperfect in -ie and root vowel frontness for Old Spanish third conjugation verbs. The results as well as corresponding statistical information are displayed in Table 6. As with the results reported for root vowel height, little differences were evidenced for GCU, the earliest text. As for the three remaining texts, conflicting patterns were found. While -ie maintained a stronger preference for back vowels in CVR (86.7% to 77.1%), the opposite occurred in CAX (9.5% to 13.6%), the chronologically later text. The results of the χ2 tests for these two distributions showed that neither was significant. As regards the results that were obtained for CTL, however, a significant difference was found between imperfect forms with back root vowels and imperfect forms with front root vowels (7.9% and 1.5% respectively). GCU CVR CAX CTL n % n % n % n % 48 29 2 3 /49 98.0 /48 60.4 /156 1.3 /309 1.0 High 375 95 25 5 /376 99.7 /111 85.6 /49 51.0 /53 9.4 Note. GCU: χ2 = 2.916; df = 1; Cramer’s V = .083; p > 0.05; CVR: χ2 = 12.365; df = 1; Cramer’s V = .279; p ≤ 0.005. CAX: χ2 = 80.663; df = 1; Cramer’s V = .627; p ≤ 0.001. CTL: χ2 = 14.994; df = 1; Cramer’s V = .204; p ≤ 0.005. RV Mid

Table 5: Distribution of imperfect forms in -ie according to root vowel height (i.e., /e/ and /o/ vs. /i/ and /u/) GCU CVR CAX CTL n % n % n % n % 381 111 25 5 /383 99.5 /144 77.1 /184 13.6 /324 1.5 Back 42 13 2 3 /42 100.0 /15 86.7 /21 9.5 /38 7.9 Note. GCU: χ2 = .220; df = 1; Cramer’s V = .023; p > 0.05. CVR: χ2 = .727; df = 1; Cramer’s V = .068; p > 0.05. CAX: 1 cell has expected values less than 5. χ2 = .602; df = 1; Cramer’s V = .036; p > 0.05. CTL: χ2 = 6.35; df = 1; Cramer’s V = .132; p ≤ 0.05. RV Front

Table 6: Distribution of imperfect forms in -ie according to root vowel frontness (i.e., /e/ and /i/ vs. /o/ and /u/)

5.

Discussion This study sought to position Penny’s (1972) thesis on root vowel morphology within the context of the morphological alternation that occurred in the Old Spanish third conjugation imperfect. The first noteworthy finding was that third conjugation imperfect verb forms surfaced with considerably more mid or high root vowels than did second conjugation imperfect verb forms (see Table 3). This was an opportune result, since the current study was oriented towards

152

NICHOLAS C. HENRIKSEN

understanding the behavior of Old Spanish third conjugation verb forms with mid or high root vowels only. It also provided an important motivation for carrying out the ensuing cross tabulations and χ2 tests, since these tests would provide a more detailed picture of the behavior of the majority of third conjugation imperfect verb forms. In terms of dissimilation patterns, the data in Table 4 showed that while front and back root vowels underwent lowering in similar proportions in the two earliest texts, front vowels only underwent a considerable increase in lowering in CAX, the third text. Back vowels were not shown to undergo root vowel lowering at a comparable rate until a later point in time, in CTL. The most reasonable explanation for this lowering could be found in the resurgence of the -ia paradigm, which had begun to take place at the beginning of the fourteenth century. Based on these data, it can be concluded that Old Spanish third conjugation imperfects with front root vowels dissimilated at an earlier time than did those with back root vowels. This is a revealing finding, since it shows that the changes incurred by each set of root vowels were not chronologically parallel. The next set of data that helped to understand root vowel behavior in the Old Spanish third conjugation concerned the relationship between root vowel height and imperfect ending. As was shown in Table 5, the distribution between root vowel height and imperfect paradigm in third conjugation verbs was significant for the last three texts. More importantly, the data reported for those three texts provided evidence for a consistent pattern that had emerged, that is, that Old Spanish third conjugation imperfects in -ie surfaced with high root vowels significantly more than with mid root vowels. Next, in terms of the relationship between root vowel frontness and imperfect paradigm, the distribution for these two variables was not significant in the three earliest texts, although front vowels did coincide with -ie with a greater frequency than did back vowels in CAX, the third text (see Table 6). While the results of the χ2 tests for root vowel frontness could lead us to believe that the distributions for front vs. back vowels were not influenced by paradigm choice, a consideration of all the data reported in the present study for the tokens extracted from CAX leads us to conclude that a somewhat different pattern had emerged. In particular, we recall that there were considerably more dissimilated front vowels than dissimilated back vowels in this text (i.e., more /e/ when compared to /i/, than /o/ when compared to /u/), as compared to dissimilation patterns reported for the two earliest texts. Knowing that there were so few front mid root vowels overall in CAX, the question that arises is why the paradigm in -ie statistically favored high vowels and showed a stronger tendency to favor front vowels in this text (see Tables 5 and 6 respectively). The first piece of data that helps to clarify this matter is that a strikingly similar pattern occurred for back vowels in CTL. That is, at the same time that lowering rates had increased for back vowels (see Table 4), so did the preference for -ie. A

IMPERFECT VARIATION IN THE OLD SPANISH THIRD CONJUGATION

153

reasonable conclusion to be made from these facts is that as rates in dissimilation proliferated, so did the drive to mark verb class via the root vowel. Additional insight into the behavior of front vowels can be gained by referring to the results found in Henriksen (2008). We recall that this study examined second and third conjugation imperfect verb forms conjointly, and that for CAX, third conjugation verbs were shown to use the paradigm in -ie significantly more than second conjugation verbs, despite the fact that only 10.3% of the total imperfect tokens surfaced with this ending. Considering that in this text there were so few -ie tokens overall, and that among these the majority contained root vowels with /e/ (82.1%, see Table 4), the fact that third conjugation verbs triggered the use of -ie significantly more than second conjugation verbs would suggest that some morphological principle had allowed for this to occur. Specifically, the fact that third conjugation imperfect forms favored -ie at exactly the same time when many of their root vowels had become incapable of marking conjugation (i.e., had lowered to /e/) leads us to presume that -ie was preferred as a means of allowing its preceding root vowel to raise, something that -ia could not accomplish. A logical implication to be drawn, given these findings, is that Penny’s (1972) thesis on Old Spanish root vowel morphology should be reconsidered in order to include the Old Spanish imperfect within the scope of its analysis. Crucially, third conjugation imperfect verb forms have been shown to exhibit a strong relationship with the imperfect paradigm in -ie in CAX, despite the fact that so many root vowels had been lowered to /e/ in this text. The most reasonable explanation for these results can be found in the need to maintain high root vowels in third conjugation imperfect verbs. We bear in mind that this process is similar in nature to what occurred in Old Spanish third conjugation synthetic future and conditional verb forms, for which high vowels were chosen as root vowels. What is unique about the data that have been analyzed in the current study, though, is that they provide insight into morphological patterns that emerged when two paradigms were allowed to vary within a single tense. In this regard, we cannot claim that verb class determined the nature of Old Spanish imperfect root vowels by directly allowing them to raise to high vowels. Rather, it was the preference for -ie – an ending which lacked tonic /i/ (i.e., [jé], as opposed to [ía]) – whose stress pattern provided a somewhat indirect means of marking verb class. A final point that is worthy of mention concerns the phonetics of -ie, which has generally been assumed to be [jé]. As was seen in Table 5, high root vowels favored the use of -ie over -ia in the last three texts. These results provide convincing evidence that the most regular production of -ie was indeed [jé]. That is, if we were to assume that stress had fallen on the first vocoid (i.e., rendering [í.e]), such a sequence would have triggered dissimilation, causing front root vowels to remain as /e/. The results obtained in the current study have shown that this was not the case. Rather, they help to show that the first vocoid in the -ie sequence regularly surfaced as a glide, allowing its preceding root vowel to raise

154

NICHOLAS C. HENRIKSEN

to /i/ or /u/. Furthermore, it is imperative to underscore that the raising of third conjugation root vowels before [jé] should not be attributed to the metaphonic effects of the yod. In doing so, we refer to Penny’s (2002a:157) discussion of the Old Spanish gerund, for which high front root vowels frequently coincided with -ir verb forms (i.e., escriv[jé]ndo). Although a reasonable conclusion to be made is that the yod in the ending was responsible for this raising, Penny calls attention to the fact that root vowel raising never occurred in the gerund of -er verbs (i.e., tem[jé]ndo, never tim[jé]ndo). In a similar vein, the raising that occurred in the Old Spanish third conjugation imperfect must be treated as morphological and not phonetic, since the root vowels of second conjugation imperfects were categorically mid, regardless of their ending. 6.

Conclusion This paper began with a summary of Penny’s (1972) thesis on Old Spanish root vowel morphology. It also reviewed previous accounts of the emergence and eventual disappearance of the Old Spanish imperfect paradigm in -ie. In doing so, it showed that little work had been done in the way of understanding the potential impact that the -ie ending had in the drive to mark verb class by means of the root vowel that preceded it. This observation motivated the current analysis, which examined 1151 third conjugation imperfect verb forms extracted from four texts whose original date of composition was between 1295 and 1410. The results revealed a unique pattern that had developed within the verbal morphology during that time. In particular, it was shown that third conjugation imperfect verbs with high root vowels and with front root vowels favored -ie precisely at the same time that dissimilation (i.e., lowering) rates increased for front vowels only. The same pattern was found to occur for back vowels, but at a later time. Most importantly, these data helped to support the ideas put forth in Penny’s (1972) work on the history of root vowel morphology. In doing so, we have added to the existing evidence that verb class determined the nature of Old Spanish root vowels by showing that the same underlying process had been substantiated in the Old Spanish imperfect. Finally, in examining the importance of our findings for those who are concerned with the phonetic realization of -ie during the time of its existence, we have demonstrated on empirical grounds that [jé] was the most regular surface production, confirming contentions of previous scholars on this issue. In light of these findings, it could be argued that a more comprehensive account of Old Spanish root vowel morphology which examined tenses other than the imperfect would ultimately present a clearer picture of the general phenomenon being studied here. For example, it is well-known that numerous verbs exhibited -ie in the Old Spanish preterite, and an interesting follow-up study could compare the distributions for those verbs with the ones that have been presented here for the imperfect. Additionally, an analysis of back root vowels

IMPERFECT VARIATION IN THE OLD SPANISH THIRD CONJUGATION

155

might disclose important information about the role that those vowels played in the process of root vowel lowering and class marking, since it was shown here that back vowels significantly favored -ie in the last text, which was composed at a time when -ie had almost totally faded from verb morphology. In sum, it can be stated that the current study has helped to uncover an interesting morphological pattern that had emerged within the Old Spanish period. Certainly, an analysis of other texts composed within the same period would help to solidify the implications drawn here. In this regard, this investigation has also shed light on the type of work that needs to be carried out in future studies so that we can more precisely understand the peculiar nature of Old Spanish root vowels.

References ADMYTE [computer software]. 1992. Archivo digital de manuscritos y textos españoles. Madrid: Micronet. Correas, Gonzalo de. 1954. Arte de la lengua española castellana, ed. by E. Alarcos García (Original work published 1625). Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas [cited in Imhoff (1998)]. Feustle, Joseph A. 1994. “Admyte”. Hispania 77:1.92-97. Ford, J.D.M. 1906. Old Spanish Readings, Selected on the Basis of Critically Edited Texts. Boston: Ginn and Company. Gassner, Armin. 1897. Das altispanische Verbum. Halle: Max Niemeyer. González Ollé, Fernando. 2000. “Pretérito imperfecto y condicional con desinencia en -ie- en el siglo XVI”. Revista de filología española 80.341-377. Hanssen, Freidrich. 1894. “Sobre la formación del imperfecto de la segunda y tercera conjugación castellana en las poesías de Gonzalo Berceo”. Anales de la Universidad de Chile 85.655-694. Henriksen, Nicholas C. 2007. “On the Peculiar Behavior of Certain Old Spanish Imperfect Root Vowels”. Paper presented at the 11th Hispanic Linguistics Symposium. San Antonio, TX, 1-4 November 2007. Henriksen, Nicholas C. 2008. “A Reanalysis of Paradigmatic Variation in the Old Spanish Imperfect”. Studies in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics 1.287-316. Imhoff, Brian. 1996. The Old Spanish -ie Imperfect. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. Imhoff, Brian. 1998. “On the Chronology and Recession of the Old Spanish -ie Imperfect”. La Corónica 26:2.243-255. Imhoff, Brian. 2000. “Dialect Contact and Historical Linguistic Variation: The Old Spanish ‘-ie’ Imperfect”. Hispanic Review 68:4.381-397. Lapesa, Rafael. 1980. Historia de la lengua española, 8th ed. Madrid: Gredos. Malkiel, Yakov. 1959. “Toward a Reconsideration of the Old Spanish Imperfect in -ia Similar to -ie”. Hispanic Review 27:4.435-481.

156

NICHOLAS C. HENRIKSEN

Penny, Ralph. 1972. “Verb Class as a Determiner of Stem Vowel in the Historical Morphology of Spanish Verbs”. Revue de Linguistique Romane 36.343-359. Penny, Ralph. 2002a. A History of the Spanish Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Penny, Ralph. 2002b. “Procesos de clasificación verbal española: Polaridad de vocales radicales en los verbos en -er e -ir”. Pulchre, Bene, Recte: Estudios en homenaje al Prof. Fernando González Ollé, ed. by C. Saralegui & M. Casado, 1053-1070. Pamplona: EUNSA.

LICENSING NEGATIVE FRAGMENTS AND THE INTERPRETATION OF COMPARISON *

SIMONA HERDAN University of Connecticut

This paper uses Bošković's feature checking analysis of negative concord to propose a solution to the problem of apparently unlicensed negative concord items in comparative/equative structures in Romanian. I will argue that a PFdeletion analysis of phrasal comparatives and equatives introduced by ca provides the structure against which Bošković's analysis can be successfully applied. Furthermore, the proposed solution also accounts for the impossibility of licensing negative polarity items in the same configuration. The key to the distinction in grammaticality appears to be the feature makeup of the negative concord item niciodată and the negative polarity item vreodată. In the last part of the paper, I also explore possible solutions to the remaining puzzle regarding variability in the NPI licensing properties of sentential and phrasal comparatives.

1.

Overview The goal of this paper is to shed some light on the manner in which negative elements like niciodată (never) are licensed and interpreted in elliptical comparative/equative structures in Romanian which do not contain an overt negation. In doing so, I will also address the distribution of negative polarity items (NPIs) in phrasal and sentential comparatives and equatives. I will argue that Bošković's (to appear) feature checking analysis of negative concord, together with a PF-deletion analysis of ellipsis, shows that negative concord items are only apparently unlicensed in some comparative structures. The structure of the paper is as follows. In section 2 I will present the puzzle and the paradigm against which any solution needs to be evaluated. In section 3 I will propose a solution to the licensing problem that relies on Bošković's (to appear) analysis of negative concord. This solution will prompt an evaluation of the interpretation of comparative structures in Romanian and will lead to the claim that the morpheme * I am grateful to the audiences at the East Coast Workshop in Syntax (ECO5) held at Harvard University in March 2005 and at the Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL 37) held in Pittsburgh in March 2007 for helpful comments and discussion. I also thank Željko Bošković for helpful feedback at different stages of this work and my informants for their patience in providing judgments. Last but not least, this version of the paper has benefited a lot from the comments of four anonymous John Benjamins reviewers. All remaining errors and omissions are my own.

SIMONA HERDAN

158

ca (as/like) is ambiguous between a comparative and an equative meaning. In section 4 I will show that the proposed solution can also account for some of the differences in the distribution of NPIs in the structures discussed. Section 5 will present the conclusions. 2.

The Puzzle The starting point of this paper is the existence of two puzzles regarding the grammaticality of the Romanian negative words niciodată (never) and nicăieri (nowhere) in the comparative construction shown in (1) or in the equative construction in (2). (1)

a.

b.

(2)

a.

b.

E mai fericit ca niciodată. Is more happy as never “*He is happier than never.” E mai fericit aici ca nicăieri Is more happy here as nowhere “*He is happier here than nowhere else.” E fericit acum ca niciodată. Is happy now as never “He is happy now like never (before).” E fericit aici ca nicăieri Is happy here as nowhere “He is happy here like nowhere else.”

altundeva. else-somewhere

altundeva. else-somewhere

In particular, I will show below that these negative words are not straightforwardly licensed or interpretable in the sentences above. 2.1

The Licensing Puzzle In Romanian, n-words (a term used by Laka 1990 for nominal and adverbial constituents that appear in negative concord structures), require a clause-mate negation in finite environments (see Ionescu 1999 and Teodorescu 2005 for discussion of the non-finite environments that allow n-words without an overt licensor), as seen in (3). (3)

*(Nu) a fost niciodată Not has been never “He has never been to Paris.”

la to

Paris. Paris

Note that these n-words are not merely polarity sensitive elements. According to a battery of tests proposed by Vallduví (1994) and Giannakidou (2000) in order to distinguish between negative polarity items (NPIs) and negative concord items

LICENSING NEGATIVE FRAGMENTS

159

(NCIs), Romanian n-words are NCIs, a term which I will use from now on for the relevant Romanian elements. The five tests are illustrated in the examples below, where the n-word is contrasted with its indefinite counterpart (see Farkas 2002, 2006 for related discussion of the rich field of Romanian indefinite determiners): a. ability to appear in some non-negative environments, i.e. without sentential negation (no for NCI, yes for NPI) (4)

Ai fost *niciodată/ vreodată la have.2SG been never/ever to “Have you ever been to Paris?”

Paris? Paris?

b. ability to appear in preverbal position (yes for NCI, no for NPI) (5)

Niciodată/*Vreodată nu am Never/Ever not have.1SG “I have never been to Paris.”

fost been

la to

Paris. Paris

c. ability to be modified by expressions like almost (yes for NCI, no for NPI) (6)

Nu merg la film aproape Not go.1SG to movie almost “I almost never go to the movies.”

niciodată/*vreodată. never/ever

d. ability to be used as a negative elliptical answer (yes for NCI, no for NPI) (7)

A: Când mergi la film? B: Niciodată/*Vreodată. A: When go.2SG to movie? B: Never/Ever “A: When do you go to the movies? B: Never/*Ever.”

e. ability to be licensed across an indicative clause-boundary (no for NCI, yes for NPI) (8)

Nu ştiu dacă găteşte Not know.1SG if cook.3SG “I don't know if s/he ever cooks.”

*niciodată/vreodată. never/ever

Returning to our puzzle, if NCIs in Romanian require an overt negative licensor as suggested by the facts in (4), then we need an explanation for the surprising grammaticality of the examples in (1) and (2).1 In addition, the solution should 1

At first sight it may appear that the data in (1) and (2) are just an illustration of the phenomenon of unlicensed NCIs in Slavic, which can appear in certain environments without any overt

SIMONA HERDAN

160

ideally provide (or be compatible with) an explanation of why NCIs are not licensed in the same way in other comparative structures such as (9). (9)

*E mai fericit decât niciodată. Is more happy than never “*He is happier than never.”

Note, however, that while other Romance languages allow n-words to appear in the same context, the data is only problematic in languages that require overt negation to license the n-word. For example, while Brazilian Portuguese nunca (never) is grammatical in (10), a comparative structure similar to (1) above, nunca in (11) does not require overt negation unless it is post-verbal as in (12). (10)

Ele está mais feliz (do) que He is more happy of-the that “He is happier than ever.”

(11)

Eu nunca viajei. I never traveled “I have never traveled.”

(12)

Eu *(não) viajei I not traveled “I have never traveled.”

nunca. never.

nunca. never

2.2

The Interpretation Puzzle Let us now turn to the interpretation of the negative elements in the comparative/equative structures introduced above. The first issue arises when we consider the fact that such negative elements are ungrammatical in English comparatives, even though n-words in English do not require (or indeed allow) overt negation: (13)

a. b.

*John is happier than never. John is (*not) never happy.2

negation, as discussed by Progovac (1994, 2000, 2005a, and 2005b) and Fitzgibbons (2007). However, this is not the case in Romanian as evidenced by the ungrammticality of (3) above without negation. However, the distribution of this phenomenon in Romanian is reminiscent of the Slavic facts in that it is only adjuncts and not arguments that behave this way. I leave this latter issue open for future research. 2 This sentence is grammatical only when not is interpreted as a metalinguistic negation. This option is not relevant here.

LICENSING NEGATIVE FRAGMENTS

161

The standard explanation for the ungrammaticality of (13a) is related to the interpretation of the comparative. Under a maximality analysis of comparatives, the degree of John's happiness in (13a) is compared with the maximum degree of happiness expressed by the embedded clause. However, as argued by von Stechow (1984) and Rullmann (1995), if the embedded clause contains a negative element, there will never be a maximal degree d such that John was never happy to the degree d (see Rullmann 1995 for a detailed discussion of the interaction of negation with maximality). To summarize, the interpretation of (1) and (2) is a puzzle independently of the licensing problem. Even if we can satisfy the structural needs of the NCI, we still need to show how the sentence can be compositionally interpreted. Anticipating the discussion in the next section, my solution will rely on interpreting structures with ca as ambiguous between comparative and equative construals. Unlike comparative structures, some equative structures allow overt negation and NCIs in the embedded clause. 3.

The Analysis In this section I propose a solution to the puzzle of licensing the NCI niciodată (never) in (1a),3 repeated here as (14), which relies on the feature checking approach to negative concord proposed by Bošković (to appear) (see also Watanabe 2004 for a different feature checking analysis of negative concord).4 In particular, I will extend his analysis of negative fragment answers to our cases involving comparatives and equatives. (14)

E mai fericit ca niciodată. Is more happy as never “*He is happier than never.”

The essence of my proposal is that niciodată in (14) has the relevant properties of a negative fragment answer. Specifically, it is an inherently negative element which is licensed by ellipsis. I argue that (14) is obtained via ellipsis from a structure that contains a negative element. I show below that the analysis of negative concord presented in Bošković (to appear) can explain the grammaticality of an NCI in (14) in the same way that it can account for the grammaticality of elliptical negative answers.

3

The same analysis will apply to the data in (2). I will generally refer to only one example for ease of exposition. 4 Both analyses yield the same results in our case, but I will be using Bošković (to appear) for a more standard view of feature checking.

SIMONA HERDAN

162 3.1

Elliptical negative answers: Bošković (to appear) Bošković (to appear) aims to provide an analysis of negative concord that holds cross-linguistically. Coupled with PF ellipsis, his analysis can account for negative fragment answers, which I will illustrate using Romanian. In section 3.2 I will extend his analysis to the data under discussion here. Consider first the examples in (15), where the negative elliptical answer in (15a) is assumed to be derived from the full sentence in (15b). (15)

a.

b.

A: Ce ai cumpărat? B: Nimic. A: What have.2SG bought? B: Nothing “A: What did you buy? B: Nothing.” B: Nimic nu am cumpărat. B: Nothing not have.1SG bought “B: Nothing.”

Under Bošković's account (see also Watanabe 2004), the negative answer is obtained by movement of the NCI followed by NegP deletion. However, in order for ellipsis to be licensed in (15b), a condition of identity between the elided material and an appropriate antecedent needs to be satisfied in order to ensure recoverability/interpretability. Traditionally, this identity condition was assumed to be syntactic in nature. However, Watanabe (2004) and Bošković (to appear) argue that elliptical answers provide support for a semantic (as proposed by Merchant 2001) rather than a syntactic identity condition. Since the antecedent of the elided element (the question) does not contain any syntactic negation, it would be impossible for the elided structure to find an appropriate antecedent. Assuming a semantic identity condition makes it possible for a non-negative question to serve as an antecedent to a negative answer if the elided structure is semantically non-negative. Evidence that the negative interpretation comes from the NCI can be obtained from the contrast in the Serbo-Croatian (16a) and (16b). (16)

a.

A:

B:

b.

B':

Ko nije došao? who NEG.is come “Who didn't come?” ?*Niko nije došao. Nobody NEG.is come “Nobody.” Niko nije došao. Nobody NEG.is come

Given the grammaticality of (16b), something must have gone wrong with the ellipsis in (16a). According to Giannakidou (1998), who argues that NCIs are

LICENSING NEGATIVE FRAGMENTS

163

non-negative, the negative meaning would come from the elided part, which makes the ungrammaticality of (16a) quite surprising. Under her account a nonnegative sentence can serve as an antecedent for a negative sentence, but a negative sentence cannot. However, if it is the NCI that is inherently negative and no negation is present (semantically) in the elided part, the data in (16) is quite natural: a negative sentence cannot be the antecedent for a non-negative structure. We have so far seen evidence that the NCI is inherently negative, which means it must bear an interpretable negative feature iNeg. Moreover, in sentences that contain only sentential negation, the negative meaning must come from this negation, which means the Neg head must also bear an interpretable negative feature iNeg. This is however problematic in sentences that contain both sentential negation and an NCI such as (16b) above. If both elements have an iNeg, we expect to obtain a double negation reading for (16b) (Someone came.), contrary to fact. Bošković (2007, to appear) proposes that the solution lies in the feature makeup of the NCI and the negative head. NCIs always contain an iNeg, while the negative head contains an iNeg in non-negative concord environments (Negation A) and an uninterpretable negation uNeg in negative concord environments (Negation B), which eliminates the double negation problem. Two further assumptions are made: an element cannot probe unless it has an uninterpretable feature uK and an element must have an uninterpretable feature uK in order to be visible for movement (Chomsky's 2001 Activation Condition). Let us see now how we can derive the distribution of the two negative heads. The uK of the NCI is checked as a reflex of Neg feature checking between Neg and the NCI, just like Case is checked as a reflex of phi-feature checking between T/v and an NP. In negative concord environments only Neg B is allowed, since Neg A would have no uninterpretable feature to allow it to probe for the NCI, whose uK would remain unchecked. In non-negative concord environments only Neg A is allowed, as the uninterpretable uNeg feature of Negation B would remain unchecked in the absence of the NCI. In the ellipsis cases discussed above, the negation has to be Neg B (since the feature of the NCI has to be checked), but there is no problem with having a non-negative antecedent as the negative feature of Neg B is uninterpretable, i.e. semantically non-negative. This view of ellipsis provides evidence that an NCI does not always need to have a phonetically realized licensor. This effect of ellipsis of obscuring the licensor for an NCI will be the basis for the proposed analysis of N-words lacking an overt licensor in phrasal comparative and equative structures. I discuss this issue in the next section.

SIMONA HERDAN

164 3.2

Application to comparatives and equatives Let us now consider the derivation of the comparative sentence in (14). Notice first that (14) has no grammatical counterpart in which the elided material is overtly expressed, as shown by the ungrammaticality of (17). (17)

*E mai fericit ca nu a fost fericit Is more happy as not has been happy “*He is happier like he has never been happy.”

niciodată. never

A sentential comparative structure with decât (than) cannot contain a negation either, as shown by the contrast between the ungrammatical (18a) and its grammatical counterpart without negation in (18b). (18)

a.

b.

*E mai fericit decât nu a fost niciodată. Is more happy than not has been never “*(He) is happier than he hasn't ever been.” E mai fericit decât a fost vreodată. Is more happy than has been ever “(He) is happier than he has ever been.”

This is not surprising considering what was said in section 2.2 about the interpretation of comparative structures with negative quantifiers in the embedded clause. Interestingly however, some sentential equative constructions do allow overt negative elements in the embedded clause as shown in (19). (19)

E fericit cum nu a fost fericit Is happy like nu has been happy “He is happy like he has never been happy.”

niciodată. never

Recall also that ca (as/like) also introduces purely equative structures, of the type in (2), repeated here as (20), or in (21). (20)

E fericit ca niciodată. Is happy like never “He is happy like never (before).”

(21)

Era albă ca zăpada. Was white like snow “She was white as snow.”

LICENSING NEGATIVE FRAGMENTS

165

In light of this similarity I propose that the comparative and equative structures introduced by ca have the same underlying structure shown in (22) prior to the application of PF deletion. (22)

E (mai) Is (more)

fericit [...] nu a happy [...] not has

fost been

fericit niciodată. happy never

Evidence that this idea is on the right track comes from the semantic interpretation of the phrasal comparative containing the NCI niciodată. Intuitively, the meaning of (14) above, repeated here as (23a) is the one given in (23b): (23)

a.

b.

E mai fericit ca niciodată. Is more happy as never “*He is happier than never.” There is a degree d of happiness that x has at t0 (now), and there is no time t before t0 such that x has been d-happy at t.

I argue that it is precisely the structure in (22) above that allows us to successfully apply Bošković's analysis of negative concord and negative fragment answers to elliptical comparatives by providing an appropriate negative licensor for the NCI. Recall that in the case of negative answers the elided material in the answer requires a semantically identical antecedent, as argued on different grounds by Merchant (2001). Given the structure in (22), I will assume that ellipsis in this case is subject to the same requirement. The antecedent in the main clause of the comparative in (22) is syntactically (and semantically) affirmative. However, the elided part is syntactically negative (just like the elided part of an elliptical negative answer, as discussed by Watanabe 2004 and Bošković (to appear)). Under Bošković's feature checking theories, the elided material is semantically affirmative as the negative head contains an uninterpretable negative feature. Recapitulating from our discussion in section 3.1, the negative element niciodată bears an interpretable negative feature and an uninterpretable feature uK, which activates the NCI, making it visible for movement. On the other hand, the negative head bears only an uninterpretable negative feature. The negative head probes the NCI which moves to SpecNegP and checks the negative feature of the negative head. At the same time, the uninterpretable feature uK of the NCI is checked. At this point, the elided material is semantically affirmative and can find an appropriate antecedent in the main clause. In addition, the NCI niciodată has had its feature checking requirements satisfied prior to the deletion of the negative head. We have now explained the mechanism that allows licensing an NCI without an overt negative head, however we have created an additional puzzle

SIMONA HERDAN

166

concerning the ungrammaticality of the NPI vreodată in (24), assuming the structure in (25). (24)

(25)

*E (mai) fericit ca vreodată. Is (more) happy as ever “He is happier than ever.” E (mai) fericit [...] nu a fost Is (more) happy [...] not has been

fericit happy

vreodată. ever

Despite the differences between the NPIs and the NCIs with respect to the tests outlined in section 2.1 above, the Romanian negative item niciodată (never) can sometimes be replaced by the NPI vreodată (ever) in contexts where it appears as a clausemate to negation, as in (26).5 (26)

Nu a visat vreodată/niciodată să devină Not has dreamt ever/never SUBJ. become “He has never dreamt of becoming famous.”

faimos. famous

Since we are assuming the presence of a negative element in the embedded clause, we might expect the NPI vreodată to be licensed in (24) as well, contrary to fact. The key to the distinction in grammaticality appears to be the feature makeup of niciodată and vreodată. Unlike niciodată, the NPI vreodată does not bear an interpretable negative feature since it is not inherently negative and can be licensed by elements other than negation. The negation, on the other hand, has a choice of bearing an interpretable or an uninterpretable negative feature. Let us consider both options. If an uninterpretable negative feature is present on NegP, the elided structure would be semantically non-negative, as desired, but the uninterpretable negative feature would remain unchecked, since the NPI vreodată does not have any negative feature. If the negative head contains an interpretable feature, the elided material will be semantically negative. In this case the elided material remains syntactically and semantically negative and does not find an appropriate negative antecedent in the main clause. An important remaining issue is how to exclude a derivation of (24) from a structure that does not contain a negation in the first place, as in (27). (27)

5

E Is

mai fericit [...] more happy [...]

a has

fost been

fericit happy

vreodată. ever

It is beyond the scope of this paper to discuss exactly under what circumstances the complementary distribution of the two series of elements breaks down. (see Teodorescu 2004 who claims that the n-word and VRE-word series are in complementary distribution). However, I will show here that negation cannot license vreodată in the relevant context anyway.

LICENSING NEGATIVE FRAGMENTS

167

Since the elided material would be affirmative, it should therefore be able to find an appropriate antecedent in the main clause. However, in the absence of negation, the NPI vreodată needs to be in the scope of a different licensor. As pointed out above, the puzzle here is that NPIs like vreodată can normally be licensed in clausal comparatives, as shown in (28). (28)

Ion e mai fericit decât a John is more happy than has “John is happier than he has ever been.”

fost been

vreodată. ever

The obvious question is then why they cannot be licensed in a phrasal comparative construction headed by ca as in (24). I explore some possible explanations in the next section. 4.

Licensing NPIs in comparatives In the previous section we have seen data that indicate that there is a significant difference in the NPI-licensing ability of comparatives introduced by decât and of those introduced by ca. The licensing of NPIs by comparatives is a notoriously difficult issue, since comparatives are neither typical downward entailing environments, as discussed by Schwarzschild & Wilkinson (2002), nor non-veridical environments, as defined in Giannakidou (1999). Unlike numerous other approaches to NPI-licensing available in the literature, the account proposed in Progovac (1994) relies on the properties of the complementizer. Regarding NPI licensing by elements other than negation, Progovac (1994) proposes that it is an operator in C that is responsible for the NPI licensing. She emphasizes the fact that it is a property of a clause rather than of an expression that allows or disallows the licensing. If we assume that decât, but not ca has the property that allows NPI licensing, then we can explain the contrast between (24) and (28) above. However, postulating a distinction in the properties of the two comparative elements looks little more than a restatement of the problem in the absence of independent evidence for such an assumption. There is, however, evidence that suggests that the comparative elements ca and decât differ with respect to their semantics. Recall that I have assumed in section 3.2 above that, barring differences in the overt shape of the introductory word, both the equative structure with cum and the phrasal comparative with ca, repeated here as (29) and (30), have the underlying structure in (31). (29)

E fericit cum nu a mai fost fericit vreodată/niciodată. Is happy like not has yet been happy ever/never “He is happy like he has never been happy before.”

SIMONA HERDAN

168 (30)

E mai fericit ca niciodată. Is more happy like never “*He is happier than never.”

(31)

E mai Is more

fericit [...] nu happy [...] not

a fost has been

fericit niciodată. happy never

I have also shown above that ca introduces both comparative and equative structures. Speculating a bit, one might claim that (30) is a hybrid structure obtained from a cross between an equative and a comparative, as evidenced by the presence of the comparative morpheme mai (more) in the main clause. Moreover, as we saw above, the interpretation of (30) cannot be that of a comparative, as the negative quantifier niciodată would yield an uninterpretable structure, which brings us to the interpretation puzzle introduced in section 2.2. I propose that sentences like (30) are interpreted as conjoined structures with the negative quantifier ranging over times along the lines suggested in (23) above, repeated here in (32). (32)

There is a degree d of happiness that x has at t0 (now), and there is no time t before t0 such that x has been d-happy at t.

An additional piece of evidence comes from the fact that not all negative concord languages behave in this way. This phenomenon is only expected to appear in a negative concord language which allows a morpheme with equative meaning, such as Romanian ca, in comparative constructions. Compare the behavior of Romanian with that of Hebrew below. In Romanian the negative quantifiers are only possible with the morpheme ca, normally used in equatives, but not with decât, used in standard comparatives. Hebrew, on the other hand, does not allow the morpheme kmo (as/like), normally used in equatives, to be used in comparative structures such as (33a), which is why the negative quantifier is disallowed in (33b). (33)

a.

b.

*hu meushar yoter he happy more “He is happier than me.” *hu meushar yoter He happy more “*He is happier than never.”

kamoni. as-me kmo as

af-pa'am. never

However, if we are to claim that the equative meaning of ca is responsible for the impossibility of NPI licensing in (24) above, we have to show that

LICENSING NEGATIVE FRAGMENTS

169

equatives do not license NPIs. This is indeed the case, as can be seen from (34) below. (34)

*E fericit cum a fost vreodată. Is happy like has been ever “He is as happy as he has ever been.”

However, this cannot be the whole story. The element decât, which introduces real comparatives, licenses the NPI vreodată when it introduces a sentential comparative, but the sentence becomes degraded when the comparative is phrasal. (35)

a.

b.

E mai fericit decât a fost Is more happy than has been “He is happier than he has ever been.” ?E mai fericit decât vreodată. Is more happy than ever “He is happier than ever.”

vreodată. ever

One possibility is that the availability of the universal quantifier oricând (anytime) blocks the weaker vreodată. Interestingly, the grammaticality in a comparative structure of the existential quantifier vreodată is actually inversely correlated with the grammaticality of the universal quantifier oricând (anytime). In a clausal comparative with the same structure as (35a), the universal oricând is somewhat degraded without an additional temporal phrase, as shown in (36a), which may explain why it doesn't block out vreodată in (35a). In a phrasal comparative corresponding to (35b), the universal quantifier is grammatical, as shown by (36b) and it blocks out the weaker existential quantifier. (36)

a.

b.

E mai fericit decât a fost oricând ? (altă dată). Is more happy than has been anytime? (another time) “He is happier than he has been at any another time.” E mai fericit decât oricând. Is more happy than anytime “He is happier than at any other time.”

While the assumption that the structures introduced by ca involving negative quantifiers share properties with some equative construction has proved fruitful, it also opens questions regarding the differences between the various comparative and equative constructions. I therefore leave a more complete evaluation of the issue of the differences between the properties of decât (in both its phrasal and clausal instantiations) and ca for future research.

170

SIMONA HERDAN

5.

Conclusions In this paper I presented a puzzle concerning the licensing and interpretation of NCIs such as niciodată (never) in the absence of an overt negative element in the comparative/equative structure introduced by ca (as/like). The solution I have provided makes use of Bošković's (to appear) theory of negative concord, which relies on feature checking and the properties of negative heads to create a semantically appropriate antecedent for the elided material in elliptical negative answers. The same theory can easily explain the licensing of an NCI if we assume that the NCI has been left behind following movement and a process of PF-ellipsis. This approach also allows us to explain the impossibility of licensing an NPI like vreodată (ever) in the structure that licenses the NCI. The key to the distinction in grammaticality appears to be the feature makeup of the negative concord item niciodată and the negative polarity item vreodată. The interpretation puzzle, on the other hand, raises questions about the semantics of the morpheme ca, which I suggest is ambiguous between a comparative and an equative construal. In the last part of the paper I explore why it is also impossible for vreodată to be licensed directly by the comparative ca, in the absence of an elided negation in the embedded clause. Following Progovac (1994), I tentatively suggest that the complementizer ca has different properties from decât. However, I leave it for future research to provide a principled connection between the two kinds of comparative constructions and their NPI licensing abilities.

References Bošković, Željko. To appear. “Licensing Negative Constituents and Negative Concord”. Proceedings of the 38th North East Linguistic Society (NELS). Ottawa, 26-28 October 2007. Amherst, MA: GSLA Publications. Bošković, Željko. 2007. “On Two Types of Negative Constituents and Negative Concord”. Studies in Formal Slavic Linguistics: Contributions from Formal Description of Slavic Languages 6.5, ed. by Franc Marušič & Rok Žaucer, 9-35. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Chomsky, Noam. 2001. “Derivation by Phase”. Ken Hale: A Life in Language, ed. by Michael Kenstowicz, 1-52. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Farkas, Donka. 2002. “Extreme Non-specificity in Romanian”. Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2000: Selected Papers from ‘Going Romance’ 2000, Utrecht, 30 November–2 December 2000, ed. by Claire Beyssade et al., 127-151. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Farkas, Donka. 2006. “Free Choice in Romanian”. Drawing the Boundaries of Meaning: Neo-Gricean Studies in Pragmatics and Semantics in Honor of Laurence R. Horn, ed. by Betty J. Birner & Gregory Ward, 71–94. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Fitzgibbons, Natasha. 2007. “A Closeup of Russian N-words”. Generals Paper. Ms., University of Connecticut, Storrs.

LICENSING NEGATIVE FRAGMENTS

171

Giannakidou, Anastasia. 1998. Polarity Sensitivity as (Non)veridical Dependency. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Giannakidou, Anastasia. 1999. “Affective Dependencies”. Linguistics and Philosophy 22.367-421. Giannakidou, Anastasia. 2000. “Negative ... Concord?” Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 18.457-523. Ionescu, Emil. 1999. “A Quantification-based Approach to Negative Concord in Romanian”. Proceedings of Formal Grammar, ed. by Geert-Jan M. Kruijff & Richard T. Oehrle, 25-35. Columbus, OH: OSU Working Papers in Linguistics. Laka, Itziar. 1990. Negation in Syntax: On the Nature of Functional Categories and Projections. Ph.D. dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge. Merchant, Jason. 2001. The Syntax of Silence: Sluicing, Islands, and the Theory of Ellipsis. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Progovac, Ljiljiana. 1994. Negative and Positive Polarity: A Binding Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Progovac, Ljiljiana. 2000. “Coordination, C-Command, and ‘Logophoric’ Nwords”. Negation and Polarity: Semantic and Syntactic Perspectives, ed. by Laurence R. Horn & Yatsuhiko Kato, 88-114. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Progovac, Ljiljiana. 2005a. “Negative and Positive Feature Checking and the Distribution of Polarity Items”. Negation in Slavic, ed. by Sue Brown & Adam Przepiorkowski, 179-217. Bloomington, IN: Slavica Publishers. Progovac, Ljiljiana. 2005b. A Syntax of Serbian: Clausal Architecture. Bloomington, IN: Slavica Publishers. Rullmann, Hotze. 1995. Maximality in the Semantics of Wh-constructions. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Schwarzschild, Roger & Karina Wilkinson. 2002. “Quantifiers in Comparatives: A Semantics of Degree Based on Intervals”. Natural Language Semantics 10.1-41. Stechow, Arnim von. 1984. “Comparing Semantic Theories of Comparison”. Journal of Semantics 3.1-77. Teodorescu, Alexandra. 2004. Negative Concord in Romanian. Master's thesis, University of Texas at Austin. Teodorescu, Alexandra. 2005. “Romanian N-Words and the Finite/Non-Finite Distinction”. Theoretical and Experimental Approaches to Romance Linguistics: Selected Papers from the 34th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL), Salt Lake City, March 2004, ed. by Randall S. Gess & Edward J. Rubin, 273-290. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Vallduví, Enric. 1994. “Polarity Items, N-words, and Minimizers in Catalan and Spanish”. Probus 6.263-294.

172

SIMONA HERDAN

Watanabe, Akira. 2004. “The Genesis of Negative Concord: Syntax and Morphology of Negative Doubling”. Linguistic Inquiry 35.559-612.

DEVELOPING I-LANGUAGE IN L1 AND L2

JULIA HERSCHENSOHN University of Washington

This paper reconsiders the nature of second language grammars—whether a language learner’s ability can be characterized as I-language or E-language (Chomsky 1986)—and how the nature of second language compares to that of first language grammars. It responds to these questions by arguing that language learners—both first and second—develop I-language over time in similar and different ways. The first section reviews conceptions of competence, performance and language variation, particularly in terms of first language acquisition. The next section considers these same points in terms of less systematic systems, those of atypical first language development (Specific Language Impairment) and second language acquisition. The third section discusses recent work on endstate interlanguage grammars that will elucidate the nature of second language deficits and the contributing causes for them.

1.

Introduction In this paper, I consider the nature of second language (L2) grammars, whether a second language learner’s ability could be characterized as I-language or E-language, a question that has been discussed at some length since Chomsky used those terms in 1986. I will address this question by arguing that language learners—first and second—both develop I-language grammars over time in similar and different ways. In examining this issue, I hope to show that studies of acquisition add new dimensions to our understanding of the language faculty; to quote Luigi Rizzi (2000:269-270): We can reasonably hope that development will allow us to see properties that are not immediately accessible to observation in adult systems, thus allowing us to identify and explore neglected areas of the grammatical space defined by Universal Grammar.

Within a generative perspective, the availability of UG to the young child is not in question because it is the sine qua non of the acquisition process, the answer to the Poverty of the Stimulus. The role of UG in second language acquisition (L2A) has not, on the other hand, been self-evident, nor is the nature of the linguistic knowledge possessed by the L2 learner. As this paper will document, studies of a range of L2s reveal that L2 interlanguages are constrained

174

JULIA HERSCHENSOHN

systems, but that endstate L2 learners nevertheless show distinct deficits when compared to native speakers. Thus there remains the conundrum of imperfect L2 competence despite rich input and even negative evidence; to what can these deficits be attributed? Imperfect access to UG has been one suggestion that we will examine. In the first section of this paper I review conceptions of competence, performance and language variation, particularly in terms of first language acquisition (L1A). In the next section I consider these same points in terms of less systematic systems, those of atypical L1 development and L2A. The third section discusses recent work on endstate interlanguage grammars that will elucidate the nature of L2 deficits and the contributing causes for them. 2. 2.1

Competence, performance and variation in L1 I-language and E-language Chomsky (1986:16) furthers the linguistic research he began decades earlier in assuming an “‘idealized speech community’ that is internally consistent in its linguistic practice.” While this idealization allows investigation into what constitutes knowledge of language, he notes in passing that prelinguistic children and foreigners have a “partial knowledge of English” that is difficult to characterize. Chomsky goes on to distinguish E(xternalized)-language—a collection of actions and behaviors à la Bloomfield—from I(nternalized)language—“some element of the mind of the person who knows the language, acquired by the learner, and used by the speaker-hearer” (ibid:22). 1 The investigation of I-language, the speaker’s grammatical competence, has provided remarkably rich evidence of the systematicity of language and the interactions of the linguistic subsystems of phonology, morphology, and syntax. This research has revealed both parametric differences and universal properties shared by languages from totally different genetic stock. It has also furnished a frame for examining L1A and for discerning cross-linguistic similarities explaining how all children learn the language to which they are exposed within a very short period of time. 2.2

Systematic variation in L1 While Chomsky’s idealization of invariable adult grammar has been a useful heuristic, it has not furnished an account of the variability that is also a constant of human language—variability of the individual who code-switches or changes register, variability of social groups whose grammar evolves over time, and variability of children or foreigners who seem to have a “partial” competence in the language. One way of accounting for variability, both synchronic and diachronic, is to attribute multiple competences to the individual who may possess distinct grammars that might, for example, correspond to different registers or 1

A reviewer notes that if such behaviors are taken to characterize “partial competences”, they are not random, but relate to, for example, the use of non-linguistic cognitive abilities or frequency.

DEVELOPING I-LANGUAGE L1/L2

175

variant forms. Lightfoot (1999:97) gives the example of English have being replaced by have got (1). (1)

He has / He’s got brown eyes.

In this diachronic change “one abstract system in which temporary and permanent possession are treated alike replaces another; one grammar replaces another over a period of time.” The idea of variable competences is appealing in its account of this kind of variation, and it is also supported by the trajectory of first language acquisition, during which children go through stages of optional use of forms that are ungrammatical for adults. For example, children acquiring overt subject languages go through a stage between two and three years known as the Optional Infinitive period, during which they optionally use infinitival / root forms or inflected verbs (Wexler 1994; see Guasti 2002 for summary). But as in the cases of variable use of have or have got, the variation is not random. The use of default verbal forms is usually accompanied by null subjects, non-nominative pronouns, and preverbal negation, indicating that the verb has not raised out of VP (2). (2)

a. no ride a bike (Peter 2;1) b. not Fraser read it (Eve 1;9) c. chercher les crayons (Philippe 2;2) ‘to look for crayons’ d. pas manger la poupée (Nathalie 1;9) ‘not to sleep the doll’ e. me want that, me want that

On the other hand, the use of the inflected verb is accompanied by nominative subjects and verb raising to Tense, as indicated by use of auxiliaries and negation (3). (3)

a. we goed to the beach (Eve 2;2) b. didn’t come out (Peter 2;1) c. moi, je tousse encore (Philippe 2;2) ‘me, I cough again’ d. écris pas, moi (Philippe 2;2) ‘write not, me’ e. No, I don’t want crackers

Significantly, nominative pronouns are generally not used with root forms (96% with finite), although inflected verbs may have null subjects (3b, 3d; cf. Pierce 1992, Rasetti 2000). As in cases of diachronic change, the child entertains two grammatical options, VP internal syntax without nominative case or verb inflection, and TP syntax with nominative case and inflected verb checked in TP (but cf. Schütze & Wexler 1996 who show both nominative and accusative subjects with root infinitives). The root infinitival forms, clearly not part of the

176

JULIA HERSCHENSOHN

child’s input, are nevertheless a systematic manifestation of grammar construction in progress that could not possibly be explained through an imitative model of L1A, but rather seems to reflect the options provided by Universal Grammar. To explain the child’s optionality, Rizzi (2000) proposes a truncation hypothesis, by which the child may truncate the sentence at VP, TP or CP. Two principles of the adult grammar are not yet mature in the child grammar: Categorial Uniformity requiring that all clauses have the same syntactic structure (root = CP), and Structural Economy advocating use of minimum structure consistent with well-formedness constraints. Rizzi (2000:289) suggests that in the initial period “structural economy is not countered by any problem of categorial uniformity.” So null subjects and root infinitives are licit, and categorial uniformity of CP projection as the general rule is not yet required. The uniformity condition may be relaxed in the adult grammar for certain stylistic devices such as use of null subjects in diary narratives or root infinitives in headlines (Bush to visit Iraq). Rizzi’s analysis accounts then for both developmental stages of child grammar and variation in adult grammar. Under this kind of account, the ambient language input provides the basic building blocks—note that the child still has to figure out which words are nouns and which are verbs to be able to construct sentences—that the child matches up to the UG template. The input provides sufficient data for children to select the correct parameter settings for their L1. What can we conclude about the prelinguistic child’s grammar, is it an Ilanguage or an E-language? While this knowledge is “partial” and manifests performance that is generally disallowed in mature grammars, it nevertheless displays characteristics that are hallmarks of human language. Early linguistic knowledge shows evidence of substantive universals in, for example, the child’s creation of a phonological system based on features such as stress versus syllable timing, or the emergence of both lexical and functional categories such as nouns and determiners. The non-mature characteristics of child language generally conform to formal universals requiring, for example, nominative case checking at the TP but not VP level. Indeed, these non-target like constructions are very systematic and can be explained as stages in development using constructs such as Rizzi’s ideas on truncation. The developing grammars are then systematic, rulegoverned, cross-linguistically similar and indicative of consistent patterns in the growth of the mature grammar. Finally, the emerging grammar—with its nontarget forms that could never have been inferred from the (non-existent) input—is a clear example of knowledge gained from an impoverished stimulus. Children end up with a mature phonology, morphology, syntax and semantics that far outpace what they were ‘taught’ by parents and caregivers. This knowledge, albeit incomplete, must be an I-language, not an E-language.

DEVELOPING I-LANGUAGE L1/L2

177

3. 3.1

Less systematic variation, L1 and L2 Atypical development in L1 Uncovering the typical pathway of L1 acquisition provides the answer to Chomsky’s query on how language is acquired, but children’s complete native competence is a post hoc observation since all normal children do reach ceiling in native ability. Foreigners do not necessarily gain the same complete competence in their L2, nor do atypical children such as those with Specific Language Impairment (SLI), Downs Syndrome or Williams Syndrome, partial (to use Chomsky’s term) competences that linguists have begun to explore in recent years (Bates et al. 1995, Bellugi et al. 1993, Rice 1996). To elucidate what ‘partial knowledge’ constitutes, I will give an example from the SLI literature, which can enhance our understanding of the language faculty. Indeed, Hamann (2004: 110) points out that “the developmental profiles of children with SLI can provide a slow motion close-up of details that could be masked by the speed of normal development at a younger age.” In her article Hamann compares two typically developing francophone children with two who have SLI, noting that both groups undergo the optional infinitive stage described earlier, but that the SLI children do so at a much later age. It is not until seven years of age that the impaired children no longer use optional infinitives, and thus they appear to have attained the mature grammar of French with respect to verbal inflection. The SLI children do not, however, follow a similar trajectory in all areas, as a comparison of nominal and verbal domains shows. Typical Louis and Marie show an eventual convergence of target like determiner and inflection, whereas impaired Rafaelle shows a divergence of these domains and a maturation that requires twice as long. Furthermore, the morphosyntactic characteristics that cluster with root infinitives differ between the two groups. Hamann observes that “children with SLI show a variety of unexpected subjects” (ibid.:134) such as those in (4). (4)

a. non, je mettre dans bras (Loris 5;3) no, I to take [it] in arms “No, I’m taking it in my arms.” b. elle renverser le lait (Rafaelle 4;1) she-nom to spill the milk “She’s spilling the milk.”

Recall that typical children overwhelmingly use nominative clitics only with inflected verbs during the optional infinitive stage. What can we make of this SLI mixing of levels (VP and TP) so unlike that of typical development? We will see the same use of nonfinite verbal forms with nominative clitics in L2 learners, a similarity between L2A and SLI that Paradis & Crago (2004) also point out. A reviewer asks how we explain UG constrained yet

JULIA HERSCHENSOHN

178

non-convergent grammars, a key question raised by recent research in atypical language development. In terms of I-language, we might envision typical development as a process of fleshing out the abstract grammar by implementing higher functional categories through intermediate stages allowing less structural complexity. Earlier productions are in a sense licit (e.g. infinitive with null subject) if not adult like. For impaired development, it appears that learners produce utterances with morphosyntactic clashes such as an unchecked nominative clitic with an infinitive. The evidence from SLI (and other impairments such as Down Syndrome or Williams Syndrome) demonstrates that their developing and mature L1 grammars show both slow maturation and apparently non-UG-like characteristics such as unchecked nominative case. We might attribute this to lack of UG availability, but such a lacuna for cognitively deficient children provides a poor explanation of their atypical development. Indeed, dissociation of cognition from grammatical ability is a key argument for the modularity of language and its universal properties Lenneberg 1967). One view of L1A sees UG as the language acquisition device: Chomsky (1995:167) says “UG is a theory of the initial state S0 of the relevant component of the language faculty,” and Hornstein et al. (2005:3) explain “UG can be thought of as a function that takes P[rimary] L[inguistic] D[ata] as input and delivers a particular grammar (of English, Brazilian Portuguese, German etc.), a GL as output.” This is illustrated in (5). (5)

PLD Æ UG Æ GL

On this view, parameters are open in ‘newborn’ UG, but later the switches are set to on / off as required for the L1. However, for atypical L1A, the learners are not only slower in implementing the UG template than typical learners, but they also end up with certain untidy aspects of their grammar, their I-language, that do not seem characteristic of UG. These atypical cases seem to reveal that while generally UG operates to foster L1A, a congenital deficit may be inextricably linked to flawed acquisition, hindering the L1A process.2 For L2 learners on the other hand, the view of UG becoming the I-language GL may, on one interpretation, leave no role for UG for acquisition of languages after L1, a topic I take up in the next section. Pinker (1994) proposes something along this line in suggesting that UG is useful in early life for L1A, but later is essentially lost once native language is acquired.

2

Lenneberg (1967) uses L1A by Down Syndrome children to illustrate dissociation of cognition and language, pointing out that their L1A demonstrates the biological nature of the human language faculty.

DEVELOPING I-LANGUAGE L1/L2

3.2

179

L2 variation, early stages If the function of UG and the growth of L1 I-language seem relatively straightforward for typically developing children, the relative roles of competence, performance and variation for subsequent languages are not obvious. In early stages of L2A learners show variability similar to that of SLI children, and in later stages even advanced and fluent learners persistently make errors of performance that far outnumber the fumbles of native speakers. One might wonder if this nonnative interlanguage is, as Gass & Selinker (2001:455) claim, only “a learner’s output”—in Chomsky’s terms, E-language—or whether the L2 grammar is actually an I-language. This section reexamines the themes introduced for L1A and investigates empirical studies of interlanguage grammars to seek answers. L2 variation may include the multiple competences described by Lightfoot to account for diachronic change or different registers, but such command is characteristic of advanced stages to be examined in the next section. Early L2 variability is rather manifested in production errors and indeterminacy in grammaticality judgement (GJ). Core syntax, on the other hand, is more quickly mastered, as for example L2 French verb raising: learners gain the most obvious and frequent structures at a fairly early stage. Even beginning students gain the correct verb-negation word order (and use it consistently). But despite mastery of core syntax, L2 learners manifest inconsistency in production and in GJs. How and why do they show variation? I examine two early stages of variation, the Basic Variety and the Initial Stage. The earliest stage of L2 acquisition that has been extensively discussed is the Basic Variety (Klein & Perdue 1997) documented in studies from the European Science Foundation (Klein & Perdue 1992). With spontaneous production data from untutored speakers of five L1s learning six L2s, these investigations reveal that at early stages the learners use a pragmatic mode of expression (often topic-comment constructions) and have virtually no morphology. The rather random vocabulary and pragmatic combinations that characterize this Basic Variety are more indicative of E-language than I-language; there is little indication of an internalized L2 system. The Basic Variety is wildly different from the target language, but it is so lacking in linguistic characteristics that its ‘variation’ cannot even be addressed. I conclude that the Basic Variety is E-language comprising a collection of vocabulary and chunks, but having little internal systematic structure. What I’m calling the Initial Stage is one where L2 morphology is just emerging, but is not consistently produced. This stage is interesting because it resembles, yet is different from, the child’s Optional Infinitive stage. Recall that typical children undergo a period during which they systematically alternate VP internal root infinitives and TP projections with inflected verbs. In L2A learners also produce infinitival and default forms at the Initial Stage, as observed in 1975 by Selinker et al. (6).

JULIA HERSCHENSOHN

180 (6)

Je aller le français camp I to go the French camp “I’m going to French camp.”

However, the infinitives are not produced with the same systematicity of L1 children; rather, several studies document the use of infinitives in L2 Spanish and French, often with nominative clitics in French (Meisel 1997, Eubank & Beck 1998, Liceras et al. 1999, Prévost & White 2000 a, b, Herschensohn 2001). Several years ago I collected data from two teenaged L2 French learners, one of whom, Chloe, spent six months in France, while the other, Emma, continued academic study of French in Seattle. I made three interviews with each of the subjects over the six month period and then analyzed their production data from several perspectives. In my 2001 article I examined their verb inflection accuracy and found data resembling that of numerous other studies (7)-(10). (7)

Nous regarder (Emma) we to watch “We were watching.”

(8)

Je ne continuer pas (Emma) I neg to continue not “I am not continuing.”

(9)

J’aller (Chloe) I to go “I am going.”

(10)

Ils [z]arriver (Chloe) they-m to arrive “They are arriving.”

The clitics in (9) and (10) undergo elision and liaison respectively, an indication that the morphophonological interface is more accurate than the morphosyntactic one. The infinitives are not the only type of verb errors, although they are the most preponderant; the learners often use present tense for past or future, employ incorrect person-number and overregularize irregular morphology. Only the last error is characteristic of L1A (Clahsen et al. 2002). L2 learners, on the other hand, often use default third singular or the infinitival forms illustrated in (6)-(10). By the third interview Emma and Chloe correctly supply verbal inflection in obligatory context at 89% and 98% respectively (although they have residual infinitival forms) and their syntax (e.g. verb raising) is 100% accurate.

DEVELOPING I-LANGUAGE L1/L2

181

L2 infinitives are different from L1 ones in that they are used with TP syntax: all these examples contain nominative clitics that must be checked against an inflected verb in Tense, while (8) shows a clear diagnostic of verb raising with postverbal negative pas. Eubank & Beck (1998) entertain and dismiss the possibility that adult L2 learners produce root infinitives and that there is a contingency between morphology and syntax as in L1A. What we see in Emma and Chloe’s production is nearly perfect syntax combined with flawed morphology, characteristics that argue against both a morphosyntax contingency and a developmental parallel to L1. Flawed morphology is widely reported in various languages (cf. Prévost & White 2000a, b, Lardiere 2007). Indeed, the learners demonstrate syntactic command of TP and CP syntax with diagnostics such as negation / adverb order, WH questions and embedded clauses. The flawed morphology can be accounted for if we assume that once learners have developed a representation of the L2 syntax, they can accurately produce word order, but have difficulty mapping the syntax to well-inflected surface morphology. Adopting a Distributed Morphology approach (Halle & Marantz 1993, Lumsden 1992), White (2003:197) suggests “some forms are defaults whose featural content does not need to be fully specified. These defaults can substitute for more fully specified forms, under certain conditions.” In this analysis the L2 infinitives are unspecified for person-number-tense and can thus substitute for the requisite inflected form. White points out that underspecified defaults substitute for specified inflections, but the reverse does not occur, a pattern I also found. 3.3

L2, E-language or I-language? Acquisitionists call the intermediate grammar interlanguage—a term meaning, according to Gass & Selinker (2001:455), “the language produced by a nonnative speaker of a language (i.e., a learner’s output).” Although the “learner’s output” definition of interlanguage sounds rather Bloomfieldian and thus more like E-language, Selinker’s original proposal of interlanguage (1973:212) traces it to Lenneberg’s “latent language structure.” While Selinker distinguishes the latent structure associated with L1A (presumably UG) from the one related to L2A, he clearly conceives of interlanguage as a “latent psychological structure” (ibid.: 214). Adjemian (1976) criticizes the ambiguity fostered by Selinker’s original proposal, arguing instead that interlanguages are natural languages that must contain an organized set of rules and basic elements (lexical items, phonological units, grammatical categories, etc.). The organization of these sets into a coherent functional whole results in the emergence of a linguistic entity with internal consistency: systematicity (ibid.:301).

What Adjemian describes is clearly I-language as opposed to E-language; however, he admits such a linguistic system is “somehow incomplete and in a state of flux” (ibid.:308).

182

JULIA HERSCHENSOHN

Generative linguists have subscribed to the idea that UG, the innate language predisposition, constrains mature grammars—all languages are restricted to certain substantive and formal universals—and narrows the options available to the young child learning a native tongue. L2 research dwelt for several early years on the question of whether UG was available to adult learners or whether it was restricted (as Pinker suggests) to early childhood. Scholars such as Bley-Vroman (1990), Clahsen & Muysken (1989, 1996) and Meisel (1997) argue that UG is available to children (who clearly develop I-languages), but not to adult L2 learners, who must use general cognitive strategies. Other linguists—Schwartz & Sprouse (1996), Hawkins (2001), White (2003), Lardiere (2007)—have argued that adults develop internalized grammars that for the most part conform to universals: they are natural languages. Indeed, while it is clear that adults do rely much more heavily on cognitive strategies than do children, it is also evident that two diagnostics of UG—parameter setting and poverty of the stimulus—hold true of second languages. These two perspectives might be characterized as the Elanguage vs. I-language views. Despite shortcomings of L2 grammars, they nevertheless show several characteristics indicative of I-language and not E-language. Studies of parameters such as Null Subject (Liceras 1986, White 1989), Verb Second (Schwartz & Sprouse 1996, Vainikka & Young-Scholten 1996) and Verb Raising (Hulk 1991, Hawkins et al. 1993) provide evidence that learners with a different setting for L1 can for the most part gain new parametric values in an L2. GJs remain, however, indeterminate despite productive accuracy. I provide an illustration of verb raising (Emonds 1978, Pollock 1989) from L1 English and L2 French in (11)-(14). (11) (12) (13) (14)

John often / never kisses (*often / never) Mary. Jean (*souvent / jamais) embrasse souvent / jamais Marie. Les filles (*toutes) embrassent toutes Jean. The girls all kiss (*all) John.

In French all inflected verbs raise from V to T to check tense and to check off nominative case of the raised subject; in English only auxiliaries are merged in T, while main verbs remain in situ in VP. The placement of negation and adverbs, left adjoined to VP, is a diagnostic distinguishing the two languages. French verb raising shows the following clustering of syntactic properties of thematic verbs contrasting with English: postverbal negation, adverbs, quantifier floated off from the subject raised to spec TP ((13)-(14)) and T to C verb raising in question inversion (e.g. Qui embrasse-t-il? ‘Who does he kiss?’). In a cross-sectional study of intermediate and advanced anglophone learners of French using grammatical judgements as a gauge of French verb raising mastery, Hawkins et al. (1993) find that both groups master negation placement, but that there is a discrepancy for GJ accuracy of adverb placement.

DEVELOPING I-LANGUAGE L1/L2

183

Furthermore, both groups have significant difficulty with the GJs on quantifier float (13). Finally grammatical sentences are judged far more accurately than ungrammatical ones. Although the central properties of a given parameter— raising the verb above negation in French or using null subjects in Spanish—can be solidly acquired in L2, the clustering properties of a given parameter (e.g. adverb placement or the more problematic quantifier float) do not necessarily follow. Another argument for the availability of UG is that of the Poverty of the Stimulus (POS), how the child comes to know so much about her grammar given such ‘impoverished’ input. This line of argumentation seems to fly against a UG account of L2A at first blush, given the ample input (over many years sometimes), instruction and negative evidence offered to adult learners. However, recent studies (Dekydtspotter et al. 1997, Kanno 1997, Montrul 2001 a,b, Sorace 1993) have shown that L2 learners, even intermediate ones, develop intuitions about subtle semantic properties that do not have correlates in the L1, knowledge they argue must be attributed to UG. For example, Dekydtspotter et al. (1997) present a cross-sectional study of anglophone learners of French using result and process nominals that do not correspond to English usage (15)-(16). (15)

Result: la version de la neuvième par / de Karajan the version of the ninth by / of Karajan

(16)

Process: la destruction de Tokyo par / *de Godzilla the destruction of Tokyo by / of Godzilla

Assuming that process nominals are counterparts to passive (with external argument suppressed), the authors find that at all levels learners make judgements that distinguish the use of prepositions in a manner that is parallel (but less accurate) to that of native French speakers. They argue that this semantic intuition—unavailable in the input, in the L1 and in instruction—indicates that the L2 learners are tapping their innate UG capacities. Cognitive strategy learning models based on input and analogy could not account for POS phenomena in L2. The untaught metalinguistic knowledge is not characteristic of E-language, but rather I-language. The extensive data from both Poverty of the Stimulus and parameter setting provides a convincing range of evidence for availability of UG in L2A and for the abstract internalized nature of the interlanguage grammar. The consistently accurate syntax and preponderantly correct morphology even at early stages indicate that the learners do possess a systematic grammar of the L2, despite their performance difficulties. They implement their morphosyntactic knowledge to produce totally novel sentences, a clear indication of the creative use of language. They deploy embedding from a very early stage, and they show evidence of a morphological system in their use of

184

JULIA HERSCHENSOHN

overregularization of irregular verbs. Their knowledge is not a collection of words and chunks, but rather a system of internalized knowledge of L2, an I-language that is, however, only partial as is that of the developing child. Furthermore, the intermediate L2 stages resemble those of SLI children, not those of typical development. How then does the final state L2 grammar compare to a native Ilanguage? 4.

Advanced interlanguage The ability of learners to gain subtle metalinguistic abilities in the L2, despite differences from the L1, has been demonstrated in other areas as well— unaccusative verbs (Sorace 1993), argument alternations (Montrul 2001b), Overt Pronoun Constraint (Kanno 1997) to name a few. Although metalinguistic tasks such as grammaticality judgements represent a difficulty for learners, the most advanced ones gain intuitions that are quite native like, if not 100% (Birdsong 1992, 1999; Herschensohn 2007). Going back as far as Chomsky’s (1959) criticism of Skinner, the availability of such ‘superfluous’ information as which phrases are ungrammatical or which sentences are synonymous has been cited as knowledge that could not be furnished by the input (POS). As the previous section has indicated, L2 learners present signs of systematic internalized grammar even at early stages, but still show persistent incompleteness at endstate compared to native grammars. In this section I examine incompleteness and flux in advanced L2 grammars to appraise such nonnative variability compared to native variation. 4.1

L2 variation, later stages At the advanced level we have even more evidence that learners have an Ilanguage, a claim I’ll support with examples from additional research and a study of advanced learners of L2 French I’m currently working on with Deborah Arteaga. Several individual and group studies document expert learners through the standard evaluative measures—native speaker opinions of L2 pronunciation, oral and written production tasks, and grammaticality judgements. In the realm of syntax and morphology, there have been a number of studies of advanced learners showing near-native ability of adult L2 learners. Coppieters (1987), in an influential analysis of expert L2 French learners (from a variety of first languages), finds that his subjects (selected for their near-native level of speech as informally judged by French natives) are very “different in terms of their underlying grammatical system, interpretation and type of intuitions about the language” (ibid.:570) from their native French peers. Although Coppieters’ study is often cited as evidence for nonnativeness of L2 learners, the overall picture of his subjects—who perform at better than 90% accuracy on grammaticality judgements—is that they are actually quite competent in L2 French. This

DEVELOPING I-LANGUAGE L1/L2

185

conclusion is reinforced by Birdsong (1992) whose replication of the Coppieters study with more controlled experimental materials and subject selection criteria finds that some of the expert learners fall within the range of performance of French natives. He concludes that “there are individuals who began L2A as adults and yet demonstrate attainment of native norms” (ibid.:742). In a study of highly advanced L2 French learners, I replicated the Hawkins et al. GJ task with ‘superior’ learners (Herschensohn 2000). Their scores matched those of controls on the negation and adverb sentences, but the third diagnostic, quantifier float (13)-(14), was more problematic. Recall that quantifiers were quite difficult for all intermediate and advanced learners in the Hawkins et al. study. My superior learners were 100% accurate on the grammatical versions of the quantifier float sentences (cf. (13)), but only 87% accurate for the ungrammatical sentences, confirming the indeterminacy of even very competent endstate L2 speakers. Duffield (2003:101) distinguishes two varieties of competence, categorical knowledge of phonological and syntactic principles and gradient ability “intimately determined by the interaction of contextual and specific lexical properties” with core syntax. He argues that the indeterminacy of L2 learners is more a function of the interface conditions than competence in core syntax. Another study of expert learners is that of White & Genesee (1996) who compare near-natives (similar to the expert learners described in this section), “nonnatives” (very proficient learners who nevertheless were perceived as nonnative by the native judges) and native controls. In this study of L2 English, the learners’ L1s vary, as does their age of acquisition. To test knowledge of (presumably UG based) subjacency, the subjects completed a GJ (monitored for reaction time) and question formation task. On both tasks the near-natives are almost identical to the natives, while the nonnatives score lower than the other two groups and show significantly longer reaction times. The authors find no deficits related to age and conclude that “L2 learners can achieve native like competence with respect to constraints of UG, provided care is taken to ensure native like proficiency; this is true even for learners who are first exposed intensively to English as an L2 after the age of 16” (ibid.:251). As for my current project, one of the subjects is again Chloe, whose capacity for verb raising I redocumented through three interviews during a year abroad in France. By age 22 she is more fluent in French, speaking with no hesitation and, for example, carrying on a conversation comprising 2610 words in Interview III. At that time she produces 394 tokens of inflected verbs with 98% accuracy. She is at 100% accuracy for verb raising production in 56 clear diagnostic contexts as in (17)-(18). (17)

on [ne] sortira peut-être jamais one neg will-get –out-3sg-pr perhaps never “We will perhaps never get out of here.”

186 (18)

JULIA HERSCHENSOHN

j’aimerais bien visiter I would like-1-sg-condit well to visit “I would really like to visit.”

On the Hawkins et al. GJ task on verb raising, she has an overall accuracy of 95%. What is telling, though, is the fact that she and the other two advanced learners in this study, who are at 100% accuracy for GJ of negation and adverbs, only reach 56% accuracy for quantifier float in the third interview. All three show near perfect mastery of negation and adverb placement in production and GJs, but still fluctuate in their judgements on quantifiers. This indeterminacy in advanced learners is similar to that seen in earlier studies, yet leads us to ask how this might be represented in an interlanguage grammar. To account for non-target production forms, we adopt the default morphology proposal described earlier holding that non-target inflection is due to factors other than syntax. This idea appeals to underspecification to explain the use of default forms for specific morphology. Recall that the underspecification account (Lumsden, 1992) allows underspecified default forms to enter into agree relations as long as they do not have mismatched features. This approach considers the syntax separately from the morphology, a separation that is clearly needed to account for the data, for while Chloe has isolated surface morphological errors in TP, she nonetheless inflects verbs for tense and for person / number. Her production no longer contains infinitival forms, since most errors use the default III singular verb form, but she does show an effect of processing load in that fatigue (e.g. the end of a long interview) and task (e.g. doing a role play as opposed to telling her own story) may negatively impact her morphology production. Chloe’s competence includes mastery of core morphosyntactic properties of L2 French, but with indeterminacy in unstable areas such as subtle grammaticality judgement, and with effect of processing load. 4.2

Core syntax, processing and indeterminacy While some evidence suggests that native like acquisition of phonological and morphosyntactic features is restricted to young childhood at which time the human brain retains enough plasticity to establish new parametric values (Hawkins & Hattori 2006), not all functional categories hamper L2 learners in comparable ways. For anglophones learning L2 French, DP gender mistakes are not similar in all nominal domains, since adjectival concord is harder than determiner agreement. As is the case for L1A of SLI children, parametrized functional features from different domains—nominal and verbal, for example— are not all acquired at a comparable rate or with analogous errors across different L2 learning populations (Belletti & Hamann 2004, Hulk 2004, Paradis & Crago 2004, Granfeldt & Schlyter 2004). The cross-categorial inconsistencies remind us of Gregg’s (1996, 2003) distinction between property and transition theories of

DEVELOPING I-LANGUAGE L1/L2

187

L2A in that the properties of a given stage of interlanguage (say, when TP is accurately fixed, but DP isn’t yet) must be considered in terms of the transitions that the L2 grammar has or will continue to undergo. The idealized competence of the mature grammar is an endstate rapidly attained by the typically developing child. For L2A and atypical L1A, a transition theory accounts for how acquisition proceeds, how input is incorporated into the developing I-language. Recent research indicates that the role of processing, particularly at the peripheral interfaces, must be examined as carefully as that of UG in assessing advanced L2 interlanguage. For example, Sorace & Filiaci (2006), in an experiment that tested near-native Anglophone learners of Italian on coreference interpretations of null and overt pronouns, examine the role of three factors: syntactic conditions on the licensing of null subjects; discourse conditions on the contextual distribution of pronouns; and processing strategies for the correct online production and interpretation of subject pronouns. They tested their subjects and controls with sentences such as (19)-(20). (19) La mammai dà un bacio alla figlia k , mentre leik/l /proi/k si mette il cappotto. the momi gives a kiss to-the daughterk, while shek/l /proi/k self puts the coat “The mom gives a kiss to her daughter while she puts on her coat.” (20) Mentre leik/l /proi si mette il cappotto, la mammai dà un bacio alla figliak. while shek/l /proi self puts the coat, the momi gives a kiss to-the daughterk “While she puts on her coat, the mom gives a kiss to the daughter.” They find that on the null anaphor sentences—with both forward and backward anaphora—the learners and native controls concur, with essentially a two way split taking the matrix subject or object as antecedent. They infer that the learners have mastered the narrow syntactic conditions on the licensing of null subjects and target-like processing strategies. With overt forward anaphora (19), the learners show a qualitatively similar interpretation, but with significant quantitative difference. With overt backward anaphora (20), however, they show diametrically opposed interpretation to the native Italians. The authors conclude that the learners do not have adequate processing resources to overcome the added load of backward anaphora with overt pronouns. The residual optionality may be the result of indeterminacy at the syntax-discourse interface and, specifically, in the processing strategies linking pronouns to their antecedents. This indeterminacy magnifies existing instabilities in Italian and may not be exclusive to non-native speakers of Italian coming from a non-null subject language; indeed, it appears to characterize different domains of language contact and bilingualism.” (ibid.:363)

188

JULIA HERSCHENSOHN

5.

Conclusion Evidence from the developing grammars of L1 children and L2 adults confirms that UG provides a template of properties that guide learners in limiting the hypothesis space. Their intermediate partial grammars are I-languages, linguistic systems that conform to universal constraints, although they sometimes resemble neither the target nor the initial language. Children’s predisposition to language appears to be driven by UG and a constellation of human maturational features, while adult L2A is UG constrained. Adults, who possess full command of a first language, may reach an L2 endstate ability that is far from target like; or they may become near native speakers. In any case, once they reach an initial level of competence, they are clearly users of an I-language, not an E-language. Research in exceptional grammars—atypical L1, bilingual, L2—reveals commonalities and differences as partial I-languages develop toward complete Ilanguages, while pointing out the necessary contextualization of the grammar with its interfaces. Returning to our earlier question, how can we explain UG constrained yet non-convergent grammars of atypical L1, bilingual and L2? Native monolinguals gain ‘perfect’ command of their L1, rarely making performance errors and setting the bar for comparisons that show deficits on the part of the non native populations referred to. Their production and GJ errors are providing insight into the most vulnerable areas of grammar, areas that appear invulnerable in native populations. For example, processing overload (which is more likely in the vulnerable populations) leads to performance errors; pragmatic conditions such as the syntax-discourse interface highlighted by Sorace and Filliaci create a less stable environment that can reveal subtle differences between native and near native speakers. Adapting UG options, atypical learners may use a strategy available neither in the L1 nor L2, or overgeneralize default forms in underspecified morphology. These very weaknesses, considered by some to be indications of unavailability of UG or characteristic of E-language, can rather be seen as confirmations of UG and the variations possible for I-language.

References Adjemian, Christian. 1976. “On the Nature of Interlanguage Systems”. Language Learning 26.297-320. Bates, Elizabeth, Phillip S. Dale & Donna Thal. 1995. “Individual Differences and their Implications for Theories of Language Development”. The Handbook of Child Language, ed. by Paul Fletcher & Brian MacWhinney, 96-151. Oxford: Blackwell. Belletti, Adriana & Cornelia Hamann. 2004. “On the L2 / Bilingual Acquisition of French by two Young Children with Different Source Languages”. Prévost & Paradis 2004. 147-174.

DEVELOPING I-LANGUAGE L1/L2

189

Bellugi, Ursula, S. Marks, A.M. Bihrle & H. Salso. 1993. “Dissociation between Language and Cognitive Functions in Williams Syndrome”. Language Development in Exceptional Circumstances, ed. by Dorothy Bishop & Kay Mogford, 177-189. Hove: L. Erlbaum. Birdsong, David. 1992. “Ultimate Attainment in Second Language Acquisition”. Language 68.706-755. Birdsong, David, ed. 1999. Second Language Acquisition and the Critical Period Hypothesis. Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum. Bley-Vroman, Robert. 1990. “The Logical Problem of Foreign Language Learning”. Linguistic Analysis 20.3-49. Chomsky, Noam. 1959. “A Review of B.F. Skinner’s ‘Verbal Behavior’”. Language 35.26-58. Chomsky, Noam. 1986. Knowledge of Language: Its nature, Origin and Use. New York: Praeger. Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Clahsen, Harald, Fraibet Aveledo & Iggy Roca. 2002. “The Development of Regular and Irregular Verb Inflection in Spanish Child Language”. Journal of Child Language 29.591-622. Clahsen, Harald & Pieter Muysken. 1989. “The UG Paradox in L2 Acquisition”. Second Language Research 5.1-29. Clahsen, Harald & Pieter Muysken. 1996. “How Adult Second Language Learning Differs from Child First Language Development”. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 19.721-723. Coppieters, René. 1987. “Competence Differences Between Native and Nonnative Speakers”. Language 63.544-573. Dekydtspotter, Laurent, Rex Sprouse & Bruce Anderson. 1997. “The Interpretive Interface in L2 Acquisition: The Process-result Distinction in EnglishFrench Interlanguage Grammars”. Language Acquisition 6.297-332. Duffield, Nigel. 2003. “Measures of Competent Gradience”. Van Hout et al. 2003. 97-128. Emonds, Joseph. 1978. “The Verbal Complex V’-V in French”. Linguistic Inquiry 9.151-175. Eubank, Lynn & Maria–Luise Beck. 1998. “OI–like Effects in Adult L2 Acquisition”. Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, ed. by Annabel Greenhill et al., 189-200. Somerville, MA.: Cascadilla Press. Friedemann, Marc-Ariel & Luigi Rizzi, eds. 2000. The Acquisition of Syntax. Harlow, England: Longman. Gass, Susan & Larry Selinker. 2001. Second Language Acquisition: An Introductory Course, 2nd ed. Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum. Granfeldt, Jonas & Suzanne Schlyter. 2004. “Cliticisation in the Acquisition of French as L1 and L2”. Prévost & Paradis 2004. 333-370.

190

JULIA HERSCHENSOHN

Gregg, Kevin R. 1996. “The Logical and Developmental Problems of Second Language Acquisition”. Handbook of Second Language Acquisition, ed. by William C. Ritchie & Tej K. Bhatia, 49-81. San Diego: Academic Press. Gregg, Kevin R. 2003. “SLA Theory: Construction and Assessment”. Handbook of Second Language Acquisition, ed. by Catherine J. Doughty & Michael H. Long, 831-865. Malden, MA: Blackwell. Guasti, Maria Teresa. 2002. Language Acquisition: The Growth of Grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Halle, Morris & Alec Maranz. 1993. “Distributed Morphology and the Pieces of Inflection”. The View from Building 20: Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger, ed. by Kenneth Hale & Samuel Jay Keyser, 111-176. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Hamann, Cornelia. 2004. “Comparing the Development of the Nominal and the Verbal Functional Domain in French Language Impairment”. Prévost & Paradis 2004. 109-144. Hawkins, Roger. 2001. Second Language Syntax: An Introduction. Oxford: Blackwell. Hawkins, Roger & Hajime Hattori. 2006. “Interpretation of English Multiple whquestions by Japanese Speakers: A Missing Uninterpretable Feature Account”. Second Language Research 22.269-301. Hawkins, Roger, Richard Towell & Niles Bazergui. 1993. “Universal Grammar and the Acquisition of French Verb Movement by Native Speakers of English”. Second Language Research 9.189-233. Herschensohn, Julia. 2000. The Second Time Around: Minimalism and L2 Acquisition. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Herschensohn, Julia. 2001. “Missing Inflection in L2 French: Accidental Infinitives and Other Verbal Deficits”. Second Language Research 17.273-305. Herschensohn, Julia. 2007. Language Development and Age. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hulk, Aafke. 1991. “Parameter Setting and the Acquisition of Word Order in L2 French”. Second Language Research 7.1-34. Hulk, Aafke. 2004. “The Acquisition of French DP in a Bilingual Context”. Prévost & Paradis 2004. 243-274. Hornstein, Norbert, Jairo Nunes & Kleanthes K. Grohmann. 2005. Understanding Minimalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Kanno, Kazue. 1997. “The Acquisition of Null and Overt Pronominals in Japanese by English Speakers”. Second Language Research 13.265-287. Klein, Wolfgang & Clive Perdue. 1992. Utterance Structure: (Developing grammars again). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Klein, Wolfgang & Clive Perdue. 1997. “The Basic Variety (or: Couldn’t Natural Languages Be Much Simpler?)”. Second Language Research 13.301-347.

DEVELOPING I-LANGUAGE L1/L2

191

Lardiere, Donna. 2007. Ultimate Attainment in Second Language Acquisition: A Case Study. Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum. Lenneberg, Eric. 1967. The Biological Foundations of Language. New York: Wiley. Liceras, Juana. 1986. Linguistic Theory and Second Language Acquisition: The Spanish Nonnative Grammar of English Speakers. Tubingen: Gunter Nar Verlag. Liceras, Juana, Elena Valenzuela & Lourdes Díaz. 1999. “L1 / L2 Spanish Grammars and the Pragmatic Deficit Hypothesis”. Second Language Research 15.161-190. Lightfoot, David. 1999. The Development of Language: Acquisition, Change, and Evolution. Malden, MA: Blackwell. Lumsden, John S. 1992. “Underspecification in Grammar and Natural Gender”. Linguistic Inquiry 23.469-486. Meisel, Jurgen. 1997. “The Acquisition of the Syntax of Negation in French and German: Contrasting First and Second Language Development”. Second Language Research 13.227-263. Montrul, Silvina. 2001a. “L1-constrained Variability in the L2 Acquisition of Argument Structure Changing Morphology with Causative Verbs”. Second Language Research 17:2.144-194. Montrul, Silvina. 2001b. “Agentive Verbs of Manner of Motion in Spanish and English as Second Languages”. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 23:2.171-206. Paradis, Johanne & Martha Crago. 2004. “Comparing L2 and SLI Grammars in Child French”. Prévost & Paradis 2004. 89-107. Pierce, Amy. 1992. Language Acquisition and Syntactic Theory: A Comparative Analysis of French and English Child Grammars. Dordrecht & Boston: Kluwer. Pollock, Jean-Yves. 1989. “Verb Movement, Universal Grammar and the Structure of IP”. Linguistic Inquiry 20.365-424. Prévost, Philippe & Johanne Paradis, eds. 2004. The Acquisition of French in Different Contexts: Focus on Functional Categories. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Prévost, Philippe & Lydia White. 2000a. “Missing Surface Inflection or Impairment in Second Language Acquisition? Evidence from Tense and Agreement”. Second Language Research 16.103-134. Prévost, Philippe & Lydia White. 2000b. “Accounting for Morphological Variation in Second Language Acquisition: Truncation or Missing Inflection?” Friedemann & Rizzi 2000. 202-235. Rasetti, Lucienne. 2000. “Null Subjects and Root Infinitives in the Child Grammar of French”. Friedemann & Rizzi 2000. 236-268. Rice, Mabel, ed. 1996. Towards a Genetics of Language. Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum.

192

JULIA HERSCHENSOHN

Rizzi, Luigi. 2000. “Remarks on Early Null Subjects”. Friedemann & Rizzi 2000. 269-292. Schütze, Carson & Kenneth Wexler. 1996. “Subject Case Licensing and English Root Infinitives”. Proceedings of the 20th Boston University Conference on Language Development, Boston, ed. by Andy Stringfellow et al., 670681. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press. Schwartz, Bonnie D. & Rex Sprouse. 1996. “L2 Cognitive States and the Full Transfer / Full Access model”. Second Language Research 12.317-368. Selinker, Larry. 1973. “Interlanguage”. International Review of Applied Linguistics 10.209-231. Selinker, Larry, Merrill Swain & G. Dumas. 1975. “The Interlanguage Hypothesis Extended to Children”. Language Learning 25.139-152. Sorace, Antonella. 1993. “Incomplete vs. Divergent Representations of Unaccusativity in Nonnative Grammars of Italian”. Second Language Research 9.22-47. Sorace, Antonella & Francesca Filiaci. 2006. “Anaphora Resolution in Nearnative Speakers of Italian”. Second Language Research 22.339-368. Vainikka, Anne & Martha Young-Scholten. 1996. “Gradual Development of L2 Phrase Structure”. Second Language Research 12.7-39. Van Hout, Roeland, Aafke Hulk, Folkert Kuiken & Richard Towell, eds. 2003. The Lexicon-Syntax Interface in Second Language Acquisition. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Wexler, Kenneth. 1994. “Optional infinitives, Head Movement and the Economy of Derivations”. Verb Movement, ed. by David Lightfoot & Norbert Horstein, 305-350. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. White, Lydia. 1989. Universal Grammar and Second Language Acquisition. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. White, Lydia. 2003. Second Language Acquisition and Universal Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. White, Lydia & Fred Genesee. 1996. “How Native is Near–native? The Issue of Ultimate Attainment in Adult Second Language Acquisition”. Second Language Research 12.233-265.

CRYPTO-VARIATION IN ITALIAN VELAR PALATALISATION *

MARTIN KRÄMER University of Tromsø / CASTL3

In this paper, I present new data from a nonce-word test that give us further insight into the synchronic status of the phonological process of velar palatalisation in Standard Italian. Velar palatalisation applies in the plural forms of some nouns and in some it does not. When confronted with novel words and the task to produce plural forms speakers split into two groups, those that apply palatalisation to all new forms and those that do not apply the process. The conclusion drawn from these results is that a uniform but ambiguous surface pattern is analysed in different ways by individual speakers, hence, showing crypto-variation. The results give evidence supporting Pater’s (2006) proposal that exceptional application of a process is due to lexical indexation of markedness constraints and exceptional underapplication is due to lexical indexation of faithfulness constraints in Optimality Theory.

1.

Introduction Palatalisation is a wide-spread process or family of processes in Romance languages which is most often analysed from a historical perspective (see e.g., the outstanding contribution by Calabrese 1993). Palatalisation showing synchronic alternations can be observed in slightly distinct incarnations in the inflectional morphology in different lexical categories in present-day Standard Italian. Velar palatalisation applies in some Italian nouns in the masculine plural. Velar or dorsal stops are realised as palatal affricates before the high front vowel /i/ in the plural, as in (1)a. Nouns with a palatal affricate in the singular never show an alternation, as illustrated in (1)b. If palatalisation applies to velar stops has to be learned item by item, since some nouns do not show the alternation in the plural, as shown in (1)b’. There is a small number of nouns which vacillate, i.e., they can be realised with or without palatalisation, as in (1)c (Celata & Bertinetto (2005).1

*

Versions of this paper were presented at the CASTL Colloquium, the Sound Circle in Amsterdam and at LSRL 37. I would like to thank the audiences and three anonymous reviewers, who read the paper for this volume, for their helpful comments. Special thanks go to the CASTL phonologists and to Diana Apoussidou for their input. The biggest thank-you goes to my informants for their cooperation and patience. 3 CASTL = Center for Advanced Study in Theoretical Linguistics. < http://uit.no/castl > 1 Celata & Bertinetto (2005) note that each of the few vacillating nouns actually has a preferred plural form. Since palatalisation and blocking of the process are indicated in the Italian orthography (an h is written between c or g and the letter representing the triggering vowels e and i

194

MARTIN KRÄMER

(1) Italian velar palatalisation in nouns a. amíko, amítʃi, amíke b. bróntʃo, bróntʃi b’. kwɔ́ko, kwɔ́ki c. mániko, mánitʃi / mániki

‘friend/pl./fem.pl.’ ‘sad face/pl.’ ‘cookN/pl.’ ‘door handle/pl.’

In 2nd conjugation verbs the process applies without any exception before inflectional affixes starting in /i/ and /e/, as shown in (2). The data in (3) illustrate the exceptionless lack of application of the process in 1st conjugation verbs.2 (2) Italian velar palatalisation in 2nd conjugation verbs a. dirídʒere, dirígo, dirídʒi, dirídʒe ‘directV inf./1/2/3sg.’ b. kwɔ́tʃere, kwɔ́tʃo, kwɔ́tʃi, kwɔ́tʃe ‘cookV inf./1/2/3sg.’ b’. *tokere, toko, toki, toke Unattested (3) Italian velar palatalisation in 1st conjugation verbs a. legáre, légi, léga, légo ‘tieV inf./1/2/3sg.’ b. komintʃáre, komíntʃo, komíntʃi, komíntʃa ‘beginV inf./1/2/3sg.’ c. *grukáre, grúko, grútʃi, grúka Unattested The questions I will be dealing with in this paper are the following. Looking at the behaviour of nouns (and adjectives) one can arrive at either of two conclusions, A the process is synchronically active and the nouns that do not show it have to be regarded as lexical exceptions or B the process is synchronically inactive and the nouns displaying the alternation have to be listed as exceptions. I will give evidence from a nonce word test that speakers face the same dilemma as linguists in such a case and some speakers choose option A while others choose option B. This result conflicts with the conclusions drawn by Celata & Bertinetto (2005) from a lexical decision task, who maintain that all plural forms of nouns ending in velars are lexically stored while nouns ending in non-velars are produced compositionally. if the consonant is intended to be interpreted as a dorsal. If the h is missing a reader will produce an affricate) it was possible to test the frequency of the competing forms of the vacillating stems by running them through an internet search engine (www.google.it). The result was that the frequency of the dispreferred form for each stem is negligible. I will ignore these stems in this paper. For a more detailed discussion see Krämer (in preparation). 2 rd 3 conjugation verbs behave like nouns. Some verbs show palatalisation, others don’t. The verbs that block palatalisation, though, mostly seem to be derived from other word classes, such as imboschire [imboskíre] ‘to afforest’ (from non-palatalising bosco ‘forest’). Thus, in the following account the analysis of 3rd conjugation verbs is by and large parallel to that of masculine nouns. If the generalisation holds true that all 3rd conjugation verbs which block palatalisation are derived from adjectives (or nouns) this could as well be regarded as a case of faithfulness to an output (e.g., bosco in the example above) as the base of derivation.

CRYPTO-VARIATION IN ITALIAN

195

A further question that is relevant here is to explain the systematic absence of exceptions in the verbal paradigms in the face of a mixed paradigm, that of nouns, which allows exceptions. Different grammatical behaviour in (lexical) subcomponents of a single language have been accounted for in a variety of ways, including idiosyncratic lexical marking or pre-specification of features, cophonologies or morpheme-specific rankings (Inkelas 1999, Anttila 2002) and lexical indexation of lexical items that triggers the activity of lexically indexed constraints (Pater 2000, in press). I analyse the Italian patterns here with lexically indexed constraints and Base-Output faithfulness constraints (Kenstowicz 1996, Benua 2000, Burzio 2000, 2004). Speakers who treat palatalisation in nouns as the exception have a grammar that generally blocks palatalisation and a lexically indexed markedness constraint triggers exceptional application. Speakers who have palatalisation generalised block the process in individual items by a lexically indexed faithfulness constraint. The general blocking and complete lack of exceptions in 1st conjugation verbs is due to high ranking paradigm uniformity constraints. The paper is organised as follows. Section 2 outlines the basic analysis of velar palatalisation in Italian, taking the 2nd conjugation as the default and blocking in 1st conjugation as the exception, emergent through lexically indexed BO-faithfulness in this paradigm. This core grammar will be used in section 3.2 to explain the behaviour of existing and nonce nouns. Section 3 introduces the methodology and the results of the nonce word experiment (3.1) and integrates these into the grammar developed in section 2 (3.2). Section 4 concludes. 2.

Verbs and palatalisation All 2nd conjugation verbs show palatalisation of dorsal stops at the morpheme boundary before inflectional affixes beginning with an /i/ or /e/. In this class the process has to be regarded as automatic. In terms of representations I assume palatalisation to be the spreading of the place feature [coronal] from these vowels to a preceding [dorsal]. The resulting segment with a complex place feature is realised as an affricate (i.e., [tʃ] or [dʒ]). This is illustrated in (4). All irrelevant nodes and features, for instance those differentiating between /i/ and /e/ are left out of the representation for matters of clarity. (4) a.

Representation k b. i/e [dors]

[cor]

c.

tʃ [dors] [cor]

d.

x

x

[dors]

[cor]

The analysis exploits Clements & Hume’s (1995) and Morén’s (2003) assumption that vowels and consonants have the same place features, just attached

196

MARTIN KRÄMER

to different mother nodes. For a more elaborate representation of velar palatalisation in the Parallel Structures Model (Morén 2003) see Morén (2006). On the constraint-based side of the analysis a constraint triggering spreading has to outrank the relevant faithfulness constraint that blocks spreading. Since the process applies in morphologically derived environments only there must be some additional faithfulness constraint blocking palatalisation inside morphemes. Krämer (2003, 2005) has argued for an analysis of derived environment effects invoking CONTIGUITY constraints (McCarthy & Prince 1995). A contiguity constraint is violated only if a segment embedded between two other segments in input and output is unfaithful. (5)

CONTIGUITY ›› PAL ›› IO-IDENT[place]

Tableau 1 exemplifies application of the process in 2nd conjugation verbs. /dirig -i/ CONTIGUITY PAL IO-IDENT ) a. diridʒi * b. dirigi *! Tableau 1: Exceptionless application

In the 1st conjugation class we do not find a single verb stem that shows the alternation. Dorsal stops in the stem surface faithfully in the palatalisation environment. I follow Burzio (2000, 2004) in assuming that generalised blocking and the absence of idiosyncratic behaviour is owed to high ranking BOfaithfulness that punishes any deviation from a surface base form. The application context is given in 2nd person singular forms, with the affixation of /-i/. Thus, these forms have to be faithful to some other form, the 3rd person singular or the infinitive, which don’t show palatalisation either (if only because of lack of a trigger). This paradigmatic constraint, then, outranks the palatalisation constraint. Since there is regular application in the 2nd conjugation, this faithfulness constraint has to be lexically indexed to 1st conjugation verbs, indicated with a subscript ‘1’ attached to the constraint. The assumption of an additional constraint that is activated only in the evaluation of 1st conjugation verbs saves us from stipulating different rankings for the two verb classes. (6)

-are verbs exceptionless non-application: CONTIGUITY, BO-IDENT[place]1 ›› PAL ›› IO-IDENT[place]

As Tableau 2 shows the highly ranked BO-faithfulness constraint issues a protest against the otherwise preferred candidate with a palatalised root-final consonant, since this candidate differs from the base.

CRYPTO-VARIATION IN ITALIAN

197

/leg/ /-i/ BO-IDENT1 PAL IO-IDENT a. ledʒi *! * ) b. legi * base: legare / lega Tableau 2: Exceptionless blocking

With one ranking which includes one lexically indexed constraint we account for the absence of a paradigm like hypothetical *{tokere, toko, toki} as well as for impossible *{tokare, toko, totʃi}. This is all that is needed to account for the behaviour of verbs and I move on to the discussion of nouns (and adjectives).3 3.

Nouns and palatalisation If we simply proceed with the analysis on the basis of the grammar established for verbs the most important choice regarding nouns seems to be made already. The default established above was application of palatalisation. Thus, nouns that display the alternation can just be fed into the grammar and the correct output will be generated. All the nouns that are immune can be treated in the same fashion as 1st conjugation verbs, they receive a lexical index tied to the activation of a BO-faithfulness constraint with the same index. However, a nonce word experiment shows that the situation is slightly more complex. A further aspect that has to be integrated is the lack of triggering behaviour of /e/. 3.1

How active is velar palatalisation as a process in nouns? To find out if native speakers of Italian spontaneously palatalise dorsals in plural formation I created a list of nonce words. These words had to comply with Italian phonotactics, not be too similar to any existing words and should be easily readable, because they were intended for presentation in written form. All words were judged by a native speaker. Furthermore they were all checked for inexistence in a dictionary and run through an internet search engine. Only words with zero hits in the dictionary and the internet were included. The items of interest were masculine nouns, indicated by their ending in the letter o and had a stem ending in the letter c or a double c preceded by all five Italian orthographic vowels. The list also contained filler words.4

3

There are though several very interesting issues here which I will not discuss for reasons of space, as for example the alternation between /sk/ and /ʃː/ or the deletion / coalescence in 1st person plural forms, such as /legː -iamo/ → [ledʒamo], *[ledʒjamo] etc. 4 The test posed a double challenge for the subjects since it is also not clear where Italian places default stress. The data generated in this test were also used to shed light on this issue, see Krämer (in prep., to appear).

MARTIN KRÄMER

198

(7) Nonce word list including fillers 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

frunaco brombulo frampeco plantico chiatteno sbancito gico cincuco praco

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

flempile tapirco chiateppo svappa nalico fiesova smeco cruvacco grotulfo

19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

giompicco rocapado plontico frudalo ancico picutopa gionsicco conchico

In the test, speakers had to read each word from a list (they did not get an auditory stimulus) and then use it in a plural context using always the same carrier sentence. For the latter they neither got a visual input, since orthography would have told them what to do (depending on whether they encounter, e.g., smeci or smechi). This corresponds largely to Gleason’s (1958) wug test procedure (with the difference that his subjects didn’t read). Several of the test words were fillers, they did not contain a root-final dorsal or they were feminine or both. 12 adult subjects were tested of which 3 had to be excluded later for several reasons.5 (8) Carrier sentence: Ieri ho visto due _______ . Yesterday have-1sg see-past.part two _______ . Yesterday, I have seen two _______ . The chart in Figure 1 displays how many percent of masculine plural forms of stems ending in ‘c’ each speaker produced with palatalisation (e.g., [pratʃi]) and without (e.g., [praki]). Each bar represents a speaker, except for the last bar, which shows respective percentages of all realisations of all plural forms by all speakers together. Looking at the average one gets the impression that the process is applied or suppressed randomly, i.e., that palatalisation happens at chance level. Thus, the premature conclusion here would be that the grammar is non-deterministic with respect to palatalisation. However, a look at the individuals (bars 1-9) reveals that each speaker has a preference.

5

One subject did not understand the task properly and did not produce the desired plural forms. The other two were aware of the problem (productivity of palatalisation) and started a discussion of the topic.

CRYPTO-VARIATION IN ITALIAN

199

Results by speaker 100,0

26,7 26,7 26,7

17,6

80,0 56,7 60,0

82,4 87,5

78,6

70,6

93,3

40,0

73,3 73,3 73,3

43,3

20,0

17,6 12,5 0,0

faithful palatal

82,4

1

2

21,4

29,4

6,7 3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Figure 1: Results by speaker

However, the phonological make-up of the test words might have an impact too. For example, geminates could prove to be resistant or a coronal vowel preceding the target consonant could constitute a factor that favours palatalisation. Indeed, it turns out that one of the subjects (represented in bar 6) who favours palatalisation never palatalises geminates and that the latter factor, a preceding coronal vowel (especially ‘i’) prompts even subjects who consistently do not palatalise to apply the process (speakers represented by bars 1-5). In the next chart the words with geminates and with an ‘i’ preceding stem-final ‘c’ are removed and we get an even clearer picture of the subjects’ preferences in Figure 2. Bar 10 represents the whole group again. Neutral words only 0,0

100,0

16,7 16,7

28,6

80,0 60,0 60,0

83,3

100,0 100,0100,0100,0

100,0 83,3 83,3

40,0

faithful palatal

71,4 40,0

20,0

16,7 0,0

0,0 1

0,0 2

0,0 3

0,0 4

5

6

7

8

9

Figure 2: Neutral words only

10

MARTIN KRÄMER

200

The chart in Figure 3 has divided the subjects into two groups according to their preference in palatalisation matters.

Faithful group

3,3

96,7

84,0

Unfaithful group

16,0

40,0

All together 0,0

20,0

60,0

40,0

60,0

80,0

100,0

Figure 3: Non-problematic words only, by group

A further factor that could have played a role here is stress. Dressler (1985) diagnoses a connection between stress placement and palatalisation. Dressler conducted a very similar nonce word test, but provided the written stimuli with stress marks. He records 85% (nouns) and 95% palatalisation rates in words with antepenultimate stress, but only 55% / 57% palatalised forms in words with penultimate stress. However, this is all he reports and he does not break down his results by candidate as was done here. My subjects, however, placed stress on the penultimate syllable in the majority of the relevant test words and I could not find any significant correlation between stress and palatalisation. The speakers’ reactions to geminates and forms ending in the sequence ‘ico’ is interesting for a more detailed analysis of palatalisation and the role of morphological decomposition (Italian has a derivational suffix -iko, which undergoes palatalisation in plural formation and which might have had an influence on performance here). What is important for our current question is that no speaker has a non-deterministic grammar, i.e., we do not find free variation. Instead, each speaker opts for one strategy and sticks to it. The results are quite clear in this respect and I don’t regard any further statistical tests necessary to underpin this result. It has to be noted, finally, that these results are in conflict with the conclusions drawn by Celata & Bertinetto (2005) from an experiment involving a lexical decision task. They concluded from reaction times of participants when judging forms presented as visual stimuli as grammatical or ungrammatical that Italians store all plural forms of nouns with stems ending in dorsals as allomorphs, i.e., in the same way as suppletive forms, while all other plurals are computed online.

CRYPTO-VARIATION IN ITALIAN

201

3.2

OT analysis of nouns As said above, two groups of speakers emerged, those that applied palatalisation and those that didn’t. I assume that those speakers who palatalise novel words have to have all the non-palatalising items in the existing lexicon marked as exceptions, since one would not expect a competent speaker to treat a novel word automatically as an exception. The same holds vice versa for the other group. For these people all palatalising known items have to carry a lexical mark that identifies them as exceptions. Following the technical strategy applied above in the analysis of verbs the lexical mark or index in the exceptional items points to or activates a highly ranked constraint that blocks palatalisation (for the first group) or one that triggers palatalisation (for the other group). Before going through the technical implementation of this analysis I first turn to an aspect of the nominal pattern that is known from the existing lexicon. Female nouns and female forms of adjectives never palatalise - like 1st conjugation verbs. As noted above in the verbal paradigm of 2nd conjugation verbs (and 3rd conjugation) affixal /e/ is a trigger of palatalisation. There are two conceivable ways to capture the different behaviour of /e/ in the two lexical classes. Either the /e/ marking feminine gender is represented differently from other mid front vowels that trigger the process, which introduces additional abstractness in the representational component, or palatalisation is blocked in feminine forms because these obey Base-Output faithfulness, just as 1st conjugation verbs do. The latter approach follows the line pursued already to capture blocking in verbs and thus is the preferred choice. The new faithfulness constraint is added to the hierarchy developed for verbs. (9) Velar palatalisation grammar continued BO-IDENT[plc]fem, BO-IDENT[plc]-are ›› PAL ›› IO-IDENT[plc] ›› *COMPLEXPLC Tableau 3 shows how the BO-faithfulness constraint selects the candidate without palatalisation. /amik/ /-e/ BO-IDENTfem PAL IO-IDENT ) a. amike * b. amitʃe *! * base: amika Tableau 3: Blocking in feminine forms

202

MARTIN KRÄMER

If the same noun is used as a masculine form we get palatalisation now as shown by Tableau 4. /amik/ /-i/ BO-IDENTfem PAL IO-IDENT a. amiki *! ) b. amitʃi * base: amiko Tableau 4: Palatalisation as the default in nouns

This grammar generates the wrong output for nouns and adjectives like cuoco ‘cook’. Masculine noun/adjective stems that don't palatalise have to be saved now. Pursuing the same argument as before we can add an indexed BOfaithfulness constraint sensitive to nouns carrying a lexical index. Nouns exceptional to palatalisation get a lexical index that links them to this constraint. (10) Velar palatalisation grammar BO-IDENT[plc]fem, BO-IDENT[plc]Nx ›› PAL ›› IO-IDENT[plc] /kwɔk-/x /-i/ BO-IDENTNx PAL IO-IDENT ) a. kwɔki * b. kwɔtʃi *! * Base: kwɔko Tableau 5: Non-application

Participants 6-9 spontaneously palatalise novel masculine words in the plural. This is exactly what is expected if they adhere to this grammar, since new words are of course not lexically indexed. This is illustrated with the evaluation of a nonce noun in Tableau 6. /frampek/ /-i/ BO-IDENTNx PAL IO-IDENT a. frampeki *! ) b. frampetʃi * base: frampeko Tableau 6: Participants 6-9

How does the grammar look like that drives the other group? The indexed constraint on nouns, which causes blocking to emerge is indexed to all nominals in parallel with the constraint indexed to feminine forms. Any stem that palatalises is lexically indexed in this grammar and this index links to an indexed markedness

CRYPTO-VARIATION IN ITALIAN

203

constraint that triggers palatalisation. The index links to a highly ranked copy of PAL. This alternative grammar is given in (11). (11) Velar-palatalisation-as-exception grammar BO-IDENTfem, BO-IDENT-are ›› PALy ›› BO-IDENTN ›› PAL ›› IO-IDENT The four tableaux in Tableau 7 show this grammar in action. Palatalising stem /amik/ has a lexical index which activates the copy of the palatalisation constraint PAL that outranks the BO-faithfulness constraint that causes blocking in un-indexed nouns (compare tableaux i and iii). However, the BO-faithfulness constraint activated by feminine forms is ranked higher than indexed PAL, thus, palatalisation cannot apply to lexically indexed stems when they are used in the feminine form (tableau ii and iv). Again the nominal grammar is an add-on to the hierarchy developed for verbs rather than a co-phonology. i. a. ) b. base:

/amik/y /-i/ amiki amitʃi amiko

BO-IDENTfem

ii. ) a. b. base:

/amik/y /-e/ amike amitʃe amika

BO-IDENTfem

iii. ) a. b. base:

/kwɔk/ /-i/ kwɔki kwɔtʃi kwɔko

BO-IDENTfem

iv. ) a. b. base:

/kwɔk/ /-e/ kwɔke kwɔtʃe kwɔka

BO-IDENTfem

*!

*!

PALy BO-IDENTN PAL *! * *

IO-IDENT

PALy BO-IDENTN PAL * * *

IO-IDENT

PALy BO-IDENTN PAL * *!

IO-IDENT

PALy BO-IDENTN PAL * *

IO-IDENT

*

*

*

*

Tableau 7: The effect of lexical indexation

The grammar looks a bit baroque but the number of indexed constraints is necessary to avoid application of idiosyncratic palatalisation in feminine forms. Speakers with this grammar treat novel words as not bearing an idiosyncratic index and thus they will follow the pattern exemplified by /kwɔk/.

MARTIN KRÄMER

204

Since they are nouns the BO-faithfulness constraint indexed to nouns is activated in their evaluation and blocks palatalisation. The higher ranked indexed PAL is very unlikely to get activated since at this stage (the word is new) the speaker has no reason to assume that it has the index that would activate the constraint. /frampek/ /-i/ ) a. frampeki b. frampetʃi base: frampeko

BO-IDENTfem

PALy BO-IDENTN PAL * *!

IO-IDENT *

Tableau 8: Blocking in novel words

This second grammar (palatalisation as exception) relies on indexed markedness to generate palatalisation as the exceptional pattern, while the first nominal grammar developed utilised indexed faithfulness to generate underapplication as the exception. This analysis follows Pater’s (2006) proposal to analyse exceptional application as indexed markedness and exceptional blocking as indexed faithfulness. To summarise, we have established two grammars, differing in the constraints that are lexically indexed (12). The first grammar (12)a represents the speakers that palatalise nonce or novel words and it has an indexed faithfulness constraint that selects the candidate without palatalisation when a lexically indexed noun stem is in the input. Accordingly, for these speakers, all nouns that block palatalisation carry the lexical index that activates the respective constraint. The second grammar (12)b represents speakers which do not apply palatalisation to novel forms. Palatalisation is blocked in all nouns (in parallel with the treatment of feminine forms as well as 1st conjugation verbs) by a high ranking faithfulness constraint connected via indexation to all nouns. Exceptional application is triggered by a markedness constraint carrying an arbitrary index. This constraint has to rank below the blocking faithfulness constraints indexed to feminine forms and 1st conjugation verbs to exclude idiosyncratic application in these classes. Accordingly, all nouns that do palatalise in the plural carry the index in their lexical representation. (12) The two grammars a. Spontaneous palatalisation BO-IDENT1, BO-IDENTfem, BO-IDENTNx ›› PAL ›› IO-IDENT b. Generalised blocking of palatalisation BO-IDENT1, BO-IDENTfem ›› PALy ›› BO-IDENTN ›› PAL ›› IO-IDENT

CRYPTO-VARIATION IN ITALIAN

205

The data generated in the experiment show that this account is on the right track. Anttila’s (2002) proposal of co-phonologies stipulates that co-phonologies arise only in cases where the general grammar has no ranking imposed on the crucial constraints. Thus, we would expect that each Italian noun has either one ranking or the other via lexical co-phonology membership, while novel words are not affiliated to any class or fixed ranking. Coupled with Anttila’s (2003) view on how unranked constraints behave, i.e., that they randomly assume a ranking in each evaluation, we expect all our subjects to behave like the group as a whole apparently behaved, i.e., to show free variation. In this hypothetical account the two crucial constraints that are generally unranked are PAL and IO-IDENT. The rest does not play a role except for BO-faithfulness for feminine forms. For the amicotype words PAL outranks faithfulness. For cuoco-type words the ranking is reversed. When novel words are pluralised the two constraints can assume any ranking, that is in 50% of all cases PAL will outrank faithfulness and in 50% of cases faithfulness will outrank PAL. The predicted surface effect is free variation in each speaker. Since this is not the case the lexical indexation account has to be preferred. 4.

Conclusions The goal of this paper was not to give a full account of the pattern of velar palatalisation in Italian. Rather I had a limited aim: I established an analysis of the basic facts and showed that speakers have two choices when it comes to nominal forms and that speakers actually differ in which choice they make. Thus, there is no point in a discussion to figure out which of the two choices – palatalisation as synchronically active in nouns or palatalisation as the exception – is the better analysis for Italian. They are both adequate. An alternative account, working along the lines of, e.g., Anttila’s theories of lexical idiosyncrasy and variation and following the conclusions drawn by Celata & Bertinetto, could regard all plural forms of all masculine nouns and adjectives with a stem ending in a /k/ or /g/ as lexically stored. This account predicts that speakers don’t possess a grammar that can handle novel forms in a straightforward fashion, i.e., they should show free variation between palatalisation and faithfulness when they pluralise novel forms. This was not the case. Finally, the experiment shows a kind of variation, crypto-variation, that is not directly observable in existing surface forms. The speakers differ in their grammars in a way that is not trivial but has no direct consequences on surface patterns in the existing lexicon. From the analysts point of view the Italian data invite speculation on different alternatives. The choice made here to regard features as unary valued, precludes choices which we face when dealing with binary features in the sense of Inkelas (1994, 2000), Inkelas, Orgun & Zoll (1997). Inkelas (1994) argues for binary features (i.e., [±F]) with a third choice, the

206

MARTIN KRÄMER

absence of a value. In this account only lexical items with an underspecified feature undergo a change. However, we would expect the same kind of choice in verbs and feminine nouns. Hence, the approach overgenerates lexical idiosyncrasy. Celata & Bertinetto (2005) give three hypothetical choices for the source of lexical idiosyncrasy in nouns, first palatalisation is fully regular and the blocking forms are the exceptions, second, if palatalisation is unpredictable one might conclude that a) the plural forms of all nouns ending in a dorsal have to be lexicalised and accessed directly rather than being generated online, or that b) all non-palatalising plurals are generated productively (including the non-palatalising stems ending in a dorsal) and the palatalising plurals are stored. As was discussed above the theories of lexical idiosyncrasy and of variation proposed by Anttila within the OT framework give us just one choice. The two groups of masculine nouns fall into two different co-phonologies (i.e., constraint rankings) that are established on the basis of constraints unranked in the general grammar. The result that several grammars converge on the same output is not uncommon. Having a look at the constraint inventory developed for the typology of stress placement in OT for example it is easy to see that the same surface pattern can be modeled with several rankings. Apoussidou (2007) has shown this in the context of learning. The learning algorithms used by her (Boersma’s 1998, 2000 Gradual Learning Algorithm and Tesar’s 1998 Error-Driven Constraint Demotion) converge on several grammars that produce the same output pattern rather than to always converge on the same ranking when fed with the same data. Usually, it is difficult to test if this has any correlate in real speakers’ competence, since the different grammars are simply co-extensional, i.e., they generate the same surface forms under all circumstances. In this paper it was shown that different grammars in different speakers faced with the same data are real. Hence, a theory that has several ways to account for the same set of data does not necessarily vacuously overgenerate grammars and does not have to be regarded as inferior to one that has only one way of explaining a given pattern.

References Anttila, Arto. 2002. “Morphologically Conditioned Phonological Alternations”. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 20.1-42. Anttila, Arto. 2003. “Variation and phonological theory”. The Handbook of Language Variation and Change, ed. by J. K. Chambers, Peter Trudgill & Natalie Schilling-Estes, 206-243. Oxford: Blackwell. Apoussidou, Diana 2007. The Learnability of Metrical Phonology. Ph.D. dissertation. Utrecht: LOT. Benua, Laura. 2000. Phonological Relations between Words. New York: Garland Press.

CRYPTO-VARIATION IN ITALIAN

207

Boersma, Paul. 1998. Functional Phonology: Formalizing the Interactions between Articulatory and Perceptual Drives. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Amsterdam. Boersma, Paul. 2000. “Learning a Grammar in Functional Phonology”. Optimality Theory: Phonology, Syntax, and Acquisition, ed. by Joost Dekkers, Frank van der Leeuw & Jeroen van de Weijer, 465-553. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Burzio, Luigi. 2000. “Cycles, Non-Derived Environment Blocking, and Correspondence”. Optimality Theory: Phonology, Syntax, and Acquisition, ed. by Joost Dekkers, Frank van der Leeuw & Jeroen van de Weijer, 47120. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Burzio, Luigi. 2004. “Paradigmatic and Syntagmatic Relations in Italian Verbal Inflection”. Contemporary Approaches to Romance Linguistics: Selected Papers from the 33rd Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL), Bloomington, IN, April 2003, ed. by Julie Auger, J. Clancy Clements & Barbara Vance, 17-44. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Calabrese, Andrea. 1993. “Palatalization Processes in the History of Romance languages: A Theoretical Study”. Linguistic Perspectives on Romance Languages: Selected Papers from the XXI Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL), Santa Barbara, 21-24 February, 1991, ed. by Ashby, William J., Marianne Mithun & Giorgio Perissinotto, 65-83. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Celata, Chiara & Pier Marco Bertinetto. 2005. “Lexical Access in Italian: Words with and without Palatalization”. Lingue e Linguaggio 4.293-318. Clements, George N. & Elisabeth Hume. 1995. “The Internal Organization of Speech Sounds”. Handbook of Phonological Theory, ed. by John Goldsmith, 245-306. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell. Dressler, Wolfgang Ulrich. 1985. Morphophonology: The Dynamics of Derivation. Ann Arbor, MI: Karoma. Gleason, Jean Berko. 1958. “The Child's Learning of English Morphology”. Word 14.150-177. Inkelas, Sharon. 1994. “The Consequences of Optimization for Underspecification”. Proceedings of the 25th Annual Meeting of the North Eastern Linguistic Society (NELS), 25.287-302. Amherst, MA: GLSA Publications. Inkelas, Sharon. 1999. “Exceptional Stress-Attracting Suffixes in Turkish: Representations vs. the Grammar”. The Prosody-Morphology Interface, ed. by Harry van der Hulst, René Kager & Wim Zonneveld, 134-187. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Inkelas, Sharon. 2000. “Phonotactic Blocking through Structural Immunity”. Lexicon in Focus, ed. by Barbara Stiebels & Dieter Wunderlich, 7-40. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.

208

MARTIN KRÄMER

Inkelas, Sharon, Orhan Orgun & Cheryl Zoll. 1997. “Implications of Lexical Exceptions for the Nature of Grammar”. Derivations and Constraints in Phonology, ed. by Iggy Roca, 393-418. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Kenstowicz, Michael. 1996. “Base-identity and Uniform Exponence: Alternatives to Cyclicity”. Current Trends in Phonology: Models and Methods, ed. by Jacques Durand & Bernard Laks, 363-393. Salford: University of Salford Publications. Krämer, Martin. 2003. “Intervocalic s-Voicing, Geminates and the Richness of the Base in Veneto Italian”. Rivista di Grammatica Generativa 28.71-85. Krämer, Martin. 2005. “Contiguity and Non-derived Environment Blocking of sVoicing in Lombardian and Tuscan Italian”. Probus 17.227-251. Krämer, Martin. To appear. “Main stress in Italian Nonce-Nouns”. Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2006: Selected Papers from ‘Going Romance’, Amsterdam, 7-9 December 2006, ed. by Danièle Torck & W. Leo Wetzels. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Krämer, Martin. In preparation. The Phonology of Italian. Oxford: Oxford University Press. McCarthy, John & Alan Prince. 1995. “Faithfulness and Reduplicative Identity”. University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers in Linguistics (UMOP) 18.249-384. Amherst, MA: GLSA Publications. Morén, Bruce. 2003. “The Parallel Structures Model of Feature Geometry”. Working Papers of the Cornell Phonetics Laboratory 15.194-270. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University. Morén, Bruce. 2006. “Consonant-vowel Interactions in Serbian: Features, Representations and Constraint Interactions”. Lingua 116.1198-1244. Pater, Joe. 2000. “Non-Uniformity in English Secondary Stress: The Role of Ranked and Lexically Specific Constraints”. Phonology 17.237-274. Pater, Joe. 2006. “The Locus of Exceptionality: Morpheme-Specific Phonology as Constraint Indexation”. University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers in Linguistics (UMOP): Papers in Optimality Theory III, ed. by Leah Bateman et al., 259-296. Amherst, MA: GLSA Publications. Pater, Joe. In press. “Morpheme-Specific Phonology: Constraint Indexation and Inconsistency Resolution”. Phonological Argumentation: Essays on Evidence and Motivation, ed. by Steve Parker. London: Equinox. Tesar, Bruce. 1998. “An Iterative Strategy for Language Learning”. Lingua 104.131-145.

ANTISYMMETRY AND THE TYPOLOGY OF RELATIVE CLAUSES SYNTACTIC AND MORPHOLOGICAL EVIDENCE FROM SPANISH

JUAN MARTÍN University of Toledo

Spanish relative clauses show two different syntactic structures. The first is derived by NP-raising, and the relative clause is selected by a determiner (Kayne 1994). The second is a matching structure and involves operator movement as in the traditional analysis of relative clauses. This latter structure also respects antisymmetry, since a non-overt determiner selects the relative clause in the complement position of a Determiner Phrase, and the head of the relative clause in the Specifier. The operator in this structure may be a Determiner Phrase or a Noun Phrase. While prepositionless relative clauses with que ‘that’ employ a non overt operator, relative clauses with prepositional operators show an allomorphic variation in the case of DP-operators, since the determiner is overt. Relative clauses with coordinated heads, relative clauses with the same preposition selecting the head and the operator, and (anti)reconstruction effects further support this analysis.

1.

Introduction This study is an attempt at providing a solution to the phrase structure problems raised for Kayne’s analysis of relative clauses, in which the determiner selects the relative clause as a complement, as in (1). (1)

[DP the [CP [NP/DPi claim] [C that John made ti]]]

Kayne’s analysis replaced the traditional analysis because of its inadequacies within Kayne’s antisymmetric framework. As illustrated in (2), the traditional analysis is based on adjunction and an operator-variable dependency (Chomsky 1977, Browning 1991): (2)

[DP the [NP [NP claim] [CP Opi [C that John made ti]]]]

Under the antisymmetric framework, word order is derived from asymmetric c-command, and therefore relative clauses should precede the noun in accordance with the Linear Correspondence Axiom in (4), since an adjunct ccommands the segment of the phrase to which it is adjoined given the definition of asymmetric c-command in (3):

210

JUAN MARTÍN

(3)

A c-commands B iff A and B are categories and A excludes B, and every category that dominates A dominates B

(4)

Linear Correspondence Axiom A lexical item x precedes a lexical item y iff (i) x asymmetrically c-commands y or (ii) an XP dominating x asymmetrically c-commands y.

Kayne’s analysis, however, is not exempt from problems. For example, in the case of two DPs modified by the same relative clause, as in (5a), and in the case of extraposition, such as in (5b), the determiner forms a constituent with the noun, but not the modifier. (5a) is also a problem for the adjunction analysis in (2). (5)

a. the claim and the suggestion that John made yesterday b. We will discuss the claim tomorrow that John made yesterday.

My proposal is that in Spanish in addition to structures in (1), there are also structures that employ operator-variable dependencies such as (6), which can overcome the phrase structure problems that coordination and extraposition represent for (1) and (2), in line with recent proposals by Aoun & Li (2003) and Hulsey & Sauerland (2006). (6)

[DP [DP the claim] [D’ [CP Opi [C that John made ti]]]]

Evidence for this analysis will be given in the last part of the paper from ‘preposition + definite article’ relative clauses in Spanish. Before this, I will review some of the (counter)-evidence to support Kayne’s analysis in section 2, and in section 3 I will offer the details of my analysis. 2. 2.1

Antisymmetry, reconstruction, and relative clauses Kayne’s proposal As stated in the introduction, Kayne’s antisymmetric proposal (1994) by which the relation of precedence is derived from asymmetric c-command imposes strong constraints on phrase structure. The adjunction analysis of relative clauses in English and Romance languages is problematic for the antisymmetric framework, since in (2) the CP both asymmetrically c-commands and follows the NP. Kayne’s proposal for relative clauses in English and Romance, instead, is that the determiner selects the relative clause, as stated by the External DP-Hypothesis in (7a), and the nominal head raises to Spec of CP, as follows from (7b), as the simplified analysis in (1) showed.

ANTISYMMETRY AND THE TYPOLOGY OF RELATIVE CLAUSES

(7)

211

a. External DP-Hypothesis (Bianchi 1999) The modifier is a syntactic complement of the determiner. b. Head-raising hypothesis The noun phrase is generated within the relative clause and may raise depending on the morphological properties of the language.

Several arguments and counterarguments have been offered for Kayne’s proposal in previous literature. Support for Kayne’s hypotheses, concerning both the external determiner and the raising hypotheses, is given, for example, by the contrast in scope assignment of a nominal expression introduced by a numeral: (8)

a. Every doctor will examine two patients. (OK narrow scope interpretation) b. Every doctor will examine the two patients. (*NSI) c. I phoned the two patients [that every doctor will examine t tomorrow]. (OK NSI)

In (8a) the universal quantifier takes scope over the indefinite NP, resulting in the distributive reading of the numeral expression. This is not possible in (8b) where the set denoted by the definite expression has only two members. (8c) shows that the numeral expression plus the noun may reconstruct without the definite article in the tail position of the dependency, in order to obtain a distributive reading. In order to obtain the narrow scope reading in (8c) the definite article cannot be reconstructed, otherwise we would obtain a similar structure to (8b) at LF. Effects such as those outlined above for English can be replicated in Romance.1 It is important to note that the overt determiner is crucial in licensing the reconstruction structure, as the impossibility of the narrow scope interpretation in (9) shows: (9)

I phoned two patients [Opi that every doctor will examine ti tomorrow]. (*NSI)

Hence there is evidence suggesting that Kayne’s proposal is correct. 2 The question therefore is whether this is the only possible derivation for relative clauses. Since Kayne claims that the structure of relative clauses is derived by raising, one of the consequences is that relative clauses observe reconstruction effects. While 1

This is shown in (i): (i) Telefoneé a los dos pacientes que cada doctor examinará mañana. I-phoned to the two patients that every doctor will-examine tomorrow 2 For further discussion of arguments and counter-arguments regarding Kayne’s analysis see Bianchi (1999), Alexiadou, Law, Meinunger & Wilder (2000), and discussions by Borsley (1997) and Bianchi (2000).

212

JUAN MARTÍN

reconstruction effects with anaphors and bound pronouns show that raising is one of the possible derivations for relative clauses, Principle C effects, if they show up, are unequivocal —in other words, the raising analysis would be the only possible analysis in this case. However, Principle C effects in Romance languages, among others, are controversial as will be shown in the next section. 2.2

Problematic aspects of Kayne’s proposal Despite a wealth of data in support of Kayne’s proposal, several problems have been pointed out in previous literature. However, I will start by discussing a rather controversial analysis of Principle C effects, which has been used to support Kayne’s analysis (cf. Bianchi 1999). As I mentioned above, if Principle C effects appear in relative clauses, then the only possible analysis would be Kayne’s, since reconstruction of the nominal restriction of the head is obligatory. Wh-dependencies that are the result of movement show Principle C effects when the lexical restriction of the wh-phrase is reconstructed at LF because of the Preference Principle (Chomsky 1995). By the Preference Principle, deletion of the restriction of all the copies is obligatory at LF, except for that in the tail. Typically minimal wh-domains such as a CP show Principle C effects, as shown in (10): (10)

a. *[What picture of Johni]j did hei bring tj? b. *[What x] did hei bring [x picture of Johni]?

On the other hand, the data concerning Principle C effects in relative clauses is not so clear. As shown in previous literature (Cf. Bianchi 1999) there is an asymmetry between null and overt pronouns in Romance. While null pronouns seem to trigger Principle C effects, tonic pronouns do not. In (11) a referential expression within the lexical restriction of the head of a relative clause does not show Principle C effects with respect to an overt pronoun, although Principle C effects appear to arise with a null pronoun: (11)

La fotografía de Juani que había dicho pro*i/éli que __ the picture of Juan that had said he that iba a ganar un premio era interesante. was-going to win a prize was interesting “The picture of Juan that he had said was going to win a prize was interesting.”

Bianchi (1999:112-115), for example, argues that tonic pronouns do not see reconstruction since they behave as R-expressions which are accidentally coreferential to a reconstructed R-expression. As acknowledged by Bianchi, this account is a stipulation, and even from the empirical point of view is difficult to sustain. The disjoint effect between the R-expression and the null pronoun

ANTISYMMETRY AND THE TYPOLOGY OF RELATIVE CLAUSES

213

reappears when there is no movement involved, and a non c-commanding Rexpression precedes the pronoun. Only the tonic pronoun is allowed, as (12) illustrates. (12)

pro*i/éli. La foto de Pedroi provocó que the picture of Pedro caused that he “The picture of Pedro caused him to laugh.”

se riera. laughed

In (12) there is no movement of the phrase containing the R-expression over the pronoun, therefore there is the same asymmetry between null and tonic pronominals, and reconstruction is not involved. Hence, some discursive reasons block the use of a null pronominal in these cases. A possible account is that null pronominals require a topic as an antecedent. In (12), Pedro is included in the topic position, but it is not a topic itself, so there is a mismatch between its features and those that the null pronoun requires. Therefore that is why we have the obviation process. This discursive factor is independent from Principle C effects that can be triggered by null and tonic pronouns as illustrated in (13): (13)

*ELi/proi leyó el libro de Juani ayer. HE read the book of Juan yesterday “He read Juan’s book yesterday.” (Arregi 2006)

Furthermore, coreferentiality between a tonic pronoun and an R-expression within the nominal head disallows reconstruction as (14) illustrates: (14)

a. Dime los dos artículos de Chomsky que piensas que tell-me the two articles of Chomsky that you-think that leyó cada estudiante. (NSI OK) read each student “Tell me the two articles of Chomsky’s that you think each student read.” b. Dime los dos artículos de Chomskyi que ELi piensa que tell-me the two articles of Chomsky that HE thinks that leyó cada estudiante. (*NSI) read each student “Tell me the two articles of Chomsky’s that he thinks each student read.”

Therefore this last argument becomes a counter-argument for Kayne’s proposal, since I have shown that sentences such as (11) are not examples of Principle C effects under reconstruction, but in fact cases of anti-reconstruction effects. Hence the split picture that reconstruction facts present suggests that in addition to Kayne’s analysis, there is an alternative structure that employs the null operator strategy, although no necessarily right adjoined.

214

JUAN MARTÍN

Among the problems noted in previous literature, those concerning phrase structure stand out. As mentioned before, two conjoined DPs may be modified by the same relative clause, as shown in (15): (15)

the man and the woman that came yesterday

Under any current phrase structure theory it would be impossible to accommodate (15) into Kayne’s analysis. Furthermore, neither would it be possible to accommodate it under the right adjunction analysis. If reconstruction tests are applied to this structure, they confirm that in the case of conjoined DPs no reconstruction of only the QPs is available: (16)

I phoned the two patients and the two relatives [that every doctor will see t tomorrow].

In (16), the only possible interpretation is that the two patients and the two relatives are the same for every doctor. Still, the reconstruction analysis of the two conjoined DPs is feasible, since the presence of the definite determiner does not allow the distributive reading, as we saw in (8b). Hence, other tests should be applied to see if reconstruction takes place at all. The principle A effects test shows in (17) that a nominal head including two conjuncts and containing an anaphor in one of them cannot be reconstructed at the tail of the chain, so an antecedent within the relative clause can bind the anaphor. (17)

Juani vio el retrato de sí mismoi/*j/éli/j y la foto de Johni saw the portrait of himselfi/*j/himi/j and the picture of María que hizo [un estudiante que hay en mi clase]j. Mary that made [a student that there-is in my class]j “John saw the portrait of himself/him and the picture of Mary that a student in my class made.”

If the second conjunct is elided, or given a parenthetical intonation, similar to that of a Right Node Raising structure, 3 the reconstructed reading is then available. Therefore conjoined DPs modified by a relative clause do not involve movement. Hence, there is evidence for one type of relative clause that is defined by the DP/CP complementation relation and the raising analysis of the nominal restriction, and for a second type that does not show reconstruction effects and fits the operator or matching analysis. The first structure is supported by quantifier scope facts and binding effects, while the second by phrase structure facts such as 3

This study is not concerned with Right Node Raising Structures, which show very different effects from the matching structures.

ANTISYMMETRY AND THE TYPOLOGY OF RELATIVE CLAUSES

215

conjunction of two DPs modified by the same relative clause, and antireconstruction Principle C effects.4 3.

Analysis Kayne’s analysis in (1) is therefore feasible although it does not account for all the empirical facts, such as coordination of two DPs and extraposition. To rescue the traditional adjunction analysis in (2) would not work either given the possibility of two DPs modified by the same relative clause, and, of course, it would be inadequate on conceptual grounds within the anti-symmetric framework, since right adjunction structures are disallowed. Furthermore, in accordance with Kayne’s analysis, relative clauses are selected by determiners. In order to account for the case of a relative clause modifying two conjoined DPs, such as in (18), the theory faces the challenge of how to be consistent with the DP/CP complementation hypothesis in (7a). If this were not the case, we would need to define what type of stipulations would be necessary for a different analysis of the internal structure of relative clauses such as in (18). (18)

el artículo y el libro que leyó the article and the book that read “the article and the book that Pedro read”

Pedro Pedro

If economy issues are considered, from a conceptual perspective a uniform analysis of the internal structure of relative clauses would be preferable. A possible analysis that is in harmony with the DP/CP complementation hypothesis and would account for the data in (18) would be to propose that the relative clause is still selected by a covert determiner and the two conjoined DPs merge into the Specifier/Adjunct position of this DP, as in (19). The relative clause and the noun are independent in terms of selection and projection; both may have their own Determiner Phrase, each of the determiners binding an independent existential variable. Their syntactic relationship is mediated by a (covert) determiner, which dominates the relative clause and acts as a predicate of the nominal complex. The existential variable of the modifier is bound by an operator that receives interpretation through the ‘agreement chain’ triggered by the predicative relationship between the nominal complex and the modifier complex.5 Modification structures in which there are two DPs modified by the same modifier can only be matching structures, leaving aside Right Node Raising Structures. 4

I will not cover extraposition here although data from extraposition structures also support the matching analysis. See Hulsey & Sauerland (2006) for further discussion. 5 An anonymous reviewer asks, when the relative clause is external to the overt determiners, why the restrictive reading is obtained, and not the appositive one. My claim is that these determiners bear a type index and not a token index. The token index is borne by the DP with an empty head that dominates both the nouns and the relative clause. See Martín (2000) for further discussion.

JUAN MARTÍN

216 (19)

DP

DP1

El libro y el artículo

DP ei1

CP Op2

CP quei2

IP

leyó Pedro

e

Other studies have argued against a uniform analysis of relative clauses, claiming that in order to account for all the data, promotion and matching analyses are necessary (cf. Aoun & Li 2003, Hulsey & Sauerland 2006). Among other differences, these proposals still use right adjunction in the matching structures against the tenets held in antisymmetric models. In addition to the conceptual argument that uniformity across relative structures would involve less stipulation, there is some crosslinguistic evidence for this. First some languages closely related to Spanish, such as Romanian, have relative clauses dominated by an overt ‘adjectival article’ or a demonstrative, as shown in (20): (20)

romanul ?cel/acela despre care ai novel-the cel/acela about which (you) have “the novel that you have talked about most”

vorbit cel mai mult talked most

Similar particles also appear in languages unrelated to Spanish such as Chinese and Arabic. The Chinese nominalizer particle de used in relative clause structures acts as a sort of nominalizer in the sense that an article/nominalizer binds the existential variable of the modifier (cf. Higginbotham 1985). Simpson (2001) has argued in support of the determiner-like properties of the particle de in Chinese. He argues that historically this particle is derived from a demonstrative that occupies the determiner position in the Chinese nominal expressions, and creates a ‘predicationtype relation’ (Simpson 2001:141) which is similar to the one I have been arguing

ANTISYMMETRY AND THE TYPOLOGY OF RELATIVE CLAUSES

217

takes place in (19) between the conjoined DPs and the relative clause. Hence, there is some evidence for this predicative determiner across languages. Under this analysis, the External DP-Hypothesis is also respected since there is a covert determiner dominating the modifier. By proposing these two different derivations (‘raising’ and ‘matching’) that employ the same internal structure for relative clauses (‘DP/CP complementation’), the empirical data can be accounted for in a more general way, but still some conflicts arise since structures that support one analysis can be combined with structures that support the other. This is the case of coordination in combination with a relative clause that contains an existential clause as in (21): (21)

el libro y el cuaderno que hay en la mesa the book and the notebook that there-are on the table “the book and the notebook that (there) are on the table”

Relative clauses that contain an existential clause whose subject is bound by the head of the chain support the External DP and Raising Hypotheses, since under this hypothesis the definite determiner is not reconstructed within the existential clause, thereby explaining the lack of definiteness effects in (21) (cf. Browning 1991, Bianchi 1999). However, given phrase structure theory, this analysis would be impossible in (21) since the overt determiners form a constituent with the heads of the relative clauses, and not with the relative clause itself. In the next section, I provide both an answer to this problem and further support for my two way distinction of relative clauses in Spanish. In fact, I will argue that there is evidence to support a further split within the ‘matching’ analysis: one structure in which the operator variable dependency is an NPdependency, and another structure in which the dependency is a DP-dependency. The NP-dependency analysis accounts for cases such as (21). 4.

Further evidence from relative clauses headed by prepositional phrases There is therefore some supporting evidence for one type of relative clause that is defined by the DP/CP complementation relation and the raising analysis of the nominal restriction, and another type that does not show reconstruction effects and fits the operator or matching analysis, and also involves a DP/CP complementation structure. Romance relative clauses with prepositional heads seem to support this split hypothesis. In Spanish, and some dialects of Italian, if the preposition selecting the head of the dependency is the same as that selecting the tail, then there are two possible structures: one in which the two prepositions are present, or another in which only the upper preposition is present, as illustrated in (22).

218 (22)

JUAN MARTÍN

No queremos estar en la situación (en (la)) que estamos not we-want to-be in the situation in the that we-are “We don’t want to be in the situation that we are in now.”

ahora. now

My claim is that, in cases where a preposition is present, the determinerless structure is related to the matching structure with a non-DP dependency formed between the null operator and the tail of the chain, whereas the structure with the determiner is a morphological reflex of a DP-dependency. On the other hand, when the ‘preposition (+ article)’ is absent, the structure is derived by movement of the nominal head of the relative clause. The ideal empirical support for this claim would again come from prepositional contexts where either strong or weak determiners are excluded. In order to exclude strong determiners, probably the most suitable environment to test this claim would be in amount constructions. In (23a) a definite determiner is excluded after the preposition preceding an amount construction. When the structure undergoes relativization in (23b), notice that the determiner is not allowed in the intended ‘amount’ interpretation, although there is a ‘non-amount’ interpretation available: (23)

a. Tomo el café con (#las) dos cucharillas de azúcar. I-have the coffee with the two spoons of sugar “I take two spoonfuls of sugar in my coffee.” b. El médico criticó las dos cucharillas de azúcar con (#las) que the doctor criticized the two spoons of sugar with the that tomo el café. I-have the coffee “The doctor criticized the two spoonfuls of sugar that I usually have with my coffee.”

Therefore (23b) seems to support the analysis of null operators as DP and non DP-dependencies. The presence of the DP in the specifier of the relative clause’s CP indicates that the operator dependency is a DP-dependency, i.e. a referential dependency. Hence, if the determiner is present, the only possible reading in (23b) is the pragmatically awkward reading where the doctor criticized the two spoons as objects that I used to drink my coffee. The structure without the determiner allows for a non referential reading, the ‘amount reading’. Therefore, in these cases an overt morphological difference between the two types of operators, the referential and the non referential, can be observed. If this analysis is on the right track, then there is also an alternative analysis for (21). In (21), the correct analysis is a matching analysis, which solves the coordination problem, and the operator variable dependency is an NPdependency, or alternatively an indefinite dependency, which solves the problem

ANTISYMMETRY AND THE TYPOLOGY OF RELATIVE CLAUSES

219

of why definiteness effects do not arise in this case. The analysis is illustrated in (24):6 (24)

[DP [DP el libro y el cuaderno] [D’ e [CP [NP Opi] que hay xi en la mesa]]

Further evidence that the presence or absence of the definite article determines a difference in terms of referentiality is given by weak islands. As pointed out by Brucart (1992), syntactically these two types behave differently in the context of weak islands. Only when the definite article is present is the dependency well-formed, given the referentiality of the element moved, as shown in (25): (25)

a. El dinero de(l) que the money of-the that “the money that I had”

disponía… I-had

b. El dinero de*(l) que no disponía… (Brucart 1992) the money of-the that not I-had “the money that I did not have” (25b) shows that extraction out of a negative island would not be possible unless the operator is referential, that is, it has definite features. Interestingly, if the head is case marked by the same preposition as the tail, promotion does not result in a grammatical structure, as (26) shows for the case of a negative island, and (27) for the case of an interrogative island: (26)

a. Hablaré del dinero (del) que disponía… b. Hablaré del dinero *(del) que no disponía… I-will-talk about-the money of-the that not I-had “I will talk about the money that I did not have.”

(27)

a. No queremos pensar en la situación (en (la)) que not we-want to-think in the situation in the that dices que está Pedro. you-say that he-is Pedro “We don’t want to think of the situation which you say that Pedro is in.”

6

Note that coordinated amount readings should be acceptable too, since a matching NPdependency is allowed. This is shown in (i): (i) Pon las dos tazas de azúcar y la cucharilla de chocolate que pusiste put the two cups of sugar and the little-spoon of chocolate that you-put en la otra tarta. in the other cake “Put the two cups of sugar and the spoonful of chocolate that you put in the other cake.”

220

JUAN MARTÍN

b. No queremos pensar en la situación *(en *(la)) que te not we-want to-think in the situation in the that youpreguntas si está Pedro. wonder if he-is Pedro. “We don’t want to think of the situation which you wonder if Pedro is in.” (26a) and (27a) show that a structure lacking the ‘preposition + article’ sequence, or just the article, is possible when the dependency is not established across a weak island. On the other hand, (26b) and (27b) show that if there is a weak island violation, the only way to overcome the weak island effect is by having the article bind the null operator. Hence, the presence of the article is a morphological reflection of a DP-dependency, which is the only type of dependency that can bind an individual variable and therefore avoid weak island effects. This fact seems to indicate that promotion involves only NP-movement, (in contrast with Aoun & Li’s (2003) conclusions for English relative clauses with that), because under the ‘promotion structure’ the moved element fails to overcome the weak island effect in (26b) and (27b), due to lack of referentiality. So far I have shown the asymmetry between the presence and the absence of the definite article within these structures, but I have not done so between the structures with and without prepositions. If the hypothesis is that structures that lack the ‘preposition + (definite article)’ are derived by promotion, then reconstruction tests applied to this structure must show a different behavior from the structures with ‘preposition + (article)’, which involve a null operator. For example, when there is no preposition introducing the dependency, binding of a reflexive pronoun by an antecedent within the relative clause that is not a topic is possible, as shown in (28b). On the other hand, when the preposition and the article are present, such a binding relationship cannot be established as (28a) illustrates. (28)

a. *Quiero referirme a la foto de sí*i mismo a la I-want to-refer-myself to the picture of himself to the que se refiere [un estudiante que hay en mi that self refers a student that there-is in my clase]i. class b. Quiero referirme a la foto de síi mismo que se I-want to-refer-myself to the picture of himself that self refiere [un estudiante que hay en mi clase]i. refers a student that there-is in my class “I want to refer to the picture of him(self) that a student in my class is referring to.”

ANTISYMMETRY AND THE TYPOLOGY OF RELATIVE CLAUSES

221

A similar argument can be constructed with the pronominal binding reconstruction test. In (29b), when there is no preposition, the pronoun can have a bound interpretation because it is derived by the operation Move. Hence the head is reconstructed in the tail position at LF, where the pronoun can be c-commanded by the antecedent. On the other hand, if a preposition introduces the dependency, then reconstruction is not available, as (29a) shows. (A focused reading and intonation of su hijo is not considered here. That reading and intonation would allow for a bound reading of the possessive.) (29)

que a. Quiero referirme al trabajo de su*i estudiante al to-the that I-want to-refer-REFL to-the work of his student se refiera cada profesori. REFL refers each professor b. Quiero referirme al trabajo de sui estudiante que I-want to-refer-myself to-the work of his student that se refiera cada profesori. REFL refers each professor “I want to refer to the work of his student that each professor is referring to.”

Similarly, when the preposition and the article, or just the preposition, are present, then there are no Principle C effects, as (30a) illustrates: (30)

a. Quiero referirme al experimento de Juani a(l) que I-want to-refer-myself to-the experiment of Juan to-(the) that se refiere éli en su libro. himself refers he in his book b. Quiero referirme al experimento de Juan*i que I-want to-refer-myself to-the experiment of Juan that se refiere éli en su libro. himself refers he in his book “I want to refer to the experiment of Juan’s that he refers to in his book.”

The reason why Principle C effects are not shown in (30a) is because the nominal head is not reconstructed at the tail position of the dependency, where the Rexpression Juan would be c-commanded by the pronoun. This means that there is no movement of the head involved in the derivation of (30a). Instead, a null operator dependency is employed. On the other hand, if there is no preposition introducing the dependency within the relative clause, Principle C effects appear because the structure has been derived by movement, and given the Preference Principle, the lexical restriction has to be reconstructed in the tail position at LF.

222

JUAN MARTÍN

As mentioned before, it has been argued that in contexts such as (30a), Principle C effects reappear if there is a null pronoun, and that overt pronouns and in general focused nominal expressions do not trigger Principle C effects (Bianchi 1999:112-115 among others), or alternatively trigger vehicle change (Arregi 2006). I have already argued that the obviation effect with null pronominals is of a discursive nature, and not due to Principle C effects. In addition, if we exempt the tonic pronoun from triggering Principle C effects, it would be difficult to explain the contrast between (30a) and (30b). Finally, scope assignment facts are consistent with binding data. While in (31b) the narrow scope reading is available, in (31a) such a reading is not available. The presence of the lower preposition is indicating the presence of an operator (‘matching’), while the lack of lower prepositional structure signals that the structure has been derived by raising of the NP. (Again a stressed intonation of dos pacientes is not considered here.) (31)

a. Hablaré de los dos pacientes de (los) que habló cada I-will-talk about the two patients about the that spoke each médico en la sala ayer. doctor in the room yesterday b. Hablaré de los dos pacientes que habló cada médico I-will-talk about the two patients that spoke each doctor en la sala ayer. in the room yesterday “I will talk about the two patients that each doctor in the room talked about yesterday.”

In conclusion, the reconstruction tests suggest that the structure with preposition (+ definite article) involves a null operator structure, and not, for example, a phonetically null NP that allows anaphoric and variable binding (pace Hulsey & Sauerland 2006),7 while those that lack a preposition employ the operation Move in their derivation.

7 An anonymous reviewer disagreed with the ungrammaticality judgments in (17), (28a), and (29a), and could also have a narrow scope reading of (31a), suggesting that Hulsey & Sauerland are on the right track. I can have those readings too, but only if the head is stressed, which is similar to what happens when the subject is stressed within a clause:

(i) a. b.

DOS PACIENTES1/Dos pacientes*1 hablaron de cada médico1 en la sala. Cada médico1 en la sala habló de DOS PACIENTES1/dos pacientes.1.

In (i) the pair-list reading is available with the non stressed phrase only if the quantifier ccommands the non stressed phrase. This fact suggests that with stressed intonation reconstruction is not absolutely necessary. Since this type of Quantifier Raising effects are clause bound, notice

ANTISYMMETRY AND THE TYPOLOGY OF RELATIVE CLAUSES

223

Finally, if my analysis of coordination of two nominal expressions modified by a relative clause is correct, and the relative clauses should be treated as matching structures, then they should make use of the prepositional structures. This is rendered in (32): (32)

Quiero referirme [[al trabajo y al proyecto] work and to-the project I-want to-refer-REFL to-the *(a (los)) que se refiere Pedro]. to the that self refers Pedro “I want to refer to the work and to the project that Pedro is referring to.”

In (32), under the relevant interpretation — that is, both conjuncts modified by the relative clause —, the preposition has to be present. In accordance with my analysis, this is a symptom that a null operator is involved in the structure. This is the only type of modifier that may modify two coordinated nominal expressions under normal patterns of intonation. In summary, the syntax of relativization of prepositional complements introduced within the relative clause by a preposition that matches the external one, seems to support the analysis of null operators as (non) DP-dependencies. Furthermore, if this analysis is correct, it is an alternative to one of the most controversial parts of Kayne’s analysis, the NP movement from the complement of the internal preposition to the Specifier of the PP in order to obtain the correct word order. The motivation of this operation should be some strong morphological feature within minimalist parameters, but notice that the Spec-head configurational constraint for feature checking will be weakened.8 5.

Conclusion In conclusion, I have argued that the empirical problem that coordination of DPs and antireconstruction effects represents for Kayne’s theory disappears once we adopt a finer-grained syntactic typology of relative clauses. I have argued that the distinction between ‘promotion’ and ‘matching’ structures suggested for other languages by Aoun & Li, applies to Spanish.

that, when we further embed the gap, the narrow scope reading is only obtained with the prepositionless structure: (ii)

8

Hablaré de los dos I-will-talk about the two habló cada médico1 spoke each doctor

pacientes1 (*de (*los)) patients about the en la sala ayer. in the room yesterday

que comprobaste that you-checked

que that

See Bianchi (1999:77-79) for a possible solution, but a solution that ultimately weakens the constraints on the type of syntactic movement that can occur.

224

JUAN MARTÍN

I have proposed that there are structures derived by movement (amount relative clauses, relative clauses that show reconstruction effects, some cases of relative clauses with the tail of the chain in an existential clause, relative clauses where the internal preposition is unnecessary since the head is already marked with the same preposition). On the other hand, there are other structures that involve a null operator (clauses that show anti-reconstruction effects, relative clauses with conjoined DPs, extraposition structures) and these structures can be DPdependencies (clauses violating weak islands, clauses not showing weak crossover effects, clauses that have internal ‘preposition + article’), and NP-dependencies (relative clauses with the tail of the chain in an existential clause, clauses that have internal preposition without a definite article). While promotion structures are subject to reconstruction and superiority effects, matching structures are only subject to superiority effects, since they just involve movement of an operator bound by the nominal head. Promotion and matching structures have different semantic properties. Promotion structures are maximalizing, while matching structures are restrictive. The semantics of promotion structures is derived from the existence of only one definite determiner. On the other hand, the restrictiveness of matching structures is derived from the predicative relationship between two DPs. Therefore, the overt determiner dominating the CP in the promotion structures is maximal, while the covert determiner dominating the CP in matching structures is predicative. Arguably, a DP that has undergone raising as head of the relative clause would take scope over the external DP selecting the CP. However, a maximal external DP would not serve as a landing site, since the determiner is semantically saturated. On the other hand, a predicative determiner would trigger the activation of the matching mechanisms in addition to the regular binding relationship created by Move, thereby violating a condition similar to the Bijection Principle (Koopman & Sportiche 1982). If this reasoning is correct, it provides further evidence in support of the promotion/matching dichotomy in Spanish. Under the proposal in this paper, the external DP-Hypothesis is preserved, and the difference between promotion and matching modification structures can be explained under a minimal compositional theory, by which the semantics can be read off the syntax.

References Alexiadou, Artemis, Paul Law, André Meinunger & Chris Wilder. 2000. “Introduction”. The Syntax of Relatives Clauses, ed. by Artemis Alexiadou et al., 1-51. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Aoun, Joseph & Yen-hui Audrey Li. 2003. Essays on the Representational and Derivational Nature of Grammar: The Diversity of wh-constructions. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

ANTISYMMETRY AND THE TYPOLOGY OF RELATIVE CLAUSES

225

Arregi, Karlos. 2006. “Reconstruction and Condition C in Spanish: A Nonstructural Account”. Selected proceedings of the 9th Hispanic Linguistics Symposium, ed. by Nuria Sagarra & Almeida Jacqueline Toribio, 1-12. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project. Bianchi, Valentina. 1999. Consequences of Antisymmetry: Headed Relative Clauses. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Bianchi, Valentina. 2000. “The Raising Analysis of Relative Clauses: A Reply to Borsley”. Linguistic Inquiry 31.123-140. Borsley, Robert D. 1997. “Relative Clauses and the Theory of Phrase Structure”. Linguistic Inquiry 28.629-647. Browning, M. A. 1991. Null Operator Constructions. New York: Garland. Brucart, José M. 1992. “Some Asymmetries in the Functioning of Relative Pronouns in Spanish”. Catalan Working Papers in Linguistics 2.113-143. Chomsky, Noam. 1977. “On Wh-movement”. Formal Syntax, ed. by Peter W. Culicover, Thomas Wasow & Adrian Akmajian, 71-132. New York: Academic Press. Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Higginbotham, James. 1985. “On Semantics”. Linguistic Inquiry 16.547-594. Hulsey, Sarah & Uli Sauerland. 2006. “Sorting out Relative Clauses”. Natural Language Semantics 14.111-137. Kayne, Richard. 1994. The Antisymmetry of Syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Koopman, Hilda & Dominique Sportiche. 1982. “Variables and the Bijection Principle”. The Linguistic Review 2.139-160. Martín, Juan. 2000. “(In)direct Modification and the External DP-Hypothesis”. Paper presented at the Fourth Hispanic Linguistics Symposium, Indiana University, Bloomington, November 17-19. Simpson, Andrew. 2001. “Definiteness Agreement and the Chinese DP”. Language and Linguistics 2.125-156.

ROMANCE PATHS AS COGNATE COMPLEMENTS A LEXICAL-SYNTACTIC ACCOUNT *

JAUME MATEU & GEMMA RIGAU Centre de Lingüística Teòrica. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona In this paper, we analyze some Path constructions that apparently go against Talmy’s (1991, 2000) typological predictions concerning Romance languages. Drawing on Hale & Keyser’s (2000) analysis of so-called ‘P-cognation’, we argue that the formation of Italian phrasal verbs (e.g., mettere giù ‘put down’ or buttare via ‘throw away’) involves a lexical-syntactic pattern where the directional particle specifies the Path element that has already been conflated in the verb: that is, the verb itself encodes or involves a directional meaning which is further specified through a P(ath) particle. We argue that Romance languages like Italian or Catalan have verb particle constructions involving ‘P-cognation’ but lack those ones involving a lexical-syntactic subordination process whereby an independent root is merged with a null verb (e.g., John worked the night away). As predicted by Talmy’s typology, the latter are found in ‘satelliteframed languages’ like English but not in ‘verb-framed languages’ like Italian or Catalan.

1.

Introduction The main goal of this paper is to provide a l(exical)-syntactic analysis of some Path constructions that have been claimed to go against Talmy’s (1985, 1991, 2000) typological predictions concerning Romance languages. As is wellknown, Talmy points out that the Germanic family belongs to the class of ‘satellite-framed languages’, whereas the Romance one belongs to that of ‘verbframed languages’. Consider some paradigmatic examples of his typology in (1): (1) a. The bottle floated into the cave b. La botella entrà a la cova the bottle entered to the cave

*

flotant floating

(Catalan)

This research has been sponsored by grants HUM2006-13295-C02-01/02 (Ministerio de Ciencia y Tecnología / FEDER) and 2005SGR-00753 (Generalitat de Catalunya). We want to thank the 37th LSRL audience and its organizers for comments and suggestions. Special thanks go to two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments. Needless to say, all possible errors are our own.

228

JAUME MATEU & GEMMA RIGAU

English can typically be taken as an example of satellite-framed language, whereas Catalan can typically be regarded as an example of verb-framed language (Mateu & Rigau 2002; Mateu 2002, i.a.). To put it in Talmy’s (1985) terms, (1a) involves conflation of Motion with Manner, or alternatively, in Talmy’s (1991) terms, (1a) involves conflation of MOVE with [EVENT]SUPPORTING. In contrast, the corresponding counterpart of (1a) in a Romance language like Catalan (cf. 1b) typically involves a different lexicalization pattern, i.e. conflation of Motion with Path, the Manner component (or the Co-event) being expressed as adjunct. However, along the ‘canonical’ verb-framed pattern in (1b), there are constructions in Romance where the Path does appear to remain as ‘satellite’: in particular, it is interesting to point out that the so-called verbi sintagmatici in Italian (e.g., cf (2)) have been said to be very similar to English phrasal verbs (cf. Simone 1996; Gràcia 1988; Vicario 1997; Masini 2005, 2006).1 (2) It. mettere giù ‘put down’; buttare via ‘throw away’; tirare su ‘pull up’; saltare dentro ‘jump in’; scappare via ‘escape away’ In this paper, we will show that, despite their surface similarity, the lexical syntax of Italian ‘verbi sintagmatici’ is different from the l-syntax of English ‘phrasal verbs’. Moreover, we will show that Talmy is not correct when saying that Northern Italian dialects have a Co-event conflation pattern. Rather we will show that, despite their surface similarities, the conflation pattern involved in (1a) must not be confused with the one involved in complex verbs like It. correre via ‘run away’. Given this, we will be arguing that a more formal notion of conflation and lexicalization patterns is required, Talmy’s descriptive one being unable to reach the explanatory level: in contrast to his account, we think that syntactic proposals like those found in Hale & Keyser (1997, 2000, 2002), Mateu & Rigau (2002), Mateu (2000f.), McIntyre (2004) or Zubizarreta & Oh (2007) are more promising. Before dealing with the apparent counterexamples in (2), which are the main topic of the present paper, it will be useful to show how the relevant canonical patterns exemplified in (1) are analyzed in our Hale & Keyserian framework. In particular, our proposal is that the relevant l-syntactic analyses of (1a-b) would be depicted as in (3a-b), respectively.2 As noted above, the ‘satellite-framedness’ of Germanic languages is to be related to the fact that, for example, the complex P element into in (3a) is not 1

It should be pointed out that Talmy (2000:145; fn. 60) was indeed aware of the apparently exceptional character of Italian within his typology: “Southern Italian dialects have a Path conflation pattern, Northern dialects have a Co-event conflation pattern, and central dialects, including standard Italian, have both patterns in parallel, with discourse factors determining the pattern used”. 2 For the syntactic distinction between directional Ps and locative Ps, see van Riemsdijk (1978) and Svenonius (2008), among others.

ROMANCE PATHS AS COGNATE COMPLEMENTS

229

conflated in the verb, this null verb being then allowed to be conflated with the socalled {‘Manner constituent’/ [EVENT]SUPPORTING}. To put it in our present lsyntactic terms, the non-conflating (i.e., ‘satellite’) nature of into allows the phonologically null unaccusative verb to be merged with the root √FLOAT (cf. 3a). As a result, this unaccusative V(erb), whose configurational/constructional meaning in both (3a) and (3b) is that of Change, turns out to be associated in (3a) with an additional embedded meaning, that of floating, where the root encodes what Talmy refers to as ‘Co-event’. In fact, the resulting l-syntactic analysis in (3a) is very similar to the one argued by Hale & Keyser (1997:229), initially adopted by Mateu (2000:86), or the verbal compound analysis put forward by Mateu & Rigau (2002:219).3 (3) a.

V DP The bottle

V V

√FLOAT

Pdir

V

Pdir -to

Ploc Ploc in-

b.

V DP La botella

V V

Pdir

Pdir

V entrà

Pdir

Ploc Ploc a

3

DP the cave

DP la cova

Here we abandon Mateu’s (2002) analysis of adjoining a full subordinate unergative structure ([V V N]) to a main null unaccusative verb. See also McIntyre’s (2004) and Zubizarreta & Oh’s (2007) insightful modifications of Mateu’s (2002) syntactic plug-in theory of ‘lexical-syntactic subordination processes’; see also Harley (2005) for interesting discussion on so-called ‘Manner incorporation’.

230

JAUME MATEU & GEMMA RIGAU

Concerning (3b), the conflation of the complex P element into a null unaccusative verb in a Romance language like Catalan gives a Path verb (entrar ‘enter’), the adjunct flotant (‘floating’) being merged outside the main argument structure of (3b). As pointed out by Mateu (2002: chap. 3) and Mateu & Rigau (2002: 212f.), Talmy’s (1991, 2000) typology accounts for why Romance languages (and, more generally, ‘verb-framed languages’) lack the elasticity of verb meaning exemplified in (4): e.g., Romance languages typically lack both complex path of motion constructions and complex resultative constructions like those in (4). Basically, our explanation of this descriptive fact is that verb-framed languages lack the l-syntactic pattern in (3a) since in these languages it is the Path (and not an independent root) what typically provides the relevant null verb with phonological content: cf. (3b).4 (4) a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h.

John danced into the room John danced away John danced the puppet across the stage John danced the night away John outdanced Mary John danced his butt off John danced his feet sore John danced his way into a wonderful world

Similarly, Talmy’s (2000) typology makes the interesting prediction that Manner verbs are more abundant in Germanic rather than in Romance (see Slobin 1996; 2006). Some English examples from different lexical semantic classes are given in (5a) and (5b): in fact, it is not easy to find the Romance equivalent or counterpart for some locative alternation verbs in (5a) and manner of motion verbs 4

The parametric differences between English and Catalan we discuss in the context of Talmy’s typology could also be related to Snyder’s (2001) alternative explanation, which is based on the connection between productive compounding (like N-N compounds) and complex predicates (like resultatives): e.g., see McIntyre (2004) and Zubizarreta & Oh (2007). Indeed, Snyder’s approach appears to make the correct predictions for languages like English and Catalan (i.e. while the former shows both productive N-N compounding and complex resultative constructions, the latter lacks both). However, as pointed out by Mateu & Espinal (2007), his predictions are not borne out when considering other language families: for example, on the one hand, Slavic languages do have a kind of complex resultative constructions (cf. Spencer & Zaretskaya (1998), Mateu (2002), Svenonius (2004); contra Snyder (2001:329)), but lack productive N-N compounding. On the other hand, Basque lacks complex resultative constructions but has productive N-N compounding. Given this, we do not consider Snyder’s alternative explanation as correct and will limit ourselves to basing our l-syntactic analysis on Talmy’s (1991, 2000) empirically well-grounded typology. But see Horrocks & Stavrou (2007) for another interesting explanation of the parametric differences which is mainly based on the observation that languages that grammaticalize viewpoint aspect in their verb morphology (e.g., Catalan or Greek) reject resultative-like constructions like those in (4). For reasons of space, we cannot enter into reviewing their alternative analysis here.

ROMANCE PATHS AS COGNATE COMPLEMENTS

231

in (5b). Related to that observation is Slobin’s (2006:1) point that the sign in (5b) is quite normal (albeit amusing) in the San Diego Zoo, whereas it would be inconceivable in Le Parc Zoologique de Paris. (5) a. Locative alternation verbs Smear-verbs: brush, dab, daub, plaster, rub, slather, smear, smudge, spread, streak; Spray-class: splash, splatter, spray, sprinkle, squirt.5 b. Manner of motion verbs Do not tread, mosey, hop, trample, step, plot, tiptoe, trot, traipse, meander, creep, prance, amble, job, trudge, march, stomp, toddle, jump, stumble, trod, spring, or walk on the plants. To be sure, the answer to Slobin’s point above has nothing to do with anthropology or cultural differences but rather has to do with Talmy’s linguistic typology. Drawing on Talmy’s descriptive insights, we have argued elsewhere that the answer to the lack of productivity of Manner verbs in Romance is a lexical-syntactic one, whereby it can be appropriately stated in Hale & Keyser’s lsyntactic terms. In particular, the main descriptive generalization we will argue for can be summarized as follows: Romance languages (and more generally, verbframed languages) typically lack complex resultative(like) constructions where the verb is crucially non-directional, i.e., the verb does not involve directionality (e.g., (4)). 2.

Verbi Sintagmatici: A Quirk in Romance languages? In this paper, we argue that so-called verbi sintagmatici are not but apparent counterexamples to the relevant typology: it is crucial to realize that these verbs can very often be argued to encode a directional component, an important restriction we do not find in Germanic (e.g., see (4b) John danced away). Accordingly, we will be arguing that verbi sintagmatici like those in (2) fall under the Path conflation pattern, i.e., the typologically expected one. We will show that, when Talmy’s descriptive typology is framed in Hale & Keyser’s more explanatory terms, their apparent exceptional status vanishes. In fact, we will argue that what would be really surprising would be our concluding that Romance languages lack examples like the ones in (2). That is to say, if our approach is on the right track, verbi sintagmatici like those in (2) should not be viewed as unexpected within Talmy’s classification of Romance languages as verb-framed ones. 5

See Pinker (1989:126-127) for these classes and others. See also Mateu (2002: chap. 3) for a Hale and Keyserian approach to the relation between Talmy’s (1985, 2000) lexicalization patterns and the well-known fact that the so-called ‘locative alternation’ is much more productive in Germanic rather than in Romance.

232

JAUME MATEU & GEMMA RIGAU

We would then like to stress the fact that examples like those in (2) should not be taken as problematic given our main generalization above nor exceptional within the Romance family. Concerning this latter point, we will show that Romance languages like Catalan and Spanish also have a productive variety of them: in particular, these two languages will be shown below to have many examples of verbi sintagmatici like those in (6): (6) a. Siamo entrati dentro e abbiamo visto il cortile are-we entered inside and have-we seen the yard b. Salgo su e scendo giù ascend-I up and descend-I down c. Non hai buttato via i soldi not have-you thrown away the money d. Posso portare avanti il progetto can-I bring ahead the project

(Italian)

We do not then agree with those who claim that verbi sintagmatici are not productive in other Romance languages: for example, Masini (2005:147) points out that “although we can find sporadic examples in French (e.g., jeter dans lit. ‘throw in’) or Spanish (e.g., echar abajo lit. ‘put down’: ‘to demolish’), the pattern does not seem to be productive in these languages”. Against Masini’s (2005) observation, we show that many examples corresponding to the type in (6) can actually be found in languages like Catalan and Spanish: as native speakers, we do not think that examples are sporadic in these languages. Rather it seems to us that it is simply the case that Catalan and Spanish do not have examples of a second type, the one exemplified in (7), which is, diachronically speaking, the most recent one. In fact, Italian can indeed be considered exceptional among other Romance languages because it has examples of the following type: (7) a. Riuscirai a lavare via il sudore (Italian) manage-FUT-you to wash away the sweat b. Devono raschiare via la sporcizia must-they scrape away the dirt c. Potete grattare via il nome del profumo sul vetro can-you scratch away the name of-the perfume on-the glass d. Utilizzano i filtri per pulire fuori l'aria use-they the filters to clean out the air Interestingly enough, a cursory look at Masini’s (2006) analysis of verbi sintagmatici in Dante’s works shows that only examples like those in (6) are found. In (8) are given some examples from Dante’s works (Masini 2006:87-99), which can also be found in Catalan and Spanish:

ROMANCE PATHS AS COGNATE COMPLEMENTS

(8) Dante’s dialect andare giù/giuso buttare fuori discendere giù/giuso gittare giù mettere avanti tirare su tornare in dietro uscire fuori

Catalan anar avall tirar fora baixar avall tirar avall tirar endavant tirar amunt tornar enrere sortir fora

233

Spanish ir abajo ‘go down’ echar fuera ‘throw out’ bajar abajo lit. ‘descend down’ echar abajo ‘throw down’ sacar adelante ‘put forward’ echar arriba ‘throw up’ volver atrás ‘turn back’ salir fuera lit. ‘exit out’

On the other hand, it is interesting to point out that those few linguists who have recently investigated Italian verbi sintagmatici conclude that they are similar to English phrasal verbs (cf. Gràcia 1988:31; Simone 1996:49; Masini 2006:68). However, what is really striking is to realize that nobody has attempted to explain why the pattern is less rich and productive in Italian than in English. One could be tempted to say that what is involved here is not a discrete structural fact but a continuum among Catalan/Spanish, Italian, and English. We want to argue against such an intuitive view. Rather our proposal is that Italian verbi sintagmatici fall under the Path conflation pattern, whereas English phrasal verbs fall under the Germanic pattern where directionality is crucially not conflated in the verb. Once the existence of examples in (6), (7), and (8) is vindicated as normal and expected within Romance languages since they all fall under the generalization commented on at the end of Section 1 above, we will still have to explain of course how they must be analyzed, a non-trivial matter as we will see immediately in Section 3. Basically, this issue will be related to the hard problem posed by cognate/hyponymous complement constructions to Hale & Keyser’s syntactic theory of argument structure, which we assume here. Finally, in Section 4 we show that the Germanic pattern of phrasal verbs is a very different one. Let’s then put forward the methodological lines to be developed in the next two sections: (i) given that both the canonical pattern in (1b) and the alleged exceptional one in (2)/(6)-(8) can be argued to involve verbs encoding a directional component, and (ii) given that both patterns can be shown to involve a specification of the directional meaning conflated in the verb by means of an adverbial or prepositional phrase, it would then seem natural to conclude that the two patterns, the ‘canonical’ one in (1b) and the alleged exceptional one in (2)/(6)(8), should be reduced to a more general one when dealing with Talmy’s typology. Indeed, the fine-grained divisions between those directional verbs in (6) and those directional manner verbs in (7) should be worked out; however, for our present purposes, here we are merely interested in showing why both types fall under the Path conflation pattern: accordingly, here we will not develop an explanation of why Dante’s works or Catalan or Spanish lack the type exemplified in (7); for our present purposes, it will be enough to show that both types should

JAUME MATEU & GEMMA RIGAU

234

in principle be possible in any verb-framed language if and only if the verb is interpreted as encoding or involving a directional meaning (unsurprisingly, fine intralinguistic variation should be expected here). In short, concerning the pattern(s) exemplified in (2)/(6)-(8), here we are not so interested in providing an account of the fine-grained differences between standard Italian and Dante’s dialect or Catalan and Spanish, but rather are interested in showing why verbi sintagmatici are predicted to exist in any Romance language (and more generally, in Talmy’s verb-framed languages, i.e., in those languages where the Path conflation pattern is typical). 3.

A P-Cognation Analysis of Path Complements in Romance With the previous background in mind, let’s then account for the data in (2). Following Hale & Keyser’s (2000:45f) insightful analysis of English particles in (9) as cognate complements of an abstract P conflated in the verb, we want to argue that the formation of the examples in (2)/(6)-(8) also involves P-cognation, i.e., they are all cases where the prepositional(like) element specifies the P(ath) element that has already been conflated in the verb. (9) heat up; warm up; cool {down/off}; widen out Consider Hale & Keyser’s (2000:39) examples in (10): (10)

a. b. c. d.

We heated the soup We heated the soup up The soup heated (slowly) The soup heated up (finally)

Hale & Keyser (2000:39-49) put forward the interesting proposal that the examples in (10b,d) involve a cognation process similar to the one found in (11): they assume that the prepositional particle that appears in (10b,d) can be analyzed like those hyponymous and cognate objects in (11). In particular, their l-syntactic analysis of complex deadjectival verbs is depicted in (12), the upper verbal head being only posited in the transitive/causative use.6 (11)

6

a. John danced a polka b. John shelved the book onto the top shelf c. John saddled his horse with a black saddle

As noted by Hale & Keyser (2000:46; fn. 23), “it is unlikely that there is a synchronically real phonological derivation here; the relationship is essentially suppletive, but in many other cases, e.g. warm, cool, the adjective and the derived verb are homophonous, and in many, the relation involves affixal morphology, as in redden, widen, darken”. On the other hand, the external argument is argued to be not present at L-syntax (Hale & Keyser 1993, 2000, 2002).

ROMANCE PATHS AS COGNATE COMPLEMENTS

(12)

235

V V heat

V DP

V V

P P up

A

According to Hale & Keyser, the overt particle up in (10b) is inserted in place of the empty P in (12), i.e., in the position that would in principle correspond to the ‘trace’ left by conflation of P into V.7 Crucially, for Hale & Keyser (2000) it is not the case that the adjectival root heat or warm conflates with the particle up; rather their claim is that this prepositional element is inserted into the P head after the (‘simple’) verb has been formed. Going then back to the examples under the present study, we posit that Pcognation can also be argued to be involved in (1b), repeated below in (13a), in (13b), and less transparently in (13c): as pointed out above, we claim that even in the less transparent cases in (13c) the prepositional or adverbial-like particle can be argued to specify the directional component already conflated in the verb. Accordingly, our proposal is that all the cases exemplified in (13) can be argued to fall under the Path conflation pattern, the typical one of Romance languages. (13)

a. La botella entrà a la cova flotant (Catalan) the bottle entered to the cave floating b. entrare dentro, lit. ‘enter in’; uscire fuori, lit. ‘exit out’ (Italian) c. buttare via ‘throw away’; lavare via ‘wash away’

Similarly then to what Hale & Keyser (2000) argued for in their l-syntactic analysis of (10b/d), here we also argue that the preposition in (13a) or the particle/adverb in (13b-c) can also be inserted in the relevant P after the verb has been formed. Once again it is important to recall that the list of verbs that enter into the Italian verb-particle construction is typically reduced to directional verbs. Concerning the lavare via type (cf. (7)), we also assume that the verb itself involves a directional meaning; otherwise, its occurrence in a Romance language like Italian would be impossible, as predicted by Talmy’s typology.

7 In (12) “P does not head a separate, autonomous predicate. Instead, it is as if A and P jointly head one and the same predicate. And this, like any adjectival predicate, finds its subject external to its own projection” (Hale & Keyser 2000:45-46).

JAUME MATEU & GEMMA RIGAU

236

For example, (14) is argued to be the l-syntactic representation of Italian transitive verb particle constructions in (13c).8 (14)

V V buttare lavare

P DP

P P via

R √BUTTA √LAVA

Given the analysis of Italian verb-particle constructions in (14) as involving P-cognation, it would then be natural to apply the very same analysis to complex verbs like the ones exemplified in (15), where the prefix could be regarded as a Path marker as well (e.g., cf. Di Sciullo (1997), among many others). For example, complex denominal verbs like the one in (15a) could be analyzed as in (16): first the simple verb bottigliare ‘to bottle’ would be formed, the prefix being then inserted via P-cognation. We leave it for for further research to draw the relevant consequences from this extension. For our present purposes, it will be sufficient for us to claim that the examples in (13) and (15) can actually involve the same relevant processes: i.e., conflation of P into V, followed by Pcognation. (15)

a. It. imbottigliare; Cat. embotellar; Fr. embouteiller: INbottle, ‘to bottle’ b. It. allargare; Cat. allargar; Sp. alargar: TOlarge, ‘to enlarge’

(16) V V bottigliare

P DP

P P in-

8

R √BOTTIGLIA

See Hale & Keyser (2000, 2002) for arguments distinguishing the causative construction in (12) from the transitive one in (14): for example, only the former enter into the causative alternation (cf. 10), a fact that is presumably related to its having a double verbal shell.

ROMANCE PATHS AS COGNATE COMPLEMENTS

237

4.

English Phrasal Verbs and the Germanic Co-event Pattern: ‘Unselected Object Constructions’ Revisited In the Romance examples in (13), the verb itself has been claimed to encode or involve a directional meaning, which is further specified through a prepositional-like element. In contrast, as shown by the English examples in (17), this restriction does not hold in Germanic. Such an observation is crucial in order to properly understand the truly relevant differences between Romance and Germanic. (17)

a. b. c. d.

John danced the night away John outdanced Mary John worked the night away John outworked Mary

Accordingly, as predicted by Talmy’s typology, examples like those in (17) are not to be found in Romance: this should not be surprising since in these cases the verb does not lexically involve a directional meaning. Indeed, the constructions in (17) do not involve a P-cognation analysis; rather they involve a complex l-syntactic structure where the phonological matrix of the relevant null verb has been saturated by an independent root, the P(ath) being a true satellite (Mateu & Rigau 2002; cf. also McIntyre (2004) and Zubizarreta & Oh (2007)): see (18). (18)

V V R √DANCE

P V

DP

P P away/out-

X

In fact, one could moreover argue, contra Hale & Keyser (2000), that the formation of English complex verbs like heat up/cool down (cf. (9)-(10)) is not to be explained by a P-cognation analysis but rather by means of the l-syntactic subordination process that is typically involved in the Germanic Co-event pattern. Accordingly, their l-syntactic representation would be the one depicted in (19b).9

9

An upper verbal head should be added in the causative use (cf. (12)); given (19b), heat up could roughly be paraphrased as ‘(to cause) X to go up wrt heat’.

238 (19)

JAUME MATEU & GEMMA RIGAU

a. The soup heated up (finally) b. V DP The soup

V V

R √ HEAT

P V

P up

X

On the other hand, if our analysis of the Germanic vs. Romance differences is on the right track, the interesting contrasts in (20) can also be explained on the basis that those Romance verbs in (20) do involve a directional component, while the English corresponding ones do not: indeed, this would account for why the directional phrase cannot be omitted in English. Notice then that the ungrammaticality of the English examples in (20a’) to (20d’) would run parallel to that of *John danced the night or *John danced Mary (cf. (17)). To put it in descriptive words, the English examples in (20) are ‘unselected object constructions’ (Mateu 2002; McIntyre 2004, i.a.), while the Romance ones are not. As shown above, we argue that the former involve the l-syntactic pattern depicted in (18) and are not found in Romance: given this, the Germanic lsyntactic pattern in (21) should then be clearly distinguished from the Romance one in (22). Despite appearances, we argue that no continuum but a discrete structural difference is involved here.10 (20)

a. Gianni ha lavato (via) la macchia (Italian) Gianni has washed (away) the stain a’. John washed the stain ??(away) b. En Joan fregà les taques (de la porta) (Catalan) det Joan wiped the stains (of the door) b’. John wiped the stains *(from the door) c. Juan limpió las huellas (de la mesa) (Spanish) Juan cleaned the fingerprints (of the table) c’. John wiped the fingerprints *(from the table/off/away…) d. Jean a essuyé la poussière (de la table) (French) Jean has wiped the dust (of the table) d’. John wiped the dust *(from the table)

10 For metonymy reasons, wash the stain without the directional PP (cf. (20a’)) can be coerced to have an additional reading similar to the one involved in wash the shirt, the latter corresponding to a different pattern (cf. Hale & Keyser 2002; Mateu 2002). For similar conceptual (non-linguistic) reasons, notice that such a metonymy-based reading is more difficult to get from scrape the dirt or wipe the crumbs whereby they are necessarily followed by a directional PP.

ROMANCE PATHS AS COGNATE COMPLEMENTS

(21)

239

V V R √WASH √SCRAPE

P V

(22)

DP the stain the dirt

P P X ??/*(away/off/…)

V V lavare raschiare

P DP la macchia la sporcizia

P P (via)

R √LAVA √RASCHIA

To conclude, as it stands, Talmy’s (1985, 1991, 2000) descriptive typology cannot easily accommodate Romance data like Italian verb-particle constructions. However, once his descriptive typology is framed in Hale & Keyser’s (2000, 2002) more explanatory terms, their apparently exceptional character vanishes: these apparently exceptional constructions can typically be argued to contain an abstract directional component involved or encoded in the verb, whereby they are not associated to the l-syntactic pattern in (21), which is typical of (truly) ‘satellite-framed’ {languages / constructions}, but rather are associated to the one in (22), which is typical of ‘verb-framed’ {languages / constructions}. 5.

Concluding remarks In this paper, we have provided a lexical-syntactic explanation of some challenging patterns of verb-particle constructions in Italian, which have been taken as exceptional wrt Talmy’s (1985, 1991, 2000) classification of Romance languages as verb-framed ones. This fact has led us to reframe Talmy’s (1991, 2000) typology within Hale & Keyser’s (2000, 2002) theory of argument structure. Given the present perspective, the difficulty of finding clear counterexamples to Talmy’s typology (as we understand it) leads us to claim that it is empirically well-grounded and that its associated generalizations are quite robust. Additionally, we hope that the l-syntactic explanations we have provided for them will contribute to show the explanatory power of Hale & Keyser’s (2000, 2002) syntactic approach to argument structure.

240

JAUME MATEU & GEMMA RIGAU

References Di Sciullo, Anna-Maria. 1997. “Prefixed Verbs and Adjunct Identification”. Projections and Interface Conditions: Essays on Modularity, ed. by AnnaMaria Di Sciullo, 52-73. New York: Oxford University Press. Hale, Kenneth L. & Samuel J. Keyser. 1993. “On Argument Structure and the Lexical Expression of Syntactic Relations”. The View from Building 20: Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger, ed. by Kenneth Hale & Samuel J. Keyser, 53-109. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Hale, Kenneth L. & Samuel J. Keyser. 1997. “The Limits of Argument Structure”. Theoretical Issues at the Morphology-Syntax Interface, ed. by Amaya Mendikoetxea & Myriam Uribe-Etxebarria, 203-230. Bizkaia: UPV. Hale, Kenneth L. & Samuel J. Keyser. 2000. “Aspect and the Syntax of Argument Structure”. Ms., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA. Downloadable at http://web.mit.edu/linguistics/events/tributes/hale/index.html Hale, Kenneth L. & Samuel J. Keyser. 2002. Prolegomenon to a Theory of Argument Structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Harley, Heidi. 2005. “How Do Verbs Get Their Names? Denominal Verbs, Manner Incorporation, and the Ontology of Verb Roots in English”. The Syntax of Aspect: Deriving Thematic and Aspectual Interpretation, ed. by Nomi Erteschik-Shir & Tova Rapoport, 42-64. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Horrocks, Geoffrey & Melita Stavrou. 2007. “Grammaticalized Aspect and Spatio-Temporal Culmination”. Lingua 117.605-644. Gràcia, Lluïsa. 1988. “Più Lo Mandi Giù, Più Ti Tira Su: Costruzioni Italiane con Particella e Predicati Complessi”. ATI Journal 53.31-51. Masini, Francesca. 2005. “Multi-word Expressions between Syntax and the Lexicon: The Case of Italian Verb-Particle Constructions”. SKY Journal of Linguistics 18.145-173. Masini, Francesca. 2006. “Diacronia dei Verbi Sintagmatici in Italiano”. Archivio Glottologico Italiano 91:1.67-105. Mateu, Jaume. 2000. “Why Can’t We Wipe the Slate Clean? A Lexical-Syntactic Approach of Resultative Constructions”. Catalan Working Papers in Linguistics 8.71-95. Downloadable at http://ddd.uab.es/pub/cwpil/1132256Xv8p71.pdf Mateu, Jaume. 2002. Argument Structure: Relational Construal at the SyntaxSemantics Interface. Ph.D. dissertation, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. Downloadable at http://seneca.uab.es/ggt/publicacions/tesis/index.html Mateu, Jaume & M. Teresa Espinal. 2007. “Argument Structure and Compositionality in Idiomatic Constructions”. The Linguistic Review 24:1.33-59.

ROMANCE PATHS AS COGNATE COMPLEMENTS

241

Mateu, Jaume & Gemma Rigau. 2002. “A Minimalist Account of Conflation Processes: Parametric Variation at the Lexicon-Syntax Interface”. Theoretical Approaches to Universals, ed. by Artemis Alexiadou, 211236. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. McIntyre, Andrew. 2004. “Event Paths, Conflation, Argument Structure, and VP Shells”. Linguistics 42:3.523-571. Pinker, Steven. 1989. Learnability and Cognition: The Acquisition of Argument Structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. van Riemsdijk, Henk. 1978. A Case Study in Syntactic Markedness: The Binding Nature of Prepositional Phrases. Dordrecht: Foris. Simone, Raffaele. 1996. “Esistono Verbi Sintagmatici in Italiano?” Cuadernos de Filología Italiana 3.47-61. Slobin, Dan I. 1996. “Two Ways to Travel: Verbs of Motion in English and Spanish”. Grammatical Constructions: Their Form and Meaning, ed by. Masayoshi Shibatani & Sandra A. Thompson, 195-220. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Slobin, Dan I. 2006. “What Makes Manner of Motion Salient? Explorations in Linguistic Typology, Discourse, and Cognition”. Space in Languages: Linguistic Systems and Cognitive Categories, ed. by Maya Hickmann & Stéphane Robert, 59-81. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Snyder, William. 2001. “On the Nature of Syntactic Variation: Evidence from Complex Predicates and Complex Word-Formation”. Language 77.324-342. Spencer, Andrew & Marina Zaretskaya. 1998. “Verb Prefixation in Russian as Lexical Subordination”. Linguistics 36.1-39. Svenonius, Peter. 2004. “Slavic Prefixes inside and outside VP”. Nordlyd 32.205-253. Svenonius, Peter. 2008. “Projections of P”. Syntax and Semantics of Spatial P, ed. by Anna Asbury et al., 63-84. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Talmy, Leonard. 1985. “Lexicalization Patterns: Semantic Structure in Lexical Forms”. Language Typology and Syntactic Description, vol. 3, ed. by Tim Shopen, 57-149. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Talmy, Leonard. 1991. “Path to Realization: A Typology of Event Conflation”. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 17.480-519. Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Linguistics Society. Talmy, Leonard. 2000. Toward a Cognitive Semantics, vol. 2. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Vicario, Federico. 1997. I Verbi Analitici in Friulano. Milano: Franco Angeli. Zubizarreta, M. Luisa & Eunjeong Oh. 2007. On the Syntactic Composition of Manner and Motion. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

DISCRIMINATING PITCH ACCENT ALIGNMENT IN SPANISH ∗

REBECCA E. RONQUEST & MANUEL DÍAZ-CAMPOS Indiana University

While much acoustic-phonetic evidence has accumulated which proves the existence of two phonetically distinct peak alignments (L+H* and L*+H) in Spanish declaratives, whether or not the two alignments are phonologically distinct remains a topic of debate. The goal of the present paper is to utilize perceptual data, as opposed production data, to establish whether listeners can distinguish between the two pitch accents. Participants took part in a perceptual task in which they were asked to discriminate between the peak alignments. The results indicate that participants had a bias to respond “same” to the majority of the experimental trials, which may explain why performance on “different” trials was poor. Sensitivity (A’) scores, however, indicate that overall, participants could discriminate some differences in the signal. The findings suggest that listeners could not successfully discriminate between the different pitch accent alignments. However, more evidence is needed to rule out the two pitch accent analysis.

1.

Introduction Within the past several decades, the topic of intonation has received an increasing amount of attention from researchers in the field of Romance linguistics. Studies by Prieto et al. (1995, 1996), Nibert (2000), Sosa (1999), McGory & Díaz-Campos (2002), Face (2000, 2001), Hualde (2000), and Beckman et al. (2002), among many others, have provided descriptive analyses of the intonation systems of several different Spanish dialects. These works, however, have also introduced a number of questions as to what kinds of structures exist in the system of Spanish intonation. Perhaps the biggest debate in the area of Spanish intonation concerns the treatment of rising prenuclear and nuclear pitch accents in declarative phrases. While a large body of production literature has illustrated that there are at least two phonetically distinct rising pitch contours in Spanish declarative phrases, the potential phonological status of these pitch accents is still a topic of debate. The goal of the present paper is to investigate further the question of phonological categories in Spanish intonation by discussing the results of a perceptual discrimination experiment with native ∗

This work was supported by NIH-NIDCD T32 Training Grant DC-00012 from the National Institutes of Health to Indiana University. We would like to express thanks to David Pisoni and Luis Hernandez for their helpful comments and suggestions.

244

REBECCA E. RONQUEST & MANUEL DÍAZ-CAMPOS

and bilingual listeners. This experiment serves as a first step in understanding the nature of pitch accents in Spanish, and is also an exploration of how they are perceived by native and non-native listeners. 2.

Pitch accents in Spanish: Phonetic or phonological? Speaking in general terms, nearly all researchers are in agreement that there are at least two types of intonational patterns in declaratives. Both involve a Low tone valley which rises to its peak either within or just after the tonic syllable. In broad focus declaratives, the realization of the peak tends to align with the posttonic syllable in prenuclear positions, and within the stressed syllable boundary in nuclear position. Thus, prenuclear accents are often described as having a delayed peak, whereas nuclear accents are referred to as having an early peak (Prieto 1995, Hualde 2000, McGory & Díaz-Campos 2002, Beckman et al. 2002). This same early-rising peak observed in nuclear position in broad focus declaratives has also been argued to occur in prenuclear position when an element is in narrow focus (Beckman et al. 2002). Thus, most of the theoretical literature which focuses on intonation contours in Spanish declarative phrases recognizes that there are two different phonetic alignments: a late peak which occurs in the posttonic syllable for prenuclear accents, and an early peak which is realized within the stressed syllable and is generally associated with nuclear accents as well as narrow focus (Face 2001, 2002). The patterns of alignment discussed above are typically used to describe Peninsular and Caribbean varieties of Spanish. It is important to note, however, that research on other regional variants of Spanish has documented the existence of dialectal variation in peak alignment patterns. McGory & Díaz-Campos (2002) suggest different descriptions of pitch accent alignment for certain Spanish dialects. For example, Argentine and Chilean varieties show a falling intonation pattern described as H+L*. More specificially, the works carried out by Colantoni & Gurlekian (2004) and Enbe et al. (2006) on Argentine Spanish describe early peak alignment in prenuclar position that does not signal contrastive focus. That is, whereas early peak alignment of the prenuclear pitch accents in Peninsular and Caribbean varieties is generally associated with contrastive focus, this same alignment in Argentine Spanish is produced in broad focus declaratives. For the purpose of the present investigation, the standard theoretical description of peak alignment as presented in Beckman et al. (2002) was adopted: prenuclear pitch accents have late alignment, while early alignment is found in nuclear positions and serves to express contrastive focus. This description is also consistent with the alignment pattern found in Venezuelan Spanish, which is the variety used in the present experiment. The phonological treatment and labeling of these two pitch accent alignments has been, and continues to be, a topic of debate with respect to declaratives. There are a number of different proposals as to how to treat the two

DISCRIMINATING PITCH ACCENT ALIGNMENT IN SPANISH

245

different pitch accents. Prieto et al. (1995) and Nibert (2000) argue that both prenuclear, late-aligned peaks, as well as nuclear early peaks should be labeled as a simple H*. The differences in alignment observed in prenuclear and nuclear accents is generally attributed to tonal crowding, in which the H peak is moved backwards to avoid a clash with a boundary tone. By adopting this label, these researchers consider the two different peak alignments to be different phonetic realizations of the same pitch accent (Face & Prieto 2007). On the other hand, Beckman et al. (2002), Sosa (1999), and Face (2002) argue that the two pitch accent alignments are actually bitonal, as they involve an L tone valley which rises into an H peak at some point either just after or within the stressed syllable. These researchers also maintain that the two peak alignments are phonologically distinct, and thus merit different labels. Consequently, the label L*+H for prenuclear (delayed peak) accents was adopted, and L+H* was designated for nuclear (early peak) accents. A third proposal for the analysis of early and late rising pitch accents comes from Hualde (2000:106-107). He prefers the bitonal nature of the accents over the simple H* proposed by Nibert (2000) and Prieto et al. (1995), but rejects the claim that there is a phonological contrast between the two. He argues that both the H and the L tone (valley) are in some way associated with the stressed syllable, and proposes the label (L+H)* with parentheses to show the association of both tones to the syllable. Thus, the literature discussed above indicates that there is considerable disagreement among researchers as to how to label rising pitch accents in Spanish, and also whether the phonetic realizations L*+H and L+H* are phonologically distinct. The controversy of how to label rising pitch accents reflects a theoretical debate regarding their status in the Spanish phonological system. One perspective holds that the two pitch accents represent distinct phonological categories due to their different usages with respect to focus; early peak alignment in prenuclear positions is generally associated with narrow or contrastive focus, whereas late peak alignment is the most common pattern observed in broad focus declarative utterances. In contrast, those in support of the one pitch accent hypothesis argue that the differences in peak alignment observed in the data might be better explained as a consequence of tonal crowding induced by a phrase accent or a boundary tone. This debate, however, is based primarily on evidence from speakers’ productions of different intonation contours, which were often gathered in very controlled experimental settings. In other words, while ample acoustic-phonetic evidence has accumulated showing the existence of two phonetically distinct alignments in production, little research on the perception of Spanish intonation has been conducted. Perception of intonation is a fairly recent area of study, which is described by Vassière1 (2005:237) as lacking a complete theory, owing to the 1

For a complete review of the literature concerning studies of perception of intonation, see Vassière (2005).

246

REBECCA E. RONQUEST & MANUEL DÍAZ-CAMPOS

complexity of the subject. Vassière (2005:241) stresses the importance of perceptual studies of intonation by stating “ (...) perception rather than acoustics has strong claims to being the best starting point for the study of intonation, a phenomenon that involves multiple acoustic cues.” Thus, extending intonation studies to the area of speech perception is a crucial step in determining whether speakers associate each pitch peak alignment with different pragmatic meanings. One of the goals of the present investigation is to further examine the potential phonological status of L*+H and L+H* by determining if the two alignments are perceptually salient, or discriminable, to native and non-native listeners. A second goal is to contribute to the general body of theoretical literature concerning Spanish intonation, as well as mainstream studies of intonation perception as a whole. Three groups of monolingual and bilingual speakers of English and Spanish took part in a perceptual task in which they were asked to discriminate between two different peak alignments. The ability of listeners to distinguish between L+H* and L*+H could lend evidence in support of the two pitch accent hypothesis. In order for two separate phonological categories to exist, there needs to be a distinction in meaning. A change in the alignment of the pitch peak (i.e. early or late) could trigger a noticeable change in meaning of the phrase, indicating two distinct phonological pitch accent categories. Failure to discriminate between peak alignments could potentially indicate that L+H* and L*+H are different phonetic realizations of one broader phonological category. Participants differing in native language and linguistic experience (monolingual and bilingual) took part in this study in order to investigate if the detection of finegrained phonetic details is restricted to native speakers of a language, or if proficient bilinguals are also sensitive to such changes. In summary, the research questions guiding this study are the following: (1)

Are listeners able to discriminate between different peak alignments?

(2)

Do native speakers of English and Spanish, as well as monolinguals and bilinguals, perceive intonation in different ways? If so, what can be inferred about their intonational systems?

In the sections that follow, a description of the stimuli, task, and participants will be provided. The results of several different statistical analyses will be presented, followed by a discussion section. Finally, the overall conclusions and directions for future research will be discussed.

DISCRIMINATING PITCH ACCENT ALIGNMENT IN SPANISH

247

3. 3.1

Methodology Procedure The present experiment was part of a larger study that consisted of four parts: a language history questionnaire, identification of CUNY sentences, a visual-only language identification task, and a pitch accent discrimination task. Prior to taking part in any of the tasks, all participants completed a language history questionnaire. The purpose of the questionnaire was to gather information pertaining to the language history of each participant such as the age of L2 acquisition and L2 usage where applicable. The monolingual Spanish participants completed a version of the questionnaire that was translated into Spanish. The other two groups of participants completed all paperwork in English. Afterwards, the bilingual participants typed out responses to auditory-only, auditory-visual, and visual-only CUNY sentences.2 All participants then completed a visual-only language identification task, and finally the pitch discrimination task. Only the results of the pitch discrimination task will be discussed in this paper. 3.2

Stimulus materials The stimuli used in this experiment consisted of five broad focus Spanish declarative sentences which were recorded by a native Spanish speaker from Caracas, Venezuela. In order to examine the perceptual salience of the two proposed peak alignments, the stimuli were manipulated in various ways. The alignment of the F0 peak was either manipulated on the first, the second, or the third pitch accent. Alterations to the first and second (prenuclear) pitch accents consisted of moving the pitch peak backwards until it aligned with the nucleus of the stressed syllable. Manipulations to the third (nuclear) pitch accent involved moving the pitch peak forward so that it aligned with the nucleus of the posttonic syllable. On average, the alignment of the peak was moved 150 ms into either the preceding or following syllable, depending on if the desired result was early or late peak alignment. The motivation for the manipulation of alignment is based on previous work on Spanish intonation. Recall that late alignment in prenuclear position and early alignment in nuclear position is used to distinguish between L*+H and L+H*. Manipulation of alignment resulted in the construction of minimal intonational phrase pairs for testing pitch accents as they have been described in the production data. These descriptions are based on the theory of autosegmental-intonational phonology (Beckman et al. 2002, Ladd 1996). As the current investigation is the first step in examining peak alignment perception in Spanish, only the alignment of the pitch peak was manipulated. Other potentially

2

As the CUNY sentences are in English, the monolingual Spanish participants did not complete this component of the experiment.

REBECCA E. RONQUEST & MANUEL DÍAZ-CAMPOS

248

relevant factors to intonational phrasing (e.g., intensity, peak height, and vowel duration) were not altered.3 In addition to the manipulations made on the first, second, and third pitch accents, ten trials were included in which the intonation was flat at 90 hz, and flat at 150 hz. These stimuli were included to ensure that all of the participants were able to perceive large differences in intonation and pitch. The manipulations were performed using PRAAT software version 4.4 (Boersma & Weenink 2005). For a full list of sentences used in this experiment, see the Appendix. 3.3

Discrimination task The experimental design of the pitch discrimination task consisted of two blocks of auditory-only pairs of Spanish sentences. Each “different” sentence pair consisted of an original phrase as it had been spoken by the informant (i.e. natural peak alignment), and another phrase in which the peak alignment had been manipulated on one of the three pitch accents. Both members of the stimulus pair were identical in all respects except for the placement of the pitch peak in one of the sentences. The “same” stimulus pairs consisted of sentences in which either no manipulation had been made, or in which the same manipulation had been made. Table 1 provides a complete list of the eleven different stimulus pair combinations. Condition C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11

Description of stimulus pair Original sentence + manipulation on pitch accent 1 Original sentence + manipulation on pitch accent 2 Original sentence + manipulation on pitch accent 3 Original sentence + low manipulation Original stimulus + high manipulation Two repetitions of the original sentence Two repetitions of stimulus manipulated on pitch accent 1 Two repetitions of stimulus manipulated on pitch accent 2 Two repetitions of stimulus manipulated on pitch accent 3 Two repetitions of sentence with low manipulation Two repetitions of sentence with high manipulation

Correct response different different different different different Same Same Same Same Same Same

N 10 10 10 10 10 5 5 5 5 5 5

Table 1: Description of stimulus pairs used in discrimination task

3

Research has shown that cues such as vowel duration, intensity, and scaling, in addition to peak alignment, are important acoustic cues to intonation, stress, and accent (c.f. Ortega-Llebaria & Prieto 2007, Prieto et al. 1995). In the present study, we only attempted to alter one of these cues (i.e. alignment). Future experiments could be designed in which these other factors are either controlled for or manipulated.

DISCRIMINATING PITCH ACCENT ALIGNMENT IN SPANISH

249

The participants took part in a two-alternative, forced-choice, samedifferent task, in which they were asked to decide if both members of the stimulus pair were the same or different with respect to intonation. Participants heard two repetitions of a sentence through the headphones. The words “same” and “different” appeared on the right and left sides of computer screen, respectively. The participants were instructed to press the “same” or “different” button on the response box depending on whether they judged the two sentences to be the same or different with respect to intonation. Prior to completing the task, the experimenter ensured that the participants understood the instructions and that they understood what was meant by the term “intonation.” No training or feedback was provided prior to, or during, the task.4 Two blocks of 80 trials each were presented to the subjects, resulting in a total of 160 trials. Each block consisted of 30 trials in which peak alignment was identical, and 50 in which peak alignment was different. All pairs consisting of manipulated sentences were counterbalanced so that in half the trials, the manipulated sentence was presented first and in the other half of the trials, the non-manipulated sentence was presented first. The stimuli for the pitch discrimination task were presented on an Apple Macintosh G4 computer. All files were leveled so that they were equal with respect to intensity, and were played through the headphones at 69 db. PsyScript version 5.1 was used for stimulus presentation. Subjects’ responses were recorded with a response box, and no feedback was provided. The entire experiment took approximately one hour to complete. Participants received $10 for completing the entire series of experiments. 3.4

Participants A total of 40 participants took part in this study. Twelve of the participants were monolingual Spanish speakers from Caracas, Venezuela. Twenty-eight bilingual participants also completed the experiment. Sixteen of the bilinguals were native English speaking bilinguals who had acquired Spanish as a second language; the other twelve were native Spanish speakers who acquired English as a second language. All of the bilingual participants were members of the Department of Spanish and Portuguese at Indiana University, Bloomington.

4 Prior to taking part in this task, a set of instructions appeared on the screen. The participants were told that they would be hearing pairs of sentences, in which one of the members of the pair may have been modified. They were explicitly told that modifications had been made to the intonation in some of the sentences, and not the words or segments. The experimenter then ensured that the participants understood what was meant by the term “intonation.”

REBECCA E. RONQUEST & MANUEL DÍAZ-CAMPOS

250 4. 4.1

Results Percent correct scores In order to examine listeners’ performance on the discrimination task, percent correct scores were calculated in each of the eleven stimulus pair conditions. Figure 1 shows the mean percent correct score in each condition, collapsed over participant group.5 The black bars indicate percent correct scores on “different” pairs of stimuli (C1-C5), whereas the gray bars indicate scores on “same” pairs (C6-C11).

Percent Correct

Percent correct scores in all stimulus conditions 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

94

97

95

92

90

C5

C6

C7

C8

98

97

97

C9

C10

C11

35 12

C1

C2

4

C3

C4

Stimulus Condition

Figure 1: Overall percent correct scores in all eleven conditions. The black bars represent “different” pairs, while the gray bars represent “same” pairs. Numbers above the bars indicate the actual percent correct score in each condition.

The percent correct scores in Figure 1 indicate that for the “same” pairs, performance was near ceiling. In other words, the participants were highly accurate in identifying both members of the stimulus pair as being the “same” with respect to intonation. Performance on “different” conditions four (C4) and five (C5), which consisted of a non-manipulated utterance paired with an utterance with a low flat or a high flat contour respectively, also neared ceiling.6 5

The percent correct scores presented in Figure 1 are collapsed across participant groups. The scores were collapsed in order to present a global measure of performance by all participants on all conditions. Initial examination of the scores revealed that the groups did not perform differently on the task, and for this reason, the figure is not broken down by listener group. A discussion of group differences is presented in section 4.2 for the measures of Sensitivity (A’) and Bias (B”). 6 The stimuli in conditions four and five were created by pairing a natural utterance which had not been manipulated with an utterance in which the pitch contour had been altered to a flat low or high contour. The resulting stimuli sounded unnatural and robotic. When presented with stimuli in these conditions, it is likely that participants were attending to differences in naturalness that may,

DISCRIMINATING PITCH ACCENT ALIGNMENT IN SPANISH

251

Interestingly, performance on conditions one (C1), two (C2), and three (C3) was extremely poor. These three conditions represent stimulus pairs which consisted of a non-manipulated utterance, and one in which the alignment of the first, second, or third pitch peak had been altered. As the figure indicates, participants judged the stimulus pairs in condition one to be “different” only 35% of the time; in condition two only 12% of the time; and in condition three, only 4% of the time. The percent correct scores show that performance on stimulus conditions one, two, and three was extremely poor in comparison to the other conditions. In order to investigate whether there were differences in performance between these three stimulus conditions, and also to examine the possibility that performance was different in each participant group, a repeated measures Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) with stimulus condition (manipulation to the 1st, 2nd, or 3rd pitch accent) as the within subjects variable and participant group (monolingual Spanish, L1 Spanish bilingual, and L1 English bilingual) as the between subjects variable was conducted. 7 The analysis revealed a significant main effect for stimulus condition (F(2,74)=71.000; p=.000). Post-hoc analyses with a paired samples t-test showed that performance on each of stimulus condition was significantly different from the others. Performance on condition one, which contained an utterance manipulated on the first pitch accent, was significantly different from performance on conditions two (p=.000) and three (p=.000); and performance on stimuli in condition two was significantly different from performance on stimuli in condition three (p=.000). The significant main effect of condition indicates that although discrimination performance was poor on the stimulus pairs in conditions one, two, and three, there are still differences between the three conditions. Participants were significantly better at noticing differences in alignment when the first pitch accent of the phrase had been modified in comparison to the other two pitch accents. The listeners’ ability to perceive peak alignment differences declined significantly for all three groups when the manipulation was made to the second pitch accent, and then again for the third pitch accent. The differences in perception of the three different manipulation conditions could potentially be explained by considering prosodic phrasing in Spanish. As described in Elordieta et al. (2005) and D’Imperio et al. (2005), Spanish exhibits a tendency to phrase subjects separately from the verb and the object, forming its own maximum phrase. This tendency may result in greater perceptual salience of the subject of or may not have been, related to intonation. In other words, participants noted that these stimuli were clearly different from one another in that the manipulated sentence sounded highly synthetic. For this reason, performance on these conditions was excluded from the statistical analysis. 7 As performance on conditions C1, C2, and C3 were of greatest interest in this experiment, only performance on these three conditions for each of the participant groups was subjected to the Analysis of Variance and subsequent post-hoc analyses. Performance on conditions C4-C11 will not be discussed further in this section.

252

REBECCA E. RONQUEST & MANUEL DÍAZ-CAMPOS

the sentence, which could in turn allow participants to more accurately perceive differences in alignment of the first pitch accent.8 Despite the effect of condition, the main effect of participant group and the participant group x condition interaction were not found to be significant. The lack of a significant main effect and interaction indicates that participants, regardless of their native language background and linguistic experience, were not different from each other with respect to their performance on this task. In other words, monolingual Spanish speakers, L1 Spanish-English bilinguals, and L1 English-Spanish bilinguals performed this task in similar ways. 4.2

Sensitivity and Bias The percent correct data presented in the previous section provide a global measure of performance on this task. Also of interest, however, is whether or not the participants were engaged in the perceptual task and were sensitive to differences in the signal, and if they were biased to choose one response option over another. For this reason, non-parametric measures of overall sensitivity (A’) and bias (B”) were computed for each subject (Grier 1971). Both of these measures calculate the relationship between hit and false alarm rates in a particular task, and provide insight into how, or if, the participant is completing the task, and whether or not there is any response bias. Sensitivity (A’) is a measure which assess a participant’s involvement in the task and indicates their level of awareness to differences in the signal. In other words, A’ indicates how well a participant is able to notice differences in the stimuli by taking into account the number of times a difference was correctly identified (“hit”), and the number of times a control trial was mistakenly identified as being different (“false alarm”). For this experiment, a hit constitutes an instance in which a participant responded “different” to a “different” trial. A false alarm is an instance in which a participant responded “different” to a “same” trial. Sensitivity is measured on a scale of 0.0-1.0, with zero indicating no sensitivity to differences in the signal and 1 indicating perfect discrimination of differences in the signal. A score of 0.5 on the sensitivity scale indicates chance discrimination; that is, 0.5 indicates that a participant was not engaged in the task and was most likely guessing.

8 One could point out that the difficulties in discriminating between the alignments could be caused by the listeners’ understanding of what is natural in their system of intonation, and what is thus expected or possible in each position. For example, altering the peak alignment in the nuclear accent (i.e. from early to late) could have created an intonational structure that is not expected in this position, and possibly not meaningful given the nature of our stimuli. Future experiments could be designed which test the perception of peak alignment in specific discourse contexts. That is, listeners could be asked to judge which phrase (e.g., one with early alignment or one with late) would be more appropriate in the given context.

DISCRIMINATING PITCH ACCENT ALIGNMENT IN SPANISH

253

In order to gain a better understanding of performance on the discrimination task, a one samples t-test of sensitivity (A’) scores against a test value of 0.5 was conducted. The test value was set at 0.5 in order to determine if listeners’ sensitivity was different from chance performance. The results of the analysis were significant (p=.000), indicating that participants were sensitive to differences in the signal at levels significantly above chance. 9 Additionally, a one-way ANOVA of A’ score and participant group was conducted, revealing no significant differences in sensitivity between participant groups. In other words, members of all three participant groups were not different with respect to their ability to discriminate differences in the signal. The mean A’ scores for each participant group are represented in Figure 2. Sensitivity (A') for three participant groups

Sensitivity (A')

1 0.9 0.8 0.70

0.72

0.7

0.64

0.6 0.5 Monolingual Spanish

L1 Spanish Bilinguals L1 English Bilinguals Participant Group

Figure 2: Mean sensitivity (A’) scores for three participant groups. The values above each bar represent the actual sensitivity scores.

Bias (B”) also utilizes hit and false alarm rates, except it measures the extent to which a participant is biased to choose one response option over another. In contrast to sensitivity, B” is measured on a scale from -1.0 to 1.0. In this experiment, negative bias values indicate a tendency to respond “different” to the 9

In contrast to the percent correct data which had been broken down by each of the manipulation conditions, the measures of sensitivity and bias reported here are overall measures which are collapsed over all conditions. It was not possible to calculate sensitivity and bias measures for each of the eleven stimulus conditions individually due in part to the nature of the stimulus set. As a result, sensitivity (A’) values seem particularly high in relation to the low percent correct performance on conditions one, two, and three. The sensitivity values reported here are more closely related to an overall percent correct measure. As a result of extremely high accuracy in the “same” conditions, the overall percent correct scores for all three participant groups were near 70%.

REBECCA E. RONQUEST & MANUEL DÍAZ-CAMPOS

254

test trials, whereas positive values indicate a tendency to respond “same.” A score of zero indicates no response bias. The same statistical analyses conducted for A’ were also conducted on bias (B”) measures for all three participant groups. A one samples t-test of B” scores against a test value of 0 was significant (p=.000), meaning that bias scores were different from 0; that is, the participants demonstrated a significant response bias. All of the B” scores are positive, which indicates that participants had a tendency to choose the “same” response option over the “different” response option. A one-way ANOVA of bias score and participant group was conducted in order to examine the potential differences in bias for each group of listeners. Although the results of the ANOVA were not significant, they were nearing significance, with a value of p=.052. A closer examination of the Tukey HSD post-hoc analysis indicated that bias (B”) scores for the L1 English-Spanish bilinguals differed significantly from those scores obtained by L1 Spanish-English bilinguals and the Spanish monolinguals (p=.044). The L1 English-Spanish bilinguals showed significantly less response bias (towards “same” responses) than did the monolingual and bilingual Spanish groups. The average B” scores for all three participant groups are presented in Figure 3. Bias (B") for three participant groups 1 0.52

0.63 0.37

Bias (B")

0.5 0

Monolingual Spanish L1 Spanish Bilinguals L1 English Bilinguals -0.5 -1 Participant Group

Figure 3: Mean bias (B”) for three participant groups. The positive scores indicate a bias towards responding “same”, whereas negative scores indicate a bias towards responding “different.”

The difference in bias between the L1 English-Spanish bilinguals and the two groups of native Spanish speakers could possibly be attributed to differences in native language experience. Although no definitive explanation for this behavior can be offered at this time, it is possible that native speakers of English who learned Spanish as a second language may have been hyper-sensitive to

DISCRIMINATING PITCH ACCENT ALIGNMENT IN SPANISH

255

differences in the stimuli; that is, this group of participants may have been more cautious to indicate that a stimulus pair was the “same” given that they may lack native-speaker intuitions about what types of intonation sound natural in Spanish. This explanation, although somewhat speculative, seems plausible. The high levels of response bias may, in part, explain why percent correct performance on the “same” trials was so high, and why performance on the three conditions of “different” trials was extremely low. As the participants were biased to respond “same” on all trials, they pressed the “different” button on the response box very infrequently. As a consequence, there was a higher likelihood of correctly identifying a “same” pair as being the “same” than there was a “different” pair being identified as “different.” Overall, the measures of sensitivity and bias indicate that the listeners who took part in this experiment were, in fact, engaged in the task, and were able to correctly discriminate some of the differences present in the experimental trials. However, the fact that some of the differences between the stimulus pairs were so slight may have influenced the participants to respond “same” more often than they responded “different.” 5.

Discussion The statistical results discussed in the previous section indicate that overall, percent correct performance on this task was poor for those stimulus pairs which contained an utterance with manipulated peak alignment. Only those pairs which contained a phrase whose first prenuclear pitch accent had been modified began to approach chance performance. The sensitivity and bias measures indicate that the participants were completing the task and were sensitive to differences in the signal, but also that they were highly biased to respond “same” to most of the experimental trials. It is also important to note, however, that the statistical analyses revealed no significant differences in percent correct performance and A’ scores for the three participant groups. This result suggests that monolingual speakers of Spanish, as well as bilingual speakers of English and Spanish, performed this task in a similar way, exhibiting comparable percent correct and sensitivity scores. Thus, the detection of fine-grained phonetic differences, such as peak alignment, does not appear to be restricted to native speakers of a language. The significant difference in bias, however, may reflect some hesitation on the part of the L1 English-Spanish bilinguals to judge stimulus pairs as being identical with respect to intonation. The findings of this particular experiment reveal a general inability of the subjects to discriminate between the two pitch accent alignments, which seems to suggest that there may not be a phonological distinction after all; if participants were unable to discriminate between the two different peak alignments, it is unlikely that the alignments induced a change in meaning and thus form separate

256

REBECCA E. RONQUEST & MANUEL DÍAZ-CAMPOS

categories. One could speculate, however, that problems with the stimuli or methodological issues could have been partly responsible for the results obtained. With respect to the stimuli, there is a possibility that the peak alignment may not have been altered enough (i.e. moved far enough into the preceding or following syllable) to alter listeners’ perception of meaning. In this experiment, peak alignment manipulations were made based on the descriptions of late and early alignment found in the production literature. These characterizations, however, are not always precise. Without a clear understanding of exactly where the category boundaries lie, it is not out of the question that the alignment of the peak in our stimuli had simply been varied within the L*+H or L+H* categories themselves, and did not cross into a different category boundary. In order to ensure that changes in alignment result in category shifts, it is necessary that studies of intonation production provide a more precise description of peak alignment location. One could also question if the discrimination task used in this experiment was the most appropriate experimental paradigm to test the perception of peak alignment. Although Gussenhoven (2004) argues that peak alignment, in comparison to other intonation phenomena, might lend itself well to an experimental design which calls for discrimination, intonation perception studies are extremely difficult to conduct given the continuous nature of many of its parameters. Studies on the perception of tones in Cantonese (Fok 1974, Li 2004), for example, have proven that listeners perceive tones in a continuum, and also that certain tones are more difficult to distinguish between than others. Li (2004) found that native speakers of Cantonese were better able to discriminate between a level tone and a rising tone than between two rising tones, possibly due to the fact that the latter pair has the same general contour shape and only differs in the level of F0 at the end point. In our study, participants’ difficulty in judging peak alignment differences may have been the result of something similar: the general shape of the intonation contour remained the same, and only a small modification was made to the location of the pitch peak. Difficulty in discriminating between pitch accents with similar contours has also been proposed by Face & Prieto (2007:20) in their suggested revisions to the Sp_ToBI system. Although no empirical tests were performed, they discuss that the perceptual distinction between the two early-rising prenuclear accents is potentially not very strong, as a result of their both being H peaks that are perceived by Spanish speakers as being H. The differences in alignment, then, may be overshadowed by the fact that both tones share the same (or similar) tonal height. Small manipulations in the location of the H peak, then, could possibly go unnoticed. Future studies of peak alignment perception will need to take this issue into consideration. A second potential criticism of the methodology employed in this experiment is that successful discrimination of a sound does not necessarily entail

DISCRIMINATING PITCH ACCENT ALIGNMENT IN SPANISH

257

categorization; even if the participants had been able to reliably distinguish between the two peak alignments, this behavior would not be unequivocal proof of two separate categories of peak alignment. A large body of research in the area of cross-language speech perception has indicated that listeners can distinguish between two different sounds that are not contrastive, or not even present, in their native language (c.f. Best et al. 2001). For this reason, it will not be possible to argue for, or against, the existence of two phonologically distinct pitch accent categories given the data from this experiment. Despite the methodological limitations of the present investigation, the study is an important first step in examining which aspects of intonation might be detectable to both native and non-native listeners. Although the results of this experiment do not allow us to provide a definitive answer to the question of whether Spanish has one or two pitch accent categories, it has shown that small differences in intonation are detectable on some level. Position of the pitch accent in the phrase also proved to be an important factor influencing perception, and there do seem to be potential differences in performance based on native language and linguistic experience. 6.

Conclusions To summarize, the main goals of the present investigation were to determine if listeners could discriminate between two phonetically distinct peak alignments in Spanish, and also to examine the possibility that native language and linguistic experience could affect perception. In response to the first research question, the results suggest that participants were fairly unsuccessful in discriminating between L+H* and L*+H as they have been described in the production literature. In terms of the second research question, there were no significant differences between groups with respect to accuracy and overall sensitivity (A’), however measures of bias showed a between group difference: non-native Spanish speakers exhibited significantly less response bias than the native Spanish-speaking participants. As mentioned previously, the data from the present experiment do not allow us to determine with absolute certainty the existence of two phonologically distinct pitch accent categories. This question could be explored further using a different experimental paradigm, such as one that examines the Just Noticeable Difference thresholds (∆f) at which participants can detect a difference in intonation. Another potential experiment would be to test listeners’ perception of minimal intonational phrase pairs in different discourse contexts. This type of experiment may provide insight into the relationship between peak alignment and focus. In addition to improving the experimental design of the present study, future investigations of intonation perception could be conducted in order to determine if other cues, such as F0 height or L valley alignment, are detectable to listeners. Characteristics such as intensity and vowel duration, which were not

258

REBECCA E. RONQUEST & MANUEL DÍAZ-CAMPOS

considered in the present investigation, could be included in future experiments as well. Finally, research of this type could be extended to the field of Second Language Acquisition, in order to examine at which point in the acquisition process L2 learners are able to detect, discriminate, or produce native-like intonation contours. Further examination of the perceptual qualities of intonation will eventually lead to a greater understanding of the intonation system as a whole.

References Beckman, Mary E., Manuel Díaz-Campos, Julia Tevis Mcgory & Terrell A. Morgan. 2002. “Intonation across Spanish in the Tones and Break Indices Framework”. Probus 14:1.9-36. Best, Catherine T., Gerald W. McRoberts & Elizabeth Goodell. 2001. “Discrimination of Non-native Consonant Contrasts Varying in Perceptual Assimiliation to the Listener’s Native Phonological System”. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 109:2.775-794. Boersma, Paul & David Weenink. 2005. PRAAT software. Downloadable from http://www.praat.org Colantoni, Laura & Jorge Gurlekian. 2004. “Convergence and Intonation: Historical Evidence from Buenos Aires Spanish”. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 7.107-119. D’Imperio, Mariapaola, Gorka Elordieta, Sónia Frota, Pilar Prieto & Marina Vigário. 2005. “Intonational Phrasing in Romance: The Role of Prosodic and Syntactic Structure”. Prosodies: Phonetics & Phonology Series, ed. by Sonia Frota & Marina Vigário, 59-97. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Elordieta, Gorka, Sónia Frota & Marina Vigário. 2005. “Subjects, Objects, and Intonational Phrasing in Spanish and Portuguese”. Studia Linguistica 59:23.110-143. Enbe, Claudia, Jorge Gurlekian & Yishai Tobin. 2006. “A Laboratory Analysis of Suprasegmental Features in Normal and Pathological Speech of Buenos Aires Spanish According to the Theory of Phonology and Human Behavior”. Proceedings from the 2nd Conference on Laboratory Approaches to Spanish Phonetics and Phonology, Bloomington, 17-19 September 2004, ed. by Manuel Díaz-Campos, 85-103. Sommerville, MA: Cascadilla Press. Face, Timothy L. 2000. “Prosodic Manifestation of Focus in Spanish”. Southwest Journal of Linguistics 19:1.45-62. Face, Timothy L. 2001. “Focus and Early Peak Alignment in Spanish Intonation”. Probus 13.223-246. Face, Timothy L. 2002. “Local Intonational Marking of Spanish Contrastive Focus”. Probus 14:1.71-92.

DISCRIMINATING PITCH ACCENT ALIGNMENT IN SPANISH

259

Face, Timothy L. & Pilar Prieto. 2007. “Rising Accents in Castilian Spanish: A Revision of Sp-ToBI”. Journal of Portuguese Linguistics 6:1.117-146. Fok Chan, Yuen-Yuen. 1974. A Perceptual Study of Tones in Cantonese. Hong Kong: Centre of Asian Studies Publications, University of Hong Kong. Grier, J. Brown. 1971. “Nonparametric Indexes for Sensitivity and Bias: Computing Formulas”. Psychological Bulletin 75:6.424-429. Gussenhoven, Carlos. 2004. The Phonology of Tone and Intonation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hualde, José Ignacio. 2000. “Intonation in Spanish and the Other Ibero-Romance languages: Overview and Status Quaestionis”. Romance Phonology and Variation: Selected Papers from the 30th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL), Gainesville, February 2000, ed. by Joaquim Camps & Caroline R. Wiltshire. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Ladd, D. Robert. 1996. Intonational Phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Li, Po-Yee. 2004. “Perceptual Analyses of Six Contrastive Tones in Cantonese. International Symposium of Tonal Aspects of Languages: Emphasis on Tone Languages in Beijing China, 28-30 March 2004. Downloadable from http://www.isca-speech.org/archive/ McGory, Julia Tevis & Manuel Díaz-Campos. 2002. “Declarative Intonation Patterns in Multiple Varieties of Spanish”. Structure, Meaning, and Acquisition in Spanish: Papers from the 4th Hispanic Linguistic Symposium, Bloomington, 17-19 November 2000, ed. by James F. Lee, Kimberly L. Geeslin, & J. Clancy Clements, 73-92. Sommerville, MA: Cascadilla Press. Nibert, Holly. 2000. Phonetic and Phonological Evidence for Intermediate Phrasing in Spanish Intonation. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. Ortega Llebaria, Marta & Pilar Prieto. 2007. “Disentangling Stress from Accent in Spanish: Production Patterns of the Stress Contrast in Deaccented Syllables”. Segmental and Prosodic Issues in Romance Phonology, ed. by Pilar Prieto, Joan Mascaró & Maria-Josep Solé, 155-176. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Prieto, Pilar, Jan van Santen & Julia Hirschberg. 1995. “Tonal Alignment Patterns in Spanish”. Journal of Phonetics 23.429-451. Prieto, Pilar, Chilin Shih & Holly Nibert. 1996. “Pitch Downtrend in Spanish”. Journal of Phonetics 24.445-473. Sosa, Juan Manuel. 1999. La Entonación del Español: Su estructura fónica, variabilidad y dialectología. Madrid: Cátedra. Vassière, Jacqueline. 2005. “Perception of Intonation”. The Handbook of Speech Perception, ed. by David Pisoni & Robert Remez, 236-263. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

260

REBECCA E. RONQUEST & MANUEL DÍAZ-CAMPOS

Appendix: Sentences used in the pitch discrimination task Below is a list of the five sentences used in the pitch discrimination task. Each of the five sentences was manipulated on the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd pitch accents. Also, a “low” version with a flat, low pitch contour, and a “high” version with a high, flat pitch contour were created. (PA1) La nena La niña

(PA2) nomina miraba

(PA3) la niña. la nena.

Manolo La nena Manolo

numera numera miraba

la lámina. la lámina. el limonero.

Gloss The little girl nominates the girl. The girl was looking at the little

girl. Manolo numbers the sheet. The little girl numbers the sheet. Manolo was looking at the lemon tree.

PROSCRIPTIONS…GAPS…AND SOMETHING IN BETWEEN AN EXPERIMENTAL EXAMINATION OF SPANISH PHONOTACTICS

MICHAEL SHELTON, CHIP GERFEN, NICOLÁS GUTIÉRREZ PALMA Occidental College, The Pennsylvania State University, Universidad de Jaén

This study tests, via the collection of online, behavioral data, native speaker reactions to two types of words that are absent from the Spanish lexicon. The experiment compares proscriptions, phonotactic sequences that are phonologically prohibited, historical gaps, forms that are synchronically licit but absent as a result of diachronic change, and fully-licit controls. In a word naming task, the patterning of production errors and reaction times proves statistically different across the three word types. The three-way split among proscriptions, historical gaps, and licit gaps challenges traditional approaches to quantity sensitivity which consider syllables binarily “light” or “heavy.” The results suggest a gradient sensitivity to varying degrees of syllable weight. In view of these findings, we argue in favor of a probabilistic conception of the lexicon in which the fine-grained subtlety of the patterns across the lexicon may be tracked statistically to form multiple levels of generalization in the phonological grammar.

1.

Introduction The three-syllable window on stress placement has been studied extensively in descriptive analyses of the Spanish stress system. While such research has delineated the restrictions that certain syllabic structures place on antepenultimate stress, native speaker reactions to impossible vs. licit-but-absent forms have yet to be tested empirically. This study employs an online word naming task to collect behavioral data with the aim of testing the cognitive representation of phonological proscriptions and gaps in native speakers of Spanish. 2.

Theoretical Background Stress placement on nonverbals in Spanish is restricted to a three-syllable window at the right edge of the word (Harris 1983, 1992, 1995; Roca 1991). This yields forms in the Spanish lexicon such as dominó ‘domino’ (oxytone stress), abanico ‘fan’ (paroxytone stress), and efímero ‘ephemeral’ (proparoxytone stress). However, a form such as *ábanico, in which stress falls four syllables from the right edge, represents a proscribed pattern. Paroxytones constitute the unmarked stress pattern in the language and represent approximately 64% of the Spanish lexicon. The second-most frequent stress pattern is oxytone stress, comprising

262

SHELTON, GERFEN & GUTIÉRREZ PALMA

28%. Lastly, only 8% of Spanish words exhibit proparoxytone stress (percentages from Núñez Cedeño & Morales-Front 1999). The lower quantity of proparoxytones is accounted for by various phonotactic constraints that reduce the standard three-syllable window to two syllables. Two such constraints are penults closed with a consonant and palatal final onsets. Proparoxytones with a closed penult, with rare exceptions, are unattested in Spanish. This is to say, words such as [tu.rís.ta] ‘tourist’ exist, but forms such as *[tú.ris.ta] do not. One possible interpretation of this pattern is to view the restriction on proparoxytones as evidence of sensitivity to syllable weight (Hyman 1985; Hayes 1989). While quantity sensitivity has been highly debated in the literature on Spanish stress (cf. Harris 1983, 1992, 1995; Lipski 1997; and Roca 1988, 1990, 1991, 1997 for discussion under a traditional generative framework, Piñeros 2000; and Roca 2007 for optimality theoretic accounts, and Aske 1990; Eddington 2000, 2004; Face 2000, 2004, 2005; and Bárkányi 2002 for experimental approaches), a weight sensitive approach would argue that if Spanish is sensitive to syllable weight, then a closed penult should attract stress and reduce the Spanish stress window from three to two syllables. Thus, a word such as pómulo is phonologically licit because all of its syllables are considered light: [poµ.muµ.loµ]. By contrast, however, our example *túrista is illicit because the second syllable is heavy: *tuµ.[risµµ.taµ]. The first syllable, tu, lies outside of the reduced two-syllable window. The absence of proparoxytones with palatal final onsets is a bit more complex. The Spanish lexicon exhibits paroxytones such as tacaño ‘stingy’ but evidences no proparoxytones with palatal final onsets, such as *tácaño. The lack of words in Spanish with this structure can be understood as a historical residue from Latin. With the exception of borrowed words, palatals in Modern Spanish all derive from phonological change, as the Latin phonemic inventory contained no palatal consonants. Palatals in the onset of the final syllable typically derived from the merger of two Latin phonemes (Penny 2002; Lloyd 1987). Modern Spanish palatal final onsets can be traced to three principle historical changes: gliding of atonic Latin E and I in hiatus, syllable-final velars, and the lenition of Latin LL and NN. Atonic E and I in hiatus with other vowels in Latin frequently underwent a process of lenition in which they were reduced to the palatal glide [j]. This change produced two subsequent changes. First, the gliding of the vowel results in the loss of a syllable. Second, in many instances the newly-formed palatal glide palatalized the preceding consonant, as illustrated in (1): (1)

Deriving palatal final onsets from atonic Latin E and I in hiatus a. ARĀNEA (a.ra.ne.a) > a.ra.nja > a.ra.a (araña) b. HISPANIA (his.pa.ni.a) > es.pa.nja > es.pa.a (España) c. PODIU (po.di.u) > p.ðjo > po.jo (poyo)

PROSCRIPTIONS…GAPS…AND SOMETHING IN BETWEEN

263

The result of the gliding of the Latin atonic E and I results in a palatal onset for the final syllable. Velars in syllable-final position also underwent a process of lenition in which they first became a velar fricative and later a palatal glide. These codaposition glides frequently palatalized the onset of the following syllable, combining with it. A similar pattern appears with the sequence ULT in Latin. Syllable-final L was often velar in Vulgar Latin. This velar quality was exaggerated by the high back vowel /u/ and, therefore, underwent a process resembling that of other syllable-final velars. Example (2) demonstrates these processes. (2)

Deriving palatal final onsets from syllable-final velars and – ULT in Latin a. FACTU (fak.tu) > faj.to > fej.to > hej.to > e.to (hecho) b. LIGNA (lig.na) > lej.na > le.a (leña) c. MULTU (mul.tu) > moj.to > mu.to (mucho)

The last category of phonological change to produce the Modern Spanish palatals are the Latin geminates LL and NN. The Latin consonantal inventory underwent a systematic change in which voiceless geminate stops became singleton voiceless stops, voiceless stops became voiced stops, and voiced stops became voiced fricatives. However, if the geminates LL and NN had followed the same pattern of lenition, they would have become the singletons /l/ and /n/. Unlike the voiceless stop singletons in Latin that underwent voicing, the extant L and N were already voiced and typically suffered no other form of lenition. This process would have resulted in the neutralization of LL and NN with L and N. Apparently to avoid this situation, the geminates LL and NN underwent a process of palatalization instead, as seen in (3). (3)

Deriving palatal final onsets from the Latin geminates LL and NN a. CABALLU (ka.bal.lo) > ka.βal.lo > ka.ba.o (caballo) b. ANNU (an.nu) > a.o (año)

For the purpose of this study, what is important is that the formation of Spanish palatal final onsets resulted from the loss of a segment from the original Latin. The palatal segment derives either from the loss of the Latin penultimate vowel, or from the merger of the penultimate coda consonant and the original final onset. Therefore, the antepenultimate syllable of any modern Spanish word with a palatal in the onset position of the ultima would have been either the preantepenultimate syllable (in the case of palatals created through vowel loss), or the antepenultimate syllable of a word with a heavy penult (the case for palatals created through consonant loss). In Latin stress always fell on a heavy penult. In the case of a light penult, the antepenultimate syllable was obligatorily stressed

264

SHELTON, GERFEN & GUTIÉRREZ PALMA

(Mester 1994). Therefore, the antepenultimate syllable of modern Spanish words with a palatal final onset fell outside the Latin stress window, hence the absence of such forms in the modern language. The phonological system of modern Spanish theoretically should hold no synchronic prohibitions on proparoxytones with the syllable structure CV.CV.PV (where P represents a palatal consonant). In the current state of the language, all of these syllables are light and antepenultimate stress should be possible. However, due to the diachronic reasons we just identified, these forms do not exist. They thus represent a gap in the Spanish lexicon. Consequently, we can see a division between two types of absent forms in the Spanish lexicon. First, there are proscriptions. These are forms that are theoretically prohibited by the synchronic grammar. Proparoxytones with a closed penult are considered impossible due to the phonotactic constraint on antepenultimate stress when the penultimate syllable is heavy. Our earlier example, *túrista, represents a proscription in Spanish. Second, there are gaps. These are forms that do not exist in Spanish despite the lack of any prohibition by the grammar. In the case of proparoxytones, these are phonotactic sequences of the shape CV.CV.CV in which nothing in the prosodic structure of the forms constrains stress placement. The distinction between the two varieties of absent forms offers us a point of comparison which can be tested empirically. When discussing why certain forms are not present in the lexicon, either due to phonological proscription or accidental/historical gaps, the analysis of behavioral data may be able to add empirical support to the theoretical accounts. The theory makes a specific prediction. If the phonological grammar of Spanish is sensitive to syllable weight, we predict that only the putative proscribed pattern will evidence a difference in the behavioral data. Historical gaps, because they comprise a CV.CV.CV syllable structure, should evidence a pattern of behavior equivalent to fully-licit CV.CV.CV control forms. The theory predicts this patterning, because only heavy syllables should reduce the stress window. If native speakers are not sensitive to the theoretical weight distinction, then the proscribed forms will not evidence behavior distinct from licit controls. The aim of the present work is to understand better how real speakers process either word type. In so doing, we may better understand the phonological representation of proscriptions and gaps in native speakers of Spanish. 3. 3.1

The Experiment Experiment Background The goal of this study is to test the cognitive validity of the proscription/gap dichotomy discussed in §2. An experimental approach offers a methodology to test how native speakers of Spanish react when presented with varying phonotactic sequences. Arguably, when asked to read aloud a word that is prohibited by their phonological grammar, speakers of a language will commit

PROSCRIPTIONS…GAPS…AND SOMETHING IN BETWEEN

265

more errors and/or take more time to pronounce the word than when presented with phonotactic sequences that are phonologically licit, even if both types of words do not exist in their language. Therefore, an experimental technique, such as the word naming task, allows us to probe via online behavioral data for different representations of proscriptions and gaps in the minds of native speakers. 3.2

Participants and the Task The participants in this study were 31 functionally monolingual speakers of Spanish. All were undergraduate students at the University of Jaén, Spain. They were predominately from the surrounding area of Andalusia and were the age of traditional university students. The speeded word naming task is a well established experimental tool that is frequently employed in psycholinguistic research paradigms (Andrews 1997; Levelt 1989, Levelt et al. 1999; Dell 1986, 1988). In this task, participants are presented with words one at a time on a computer screen. They are instructed to read the word as quickly and accurately as possible. Data is collected in the form of reaction times and error rates. The stimuli may consist of real words in the speakers’ language or nonwords developed by the experimenter to manipulate phonological sequences. 3.3

Stimuli Design As the purpose of this experiment is to test for variability between different types of nonexistent forms in Spanish, the critical stimuli consisted of nonwords. The manipulation of the nonword stimuli allowed for the controlled comparison of proparoxytones with a closed penult, a palatal final onset, and licit controls. Therefore, seventy three-syllable nonwords were developed in three main categories. The first category consisted of theoretically proscribed forms: proparoxytones with a consonant in the coda position of the penultimate syllable, such as dóvalda. The second category comprised historical gaps in Spanish: proparoxytones with a palatal final onset. Because Spanish orthography represents some palatals as singleton graphemes (ñ and y) and others as digraphs (ch and ll), this category was further divided into two subcategories, containing words such as dóvaña and dóvacho. The final category included completely licit gaps, i.e. words that do not exist in Spanish and carry no historical restrictions. All words of the latter category were of the shape CV.CV.CV, such as dóvasa. The segmental composition of the stimuli was carefully controlled across all categories. That is, the segments of the syllables in one stimuli category also appear in the other categories to eliminate any effects due to the nature of producing the individual consonants and vowels. This allows for a controlled comparison across the stimuli sets, i.e. word type. Any effects that arise may be attributed solely to the presence of a closed penult or a palatal final onset, as they

266

SHELTON, GERFEN & GUTIÉRREZ PALMA

were the only segmental variables across the conditions (e.g., dóvalda ~ dóvaña ~ dóvasa). The stimuli were also presented both with and without a written accent mark over the first syllable. This allowed for a second controlled comparison, i.e. stress type. Stress placement in Spanish is marked in the orthography and is extremely systematic and regular. All proparoxytones in Spanish are marked with a diacritic over the antepenultimate syllable. If a word ends in a vowel, as all of our stimuli do, then the absence of a diacritic orthographically signals penultimate stress. Native speakers will thus assume paroxytone stress for any of our stimuli if no accent mark is present and proparoxytone stress for those stimuli with the accent mark. This comparison is crucial, because only antepenultimate stress is constrained by the phonotactic sequences manipulated in this experiment. Penultimate stress is in principle licit for all stimuli in the study. Thus, differential treatment of words across the two stress conditions by our participants would be evidence of the cognitive validity of the phonotactic constraints discussed in traditional accounts of Spanish stress theory. Importantly, the stimuli were presented in a counter-balanced fashion so that no single participant saw both dóvalda and dovalda. This was done to eliminate any possible effects the priming of the segments might cause. Table 1 summarizes the critical stimuli for this study and lists quantities and example items for each category. Critical Items Closed Penult Palatal Final Onset - Singleton Palatal Final Onset - Digraph CV.CV.CV Control

Orthographic Proparoxytone dóvalda (14) dóvaña (14) dóvacho (14) dóvasa (28)

Orthographic Paroxytone dovalda (14) dovaña (14) dovacho (14) dovasa (28)

Table 1: Summary of critical stimuli

The stimuli presented in Table 1 allow for the controlled comparison of phonotactic restrictions on the Spanish three-syllable window. The same word types are presented in both proparoxytone and paroxytone stress conditions. Also, within each stress condition each individual word type may also be examined. The boldface items in the table represent those stimuli that are theoretically proscribed (dóvalda) or historically absent (dóvaña, dóvacho) in Spanish. The remaining stimuli serve as controlled comparisons. Differences across the conditions provide a method of empirically assessing the cognitive reality of the descriptive accounts. In addition to the categories listed in Table 1, participants saw 182 filler items. These words consisted of 42 additional nonwords of distinct phonotactic patterns unrelated to the critical items (e.g., zámacan, tamiana) and 140 real words. The real word stimuli included proparoxytones, paroxytones and oxytones that were divided into two categories of high and low frequency.

PROSCRIPTIONS…GAPS…AND SOMETHING IN BETWEEN

267

3.4

Predictions If native speakers are sensitive to the difference between proscriptions and gaps across their lexicon, then we would predict statistical differences to surface in participant behavior between the categories discussed §3.3. Specifically, when presented with proscribed patterns in a naming task, participants should commit more production errors and/or take longer to articulate the theoretically prohibited forms than when presented with phonologically licit nonwords. Consequently, stimuli such as dóvalda should provoke higher error rates and evidence slower reaction times than items such as dóvasa or dóvaña. (Note: At the syllable level of generalization, the palatal stimuli are identical to the control stimuli, despite their absence from the lexicon for historical reasons. This is to say, both the controls and the palatal items exhibit a CV.CV.CV syllable structure. Thus, we expect the synchronic phonology of modern Spanish to treat both categories equally with regard to syllable weight. All syllables in the stimuli with palatal final onsets and the control items should pattern as light. When all the syllables in a word are light, both proparoxytone and paroxytone stress are possible.) 4. 4.1

Results Data Analyses Both latency and accuracy data were collected for this experiment. Latency data were recorded via voice key and represent the time between stimulus presentation and the onset of speech production in milliseconds. Digital recordings of the experimental sessions were also made for subsequent manual coding of accuracy data in the form of error rates. Errors comprised two categories: production errors and technical errors. Production errors consisted of instances in which participants misspoke the stimulus. Examples were stress shifts to another syllable, changes in the segmental makeup of the word, or disfluencies in which words were not finished or contained pauses. Technical errors were those in which the microphone or the voice key failed. These errors resulted in either extremely long reaction times, such as when the microphone did not trigger the voice key after articulation, or extremely fast reaction times, such as when the voice key triggered the next stimulus prematurely before the participant actually spoke. The data were cleaned as follows. First, errors due to the microphone and/or voice key were eliminated from all analyses. Production errors were included in error rate analyses, and excluded from reaction time analyses. All reaction time latencies were cleaned to exclude any responses faster than 200 ms and slower than 2000 ms. Subsequently, any latencies 2.5 standard deviations above or below each individual’s mean reaction time were also eliminated. Both reaction time and error data were submitted to separate repeated measures ANOVAs by participants (F1) to test for variance across the population and by items (F2) to test for variance across the stimuli set. Main effects and

268

SHELTON, GERFEN & GUTIÉRREZ PALMA

interactions were followed up by Tukey’s HSD post-hoc tests to identify any independent effects across the experimental categories and conditions. Results are discussed below. 4.2

Main Findings First, we ran an analysis of variance (ANOVA) to test for any statistical differences between the singleton (e.g., dóvaña) and digraph palatal (e.g., dóvacho) categories exemplified above. As both palatal types pattern together, the two categories were collapsed into one palatal category for future analyses ([F1(1, 30) = 0.27, MSE = 0.00, p>.60; F2(1, 26) = 0.11, MSE = 0.00, p>.75]). Second, the accuracy data were submitted to a 2 (stress type) x 3 (word type) ANOVA to test for statistical differences in the patterning of the closed penults, palatal final onsets, and controls when they were presented either as proparoxytones or paroxytones. The analysis revealed a significant main effect of word type [F1(2, 60) = 23.59, MSE = 0.54, p coronal, as in Spinu’s study, or coronal > labial, as expected based on typological considerations) holds under these circumstances. 3.

Experiment The perception of word-final plain and palatalized fricatives was compared for the two places of articulation under consideration, labial and [+anterior] coronal. Using sounds with the same manner of articulation (i.e. fricatives) across these two places allows for a more accurate assessment of the perception of palatalization in Romanian, as the potential manner of articulation confound has been eliminated. The reason stops were not investigated is because in Romanian a root-final [+anterior] coronal involves further changes (assibilation) in the

LAURA SPINU

282

presence of the plural morpheme, aside from acquiring a secondary palatal feature (7). (7)

a. po[t] a. plo[d]

‘I can’ ‘child’

b. po[tsj] b. plo[zj]

‘you can’ ‘children’

Furthermore, the target consonants [v] and [z] were voiced because [z]’s voiceless counterpart, [s], never occurs with secondary palatalization in Romanian, being realized as the post-alveolar [], as in (8). Related to this, it should be mentioned that in analyzing cross-linguistic distributional patterns, Kochetov (2002) also ignores the laryngeal distinction between the segments that he investigates, since the two classes do not differ with respect to palatalization. (8)

pa[s]

‘step’

pa[ j] ‘steps’

There were 24 words in each place of articulation group, half ending in a plain consonant, and the other half ending in a palatalized one, for a total of 48 targets. These were all real, dissyllabic words of Romanian with the stress on the final syllable.2 The full list of target items is given in the appendix. 3.1

Hypothesis The following null hypothesis was formulated: the perception of palatalized [+anterior] coronals will not differ significantly from that of palatalized labials. 3.2

Stimuli The target words were embedded inside the carrier sentence Am să aleg cuvântul X mâine ("I will choose the word X tomorrow"). Distractors were also created by inserting non-target words into the same carrier sentence. The words used as distractors were also real words of Romanian, and half of them showed inflectionality other than plural, so as to eliminate listeners’ potential expectation for the citation form of a word (e.g. singular) to appear. A male native speaker of Romanian recorded all sentences, following which two different sets were created so that a target word was never repeated in both the plain and palatalized condition inside the same set. Each set contained the same distractor sentences, twice as many as targets present, for a total number of 72 sentences. The order of the sentences inside each set was randomized. Any given subject was presented with only one of the sets, in order to avoid the possibility of priming effects.

2

There was one exception to this stress pattern, more specifically the word văduv ‘widower’, in which the stress falls on the first syllable.

ROMANIAN PALATALIZATION: THE ROLE OF POA IN PERCEPTION

283

3.3

Procedure The subjects were asked to listen to the sentences (only one repetition of each sentence) over headphones, and write down for each sentence the word they had heard before mâine "tomorrow". This was considered an appropriate means of recording the results since in Romanian word-final palatalization is represented orthographically by a sequence of consonant-i. It was thus expected that a subject would spell a perceived plural word (ending in a palatalized consonant) with an "i" at the end, e.g. firavi for [firavj] ‘weak-pl’. A pre-test session was also administered to allow the subjects to familiarize themselves with the format of the experiment. 3.4

Subjects 22 native speakers of Romanian (mean age 28) volunteered to take part in this experiment. Of these, 10 were male, and 12 female. Testing was done individually, in the presence of the experimenter. 3.5

Analysis A repeated-measures two-factor ANOVA was used to assess the effects of place of articulation and palatalization on the mean correct identification of the stimuli. Furthermore, the rate of correctly identified targets from each place of articulation (labial and coronal) and palatalization condition (plain and palatalized) was used in the computation of the d' (d prime) statistic, a measure of sensitivity that takes bias into account by using both the number of correct responses (how many times a signal was correctly identified; in our case, how many of the palatalized targets were perceived as palatalized, e.g. plural), and the number of false alarms (that is, how many times a signal was incorrectly identified; in our case, how many of the plain targets were identified as being palatalized). Sensitivity (d') was computed for each speaker, and a two-tailed paired-samples t-test compared the mean sensitivity values for the labial and coronal places of articulation. 3.6

Results The table below summarizes the results of the experiment in terms of mean correct identification.

labial, plain labial, palatalized coronal, plain coronal, palatalized

Mean .95 1.00 .93 .96

St.Dev. .09 .00 .09 .07

Table 1: Mean correct identification for each of the place-palatalization combinations (N=22). A value of 1 indicates 100% correct responses.

284

LAURA SPINU

The results of the repeated measures ANOVA reveal a significant main effect of palatalization: F(1, 21) = 4.449, p < .05. The main effect of place was not found to be significant: F(1, 21) = 4.048, p = .057. The interaction between place and palatalization was not significant either. Moving on to the t-test comparison of the mean sensitivity values, a significant difference was found between subjects’ sensitivity to palatalization in the two places of articulation. Specifically, their mean sensitivity was significantly higher for labials than for coronals, t(21)=2.42, pagent>object. The surface linear order of PP arguments is derived as the result of the interaction of no fixed order of external Merge among the PP arguments within nominal phrases, phonological constraints of Spanish, and phonetic resolution of chains.

WORD ORDER IN SPANISH DP

301

The question arises regarding the entity of the prosodic unit D-N. Note that the only element that can intervene between a D and an N is a pre-nominal adjective (A), which is predicted to form a prosodic phrase with the D and N under my analysis. An interesting confirmation of this prediction is provided by some wellknown properties of Spanish DPs, which can now receive a straightforward explanation. First, pre-nominal As cannot take a complement, but post-nominal As can. This is illustrated in the contrasts in (22). (22)

a. Conocimos al orgulloso padre (we)met the proud father b. *Conocimos al orgulloso de su hijo padre (we)met the proud of this son father c. Conocimos al padre orgulloso (we)met the father proud d. Conocimos al padre orgulloso de su hijo (we)met the father proud of his son

Furthermore, pre-nominal and post-nominal As also behave differently with respect to degree words: pre-nominal As do not easily accept degree words, while post-nominal As do. (23)

a. Leímos una novela bastante interesante (we)read a novel pretty interesting b. *Leímos una bastante interesante novela (we)read a pretty interesting novel c. Resolvimos un problema extremadamente complicado (we)solved a problem extremely complex d. *Resolvimos un extremadamente complicado problema (we)solved a extremely complex problem

Finally, let me point out that the shortening of As, which seems to be an entirely phonological effect, occurs always in pre-nominal position in Spanish. (24)

a. Vimos a aquel buen amigo (we)saw to that good friend b. Vimos a aquel amigo bueno (we)saw to that friend good

302

M. EMMA TICIO

Under the current analysis, all these properties of pre-nominal As are indeed phonological effects, to preserve the D-N sequence as a prosodic unit.5 4.4

Additional evidence for the analysis Let us consider again the structure my analysis obtains, repeated in (25), where we pronounce the lower copies (in bold). (25)

[DP [D’ D [AgrP Possessor [Agr’ Agr [nP Agent [n’ libros [ NP Object [N’ libros [NP Agent [N’ libros Possessor]]]]]]]]]]

Note that, for syntactic purposes, the upper copies of possessor and agent will be relevant. Crucially, the upper copies of the PP arguments correspond to the thematic hierarchy needed to explain the binding and extraction facts discussed in section 2. Assuming the existence of an escape hatch position that affects the possibilities of extraction of PP arguments (cf. Ticio 2005a for an extensive review of this proposal in the literature), then a possessor will always be the privileged element to be extracted out of the DP due to locality considerations. This is so given that it occupies the highest position in the structure after its internal movement. Agents will be the second best candidates for extraction out of Spanish DPs in the absence of a possessor, and, finally, if no possessor or agent is present, the object can be freely extracted. This is exactly the prediction of the current analysis. Interestingly, the analysis also finds empirical support in the different types of remnant elements allowed in some cases of cliticization and ellipsis in Spanish DPs. Let us start with the cliticization examples. Ticio (2003) describes some cliticization operations in Spanish DPs, which only affect some parts of the DP and leave behind some stranded elements. An example of this partial cliticization (PC) is given in (26). (26)

Compramos [varias traducciones [de ese escritor]]ag y (we)bought several translations of this writer and tú las compraste [[de aquel político]]ag you CL bought of that politician

In (26) the omitted element is a part of the DP. That is, the clitic las is substituting for varias traducciones. PC can have more than one stranded element, but only if they respect the usual restrictions on extraction out of Spanish DPs,

5

Note that the non occurrence of D does not allow the PP to appear prenominally. I believe this is due some other syntactic requirements, such as the fact that the bare N can only be licensed in very restricted contexts. This topic however is left open for further research here.

WORD ORDER IN SPANISH DP

303

that is, we cannot have more than one element stranded unless they are a possessor and an agent. The relevant examples are in (27). (27)

a. *Compramos [una casa [de Juan]poss [con ventanas azules]obj]] y (we)bought [ a house [of Juan]poss [with windows blue]obj ]]and tú la compraste [e [de Ana]poss [con piscina]obj]]] you CL bought [e [of Ana]poss [with swimming pool]]] b. *Compramos [varias traducciones [de Don Quijote]obj (we)bought [several translations [of Don Quijote]obj [de ese escritor]ag]] y tú las compraste [e [de La Celestina]obj [of this writer]ag ]] and you CL bought [e [of La Celestina]obj [de aquel político]ag ]] [of that politician]ag ]] c. Compramos [varias traducciones [de ese escritor]ag [de Ana]poss]] y (we)bought [several translations [of this writer ]ag [of Ana ]poss]] and tú las compraste [e [de Miguel]poss [de aquel político]ag ]] you CL bought [e [of Miguel]poss [of that politician]ag ]]

This way, (27a) is ungrammatical with possessor and object and (27b) shows that an object and an agent cannot be left stranded either. Finally, the examples in (27c) are grammatical because they do not contain objects. Assuming that the clitic stands for the NP, any argument surviving PC must be generated outside of the NP, as a last resort. (28b) illustrates the structure for the PC in (27c), repeated in (28a). (28)

a. tú las compraste de Miguel de aquel político You CL bought of Miguel of that politician b. [IP tú [VP las-compraste [DP [D’ [AgrP de Miguelposs [Agr’ Agr [nP de aquel políticoag [n’ [NP las ]]]]]]]]]

Therefore, only possessors and agents can co-occur, as predicted by the current analysis. Let us turn next to nominal ellipsis. Within the nominal domain, ellipsis has been treated as PF deletion. Lobeck (1995), Raposo (1999), and Ticio (2005b), among others, have proposed different analyses of nominal ellipsis based on the deletion at PF of parts of the DP. A typical example of nominal ellipsis is given in (29). (29)

Compramos el libro de físicaobj y vendimos (we)bought the book of physics and we-sold

el [e] de químicaobj the [e] of chemistry

304

M. EMMA TICIO

Note that nominal ellipsis does not have the same restrictions as PC regarding the type of remnant element allowed. As (30) shows, any argument can be left stranded after nominal ellipsis has applied: objects and possessors co-occur in (40a-b) and objects and agents in (30c-d). (30)

a. Compramos el libro de físicaobj de Maríaposs y tú compraste el [e] (we)bought the book of physics of María and you bought the [e] de químicaobj de Juanposs of chemistry of Juan b. Compramos el libro de físicaobj de Maríaposs y tú compraste el [e] (we)bought the book of physics of María and you bought the [e] de Juanposs de químicaobj of Juan of chemistry c. Vimos la invasión de Irakobj de los E.E.U.U.ag y tú viste la [e] (we)saw the invasion of Iraq of the US and you saw the [e] de Checheniaobj de Rusiaag of Chechnya of Russia d. Vimos la invasión de Irakobj de los E.E.U.U.ag y tú viste la [e] (we)saw the invasion of Iraq of the US and you saw the [e] de Rusiaag de Checheniaobj of Russia of Chechnya

This is expected under my analysis. As illustrated in (31b-c), any argumental PP can be generated in the ellipsis site, prior to the application of the ellipsis operation at PF (cf. Lasnik 1999, among others). (31)

a. tú compraste el [e] de Juanposs de químicaobj you bought the [e] of Juan of chemistry b. [IP tú [VP compraste [DP [D’ el [AgrP de Juanposs [Agr’ Agr [NP de Juanposs [N’ libro de químicaobj]]]]]]]]] c. [IP tú [VP compraste [DP [D’ el [AgrP de Juanposs [Agr’ Agr [NP de químicaobj [N’ libro de Juanposs]]]]]]]]]

Any argumental PP can be a remnant in nominal ellipsis contexts because the chain resolution system at PF allows us to pronounce the higher copies of arguments when the N is not phonetically present and the pronunciation of those copies does not violate a phonological constraint. 5.

Conclusion This paper has provided evidence that no additional mechanism is needed to explain the disparity between hierarchical and phonological orders in the Spanish nominal phrases. Additionally, the paper showed that the properties of

WORD ORDER IN SPANISH DP

305

Spanish DPs offer further empirical evidence for the syntax-phonology interaction via pronunciation of lower copies. The analysis proposed derives the final surface linear order of PP arguments within nominal phrases from the need to delete all but one copy of each PP argument and from the impossibility of pronouncing a PP argument between the D and the N. The current analysis preserves the desired hierarchical order by assuming that the highest copy of each PP argument is interpreted as relevant for conceptual interpretation (binding, scope, etc.).

References Bošković, Željko. 1994. “D-Structure, D-Criterion, and Movement into D-positions”. Linguistic Analysis 24.247-286. Bošković, Željko. 2002. “On Multiple Wh-fronting”. Linguistic Inquiry 33:3.351-383. Chomsky, Noam. 2004. “Beyond Explanatory Adequacy”. Structures and Beyond: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, vol. 3, ed. by Adriana Belletti, 104-131. New York: Oxford University Press. Chomsky, Noam. 2005. “On Phases”. Ms., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge. Coene, Martine & Yves D’hulst, eds. 2003. From NP to DP. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Den Dikken, Marcel. 1997. “The Syntax of Possession and the Verb ‘Have’”. Lingua 101.129-150. Kayne, Richard. 1994. The Antisymmetry of Syntax. (= Linguistic Inquiry Monographs, 25). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Landau, Idan. 2006. “Chain Resolution in Hebrew V(P)-Fronting”. Syntax 9:1.32-66. Lasnik, Howard. 1999. Minimalist Analysis. Oxford: Blackwell. Lobeck, Ann. 1995. Ellipsis: Functional Heads, Licensing and Identification. New York: Oxford University Press. Mallén, Enrique. 2001. “Issues in the Syntax of DP in Romance and Germanic”. Current Issues in Spanish Syntax and Semantics, ed. by Javier GutiérrezRexach & Luis Silva-Villar, 39-63. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter: Martín, Juan. 1995. On the Syntactic Structure of Spanish DPs. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Southern California. Nespor, Marina & Irene Vogel. 1986. Prosodic Phonology. Dordrecht: Foris. Nunes, Jairo. 2004. Linearization of Chains and Sideward Movement. (= Linguistic Inquiry Monographs, 25). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Ormazabal, Javier. 1991. “Asymmetries on Wh-movement and some Theoretical Consequences”. Ms., University of Connecticut, Storrs. Raposo, Eduardo. 1999. “Towards a Minimalist Account of Nominal Anaphora in Spanish and English”. Ms., University of California, Santa Barbara.

306

M. EMMA TICIO

Sánchez, Liliana. 1996. Syntactic Structure in Nominals: A Comparative Study of Spanish and Southern Quechua. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Southern California. Ticio, M. Emma. 2003. On the Structure of DPs. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Connecticut, Storrs. Ticio, M. Emma. 2005a. “Locality and Anti-Locality in Spanish DPs”. Syntax 8:3.229-286. Ticio, M. Emma. 2005b. “NP-Ellipsis in Spanish”. Selected Proceedings of the 7th Hispanic Linguistics Symposium, ed. by David Eddington, 128-141. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project. Torrego, Esther. 1987. “On Empty Categories in Nominals”. Ms., University of Massachusetts, Boston.

THE DOMAIN OF PALATALIZATION IN ROMANIAN

IRENE VOGEL & LAURA SPINU University of Delaware In Romanian, word final /-i/ is usually not pronounced as a vowel, but rather as a type of glide, or palatal property associated with the preceding segment. While this palatalization or “desyllabification” has been assumed to apply at the right edge of a word, we demonstrate that the word boundary does not provide the appropriate context. Instead, we propose that the phenomenon applies within a phonological constituent located in the prosodic hierarchy between the Phonological Word and the Phonological Phrase – the Composite Group, a revised form of the Clitic Group. Our analysis accounts for both enclitics and proclitics, which must be excluded from the PW of the associated root since the PW is the domain for stress assignment. The analysis in terms of the Composite Group accounts for the different domains of palatalization and stress assignment while avoiding the introduction of recursion (recursive PWs) into phonological structure.

1.

Introduction Romanian, like other Romance languages, has several morphologically determined palatalization phenomena. For example, there is an alternation in root-final consonants /k/ and /g/ when they are followed by a front vowel (i.e. /i/ or /e/) in words such as [duk] ‘I carry’, and [dute] ‘he carries’. Differently from other Romance languages, however, Romanian also has a palatalization phenomenon that leads to the creation of consonants with a secondary palatal articulation. This latter type of palatalization occurs when a word final /-i/ is not pronounced as a vowel, but rather as a type of glide or palatal property associated with the preceding segment (cf. among others Schane 1971, Ruhlen 1973, Steriade 1984, Chiţoran 2002). For example, the plural of /lup/ ‘wolf’ is underlyingly /lup+i/ but pronounced [lupj] on the surface. This “desyllabification” of “i” and the associated palatalization of the preceding consonant, henceforth referred to as PAL, is assumed to apply at the right edge of a word. There has, however, been little attention paid to the precise nature of the domain of application of PAL. In this paper, we first present a brief analysis of PAL in terms of the specific phonological changes that take place. We subsequently examine the various contexts in which PAL occurs and fails to occur, and we demonstrate that a right word edge does not provide the appropriate context for PAL. Instead, it will be proposed that PAL applies within the phonological constituent located in the prosodic hierarchy between the Phonological Word and the Phonological

IRENE VOGEL & LAURA SPINU

308

Phrase – the Composite (Clitic) Group. This will be shown to be analogous to the treatment of clitic phenomena in Italian, where it is argued that a distinct CG level is needed (e.g. Vogel 1999, 2008). 2.

The Phenomenon of Palatalization (PAL) Palatalization refers to a number of different phenomena. The phenomenon under investigation in this paper can be viewed as the presence of a secondary palatal feature superimposed on the primary place of articulation of a consonant. In this context, the term 'secondary palatalization' has also been used (Bhat 1978). This is generally considered characteristic of a set of consonants that are phonemic in Celtic and Slavic languages. In these languages, there are typically two sets of contrasting consonants, one plain and one palatalized (Bhat 1978; Padgett 2001; Kochetov 2002). This can be seen in (1), where minimal pairs of Russian are provided. (1)

a. [p]at b. glu[p]

‘stalemate’ ‘stupid’

vs. vs.

[pj]at ‘heel-gen.pl.’ glu[pj] ‘depth’

With respect to Romance languages, the term ‘palatalization’, is most frequently used to refer to different phenomena from the one described above. Typically, it refers to the change in primary place of articulation of a consonant to (alveo-) palatal in the context of a following high front vowel or palatal glide, as shown in the Introduction. This process is sometimes called coronalization (Hume 1994). Such cases are illustrated in (2a) with Italian and (2b) with Romanian. (2)

a. fin[g]-o b. zi[k]

‘(I) pretend’ ‘(I) say’

fin[d]-i zi[t]-eam

‘(you) pretend’ ‘(I) said’

While this typical Romance phenomenon can be found in Romanian, the focus here is on the first type of palatalization mentioned, that involving a secondary articulation on a given consonant. As indicated, this is typical of Slavic (and other types of) languages, and while it is found in Romanian, it is not found elsewhere in the Romance language family. It should be noted that the case of Romanian (secondary) palatalization is not identical to that in a language such as Russian, since in Romanian the occurrence of palatalized consonants is restricted to the word-final position. Furthermore, while it is responsible for distinguishing words, it is generally associated with the presence of an inflectional suffix consisting of /-i/. The /-i/ itself is not pronounced, but is manifested as the palatalization of the previous consonant. This occurs in two cases: when the suffix –i appears with nouns and adjectives, indicating a plural form (generally in the masculine, but to a lesser

THE DOMAIN OF PALATALIZATION IN ROMANIAN

309

extent also in the feminine), and with verbs, indicating the 2nd person singular present indicative form, as illustrated in (3b) and (4b), respectively. (3)

a. [pom]

‘tree’

b. [pomj]

‘trees’

(4)

a. [sar]

‘(I) jump’

b. [sarj]

‘(you) jump’

Both Russian and Romanian exhibit a surface contrast between plain and palatalized consonants corresponding to a difference in meaning, reflected in the existence of numerous minimal pairs. In Slavic, on the one hand, the difference must be considered underlying, since in many cases it cannot be predicted either morphologically or phonologically. In Romanian, on the other hand, since palatalization occurs in specific morphological and phonological contexts, it can be considered predictable, even though on the surface we observe only the contrast between the plain and palatalized forms of the consonants in question. Very commonly PAL is in fact found at the end of a word. While this most frequently coincides with the morphological contexts described above, and seen in (3) – (4), there are a number of monomorphemic items that exhibit PAL in the absence of the usual morphemes. In these cases, the lexical item simply ends in /i/, as shown in (5). (5)

a. [ungj]

‘angle’ (pl. [ungjurj])

b. [baremj]

‘at least’ (adv.)

While the well-known cases of PAL involve associating a palatal property with a preceding consonant, it is also possible to account for the behavior of a final –i preceded by a vowel in an analogous way. That is, the “high” feature of the –i becomes associated with the preceding vowel resulting in the creation of a diphthong if the vowel in question is not another /i/, as shown in (6). (6)

/bo+i/ [boj]

‘oxen’ (sg. [bow] /bo+u/)

If, however, the preceding vowel is /i/, it seems that the final –i morpheme merges its features with the preceding /i/ so that the outcome appears to be a full vowel [i]. Thus, in the case of a single /i/ before the added –i morpheme, the result is [i], however, in the case of a double /ii/ before the added –i morpheme, the merger of the suffix with the preceding vowel results in a long [ii]. Thus, a three-way distinction arises with these cases and that of a consonant preceding the –i morpheme, as shown in (7), where the superscript “j” indicates the position of the final –i morpheme. (7)

a. puri b. purii c. puriii

‘pure, m.pl.’ ‘the pure, m.pl.’ ‘the old ones’

[purj] [purij] [puriij]

(no [i]) (short [i]) (long [i:])

IRENE VOGEL & LAURA SPINU

310

Despite the fact that PAL applies in the vast majority of items ending in /i/, it should be noted that there are certain cases in which it fails to apply and instead the full [i] vowel appears. These cases, however, are quite limited, and are morphologically and phonologically predictable. Specifically, PAL does not apply when the final /i/ in question bears lexical stress. This can be seen in (8a-b), where the infinitive marker –i is always stressed, and in (8c-d), where the only vowel of a monosyllabic item is /i/. PAL is also avoided in loanwords and truncations of proper names where instead we observe a full [i] vowel, as in (9a-b) and (9c-d), respectively. (8)

a. priv[í] b. ven[í] c. z[í] d. ş[í]

‘(to) look’ ‘(to) come’ ‘day’ ‘and’ (conj.)

(9)

a. min[i] b. Son[i] c. Em[i] d. Cam[i]

‘short’ Sony (electronics) < Emanuela < Camelia

In addition, PAL fails to apply if the resulting sequence is not a possible coda in Romanian (Steriade 1984), as in (10). (10)

a. albaştr[i] b. cuscr[i]

*[albatrj] *[kuskrj]

‘blue, m.pl’ ‘in-laws’

All of these cases involve single words, and the final /i/ of these words. As we will show in the following sections, however, there are more complex structures that show that the application of PAL cannot be accounted for on the basis of individual words. 3. 3.1

The Role of Clitics Clitics and PAL While a great deal of recent work on Romance clitics addresses the morpho-syntactic relationships of clitics to their hosts (e.g. Monachesi 2000, Legendre 2000, for Romanian), it is also well known that clitics often play a role in the application of phonological phenomena (e.g. among others Peperkamp 1996, 1997, Repetti to appear, Loporcaro 2000 for Italian). Romanian is no exception in this regard. In the examples seen above, PAL always applied at the right edge of a word, other than in the set of exceptional items mentioned in (8) – (10). It can be seen, however, that PAL systematically fails to apply when a word is followed by

THE DOMAIN OF PALATALIZATION IN ROMANIAN

311

one or more clitics, but not other lexical items. Thus, while PAL applies at the end of the verb in (11a), it does not apply to the same verb in (11b-d). Instead, it applies to the /i/ of a final clitic if one is present, as in (11b). The same clitic exhibits a full [i] if it is followed by another clitic, as in (11c-d). The relevant sounds are bolded. (11)

a. daţi b. daţi-mi c. daţi-mi-l d. daţi-mi-le

‘give-2pl.imp.’ ‘give me’ ‘give me it’ ‘give me them’

[datsj] [datsimj] [datsimil] [datsimile]

When another lexical item follows, as in (12), the final /i/ of the verb again undergoes PAL, as does the final vowel of the following word. (12)

daţi Mariei

‘give Mary’

[datsjmariej]

The involvement of clitics in determining the application of PAL suggests the likelihood that this is not a lexical phenomenon, but rather a post-lexical one. This, in turn, raises the question of the domain of PAL. 3.2

Prosodic Structure and Clitics A typical property of phonological phenomena involving clitics is that the morpho-syntactic structure of the clitics and their phonological behavior do not necessarily coincide. An example of such a lack of isomorphism is observed in the familiar case of the English auxiliary, shown in (13). While ‘has’ is syntactically part of the VP, it is phonologically associated with the preceding NP, as seen by the fact that its surface form is determined by the final segment of the NP. (13)

a. b.

Bob[z] arrived (< has arrived) The man who invited Pat[s] arrived (< has arrived)

As we will show below, the case of the Romanian clitics appears to exhibit a similar possibility, such that the clitics that participate in PAL are not always associated with their closest morpho-syntactic elements. First, let us consider a widely accepted aspect of prosodic phonology, the fact that phonological phenomena frequently operate in domains that do not necessarily coincide with the related morphological and syntactic constituents (cf. among others Selkirk 1981, 1986; Nespor & Vogel 1986). In a number of analyses of phonological phenomena that involve clitics, it has been proposed that the Phonological Word (PW) constituent must be enlarged to include clitics along with a root and possible affixes attached to the root (e.g. Peperkamp 1996, 1997;

IRENE VOGEL & LAURA SPINU

312

Hall 1999; Selkirk 1996; Booij 1999). In these accounts, clitics are either included directly into the PW as in (14a), or they are adjoined to the core PW yielding a recursively structured PW or set of PWs, as shown schematically in (14b-c). (14)

a. [… root affixes CL CL]PW b. [ [… root affixes]PW CL CL]PW c. [ [ [… root affixes]PW CL]PW CL]PW

Each of these structures, however, has serious drawbacks. Since prosodic constituents delimit domains that exhibit particular properties, it is predicted that all constituents of a given type should behave in the same way with respect to these properties. That is, in syntax, NPs have similar properties regardless of their internal structure (e.g. (15a)) and by the same token it is expected that phonological constituents such as PWs should have similar properties regardless of their internal structure (e.g. 15b). (15)

a. Syntax:

[John]NP [The man with purple shoes]NP b. Phonology: [X]PW [XXXX]PW

With regard to the structures in (14), while the first one only involves a single PW domain, the others involve more than one PW domain. As argued in Vogel (2008) (cf. also Kabak & Vogel 2001), the repeated use of the label “PW” in such cases does not eliminate the need for a constituent between the PW and the Phonological Phrase (PPh). Instead, it obscures the fact that such an additional constituent is needed, since the additional structure can be shown to function as the domain for phonological phenomena in a variety of languages. For example, in Italian, the PW cannot include clitics (e.g. Nespor & Vogel 1986, Vogel 1994, 1999, 2008). Based on their phonological and morphological properties, PWs are stressed on one of the final three syllables, or in the “three syllable window”, as seen in (16).1,2 The accents show the position of main stress, and are not part of the orthography except in (16a).

1

In fact, the “three syllable window” is not only observed in standard Italian, but also in numerous dialects (cf. among others Repetti to appear). 2 There is a small set of verbs with stress on the pre-antepenultimate syllable in the third person plural present indicative and subjunctive forms (e.g. pettinano ‘(they) comb’, pettinino ‘(that they) comb’). These items are rare, however, and do not invalidate the generalization expressed by the “three syllable window”.

THE DOMAIN OF PALATALIZATION IN ROMANIAN

(16)

313

Italian Stress: “three syllable window” a. caffé ‘coffee’ b. gátto ‘cat’ c. péttina ‘(he) combs’

When clitics are present, however, it is not uncommon to find stress further left than the last three syllables, as shown in (17). (17)

Italian Stress with clitics a. péttina lo ‘comb him’ b. péttina me lo ‘comb him for me’

Furthermore, the rule of Intervocalic s-Voicing (i.e. s Æ [z] / V __ V) observed in northern varieties of Italian applies within a PW, but does not apply to structures involving clitics, as shown in (18a-b) and (18c-d), respectively. (18)

Northern Italian Intervocalic s-Voicing a. i[z]ola ‘island’ b. fam-o[z]-o ‘fam-ous (m.sg.)’ c. lavando [s]e lo ‘washing it for himself’ d. lo [s]i [s]ala ‘(he) salts it for himself’

Thus, we see that the PW is the domain for both Word Stress (i.e. the three syllable window) and Intervocalic s-Voicing, and this domain cannot include clitics. Instead, clitics must be included in some other domain. In fact, analyses that make reference to innermost as opposed to outermost PW to account for the different phonological patterns actually support this position. That is, they, too, recognize different behaviors associated with different constructions, and thus imply the existence of two distinct domains, not a single (PW) domain. It has previously been proposed that this domain is the Clitic Group, and more recently it has been referred to as the Composite Group (cf. Vogel 2008). Examples of the relevant structures are shown in (19). (19)

Domain with Clitics = Clitic / Composite Group a. [péttina]PW b. [ [péttina]PW me lo]CG c. [fam-o[z]-o]PW d. [ [lavando]PW [s]e lo]CG

As will be seen in the next section, analogous arguments can be made with respect to the domain of application of PAL in Romanian.

314

IRENE VOGEL & LAURA SPINU

4. 4.1

The Domain of Palatalization (PAL) in Romanian The Phonological Word in Romanian In order to determine the domain for PAL, we must first determine what constitutes a PW in Romanian. As in Italian, word stress in Romanian appears on one of the last three syllables of a word, as illustrated in (20) (cf. Steriade 1984). Its location is determined by a combination of its phonological and morphological properties. (20)

Romanian Stress: “three syllable window” a. importánt ‘important’ b. ascúnde ‘hide!’ c. túlbure ‘turbid’

While adding suffixes to a root does not lead to violations of the “three syllable window” in Romanian, as in (21a), adding clitics frequently results in stress falling further left than the antepenultimate syllable, as in (21b-c). (21)

Romanian Stress with suffixes and clitics a. purcelúşilor ‘of/to the piglets’ (purcel+us+i+lor) b. ascúndeţi-le ‘hide them’ c. ascúndeţi-mi-le3 ‘hide them for me’

Thus, the PW domain in Romanian, like that in Italian, appears to include suffixes, but not clitics. It should be noted that constructing recursive PWs such as those seen above in (14b-c) is not a satisfactory solution, since it would lead to incorrect predictions, as in Italian. This can be seen in relation to the recursive PW structure for (21c) given in (22), following the representation in (14c). (22)

Recursive PW in Romanian [ [ascúndeţi]PW mi le]PW

‘hide them for me’

Since the “three syllable window” for stress assignment does not apply to both PWs, we would need to distinguish two constituent types, an innermost PW that is the domain of stress assignment and an outermost PW that does not constitute the same stress domain. As mentioned above in relation to Italian, this would be equivalent to recognizing two distinct prosodic domains, and the repeated use of the PW in identifying these domains only obscures the distinction. 3

There is also an alternate pronunciation for this item in which primary stress falls on the preantepenultimate syllable. This is most likely due to the fact that two stress patterns may also be observed in the verb in isolation, specifically, ascúndeţi and ascundéţi, although the latter is less common. In either case, adding clitics still results in a violation of the “three syllable window”.

THE DOMAIN OF PALATALIZATION IN ROMANIAN

315

Instead, as in Italian, we propose that the domain for stress assignment in Romanian is the PW. Thus, instead of (22), we would have the structure in (23). (23)

CG in Romanian [ [ascúndeţi]PW mi le]CG

‘hide them for me’

In this way, it is possible to identify the domain for stress simply as the PW, and thus automatically exclude clitics from consideration. 4.2

The Clitic (Composite) Group as the Domain for PAL (enclitics) It is clear from the fact that clitics play a role in the application of PAL that the domain of this phenomenon is not the same as that for stress assignment, which does not involve clitics. Furthermore, if the PW is taken to be the domain for PAL (i.e. C Æ [+pal] / … __]PW), this would make the incorrect prediction that PAL would not apply in the strings with clitics. If a recursive PW is used, we would encounter an analogous problem to that seen in relation to stress assignment, the need to distinguish between the innermost and the outermost PW. That is, we would need to specify that the domain for PAL is the outermost PW, in comparison with stress assignment which applies in the innermost PW. If we use the CG as the domain of application of PAL, we can formulate this rule as in (24). Thus, the structure seen in (23) for stress now also accounts for the (lack of) application of PAL as shown in (25), since the word final /i/ is not final in the CG. (24)

Clitic (Composite) Group as domain of PAL C Æ [+pal] / … __]CG

(25)

PAL in the CG [ [ascúndeţi]PW mi le]CG

‘hide them for me’

Indeed, we can see that the application and lack of application of PAL in all of the examples given above in (11) – (12) are correctly predicted on the basis of CG structure, as shown with the same items repeated in (26). (26)

a. daţi b. daţi-mi c. daţi-mi-l d. daţi-mi-le e. daţi Mariei

‘give’ ‘give me’ ‘give me it’ ‘give me them’ ‘give Mary’

[ [datsj]PW]CG [ [datsi]PW mj]CG [ [datsi]PW mi l]CG [ [datsi]PW mi le]CG [ [datsj]PW]CG[ [mariej]PW]CG

While stress applies to the PW domain, we only find PAL if the /i/ in question is final in the CG.

316

IRENE VOGEL & LAURA SPINU

4.3

The Clitic (Composite) Group as the Domain for PAL (proclitics) Given that Romanian makes use of proclitics as well as enclitics, the question arises as to whether they behave similarly with respect to PAL. Indeed, this would be the prediction of the proposal we are advancing. Assuming that proclitics are similar to enclitics in falling outside the PW of the associated root, as in other Romance languages, we propose that they are included within the domain of the CG. Since it is now claimed PAL applies only at the right edge of the CG, we predict that a final /i/ will be pronounced as the full [i] vowel elsewhere throughout the CG, including in structures involving proclitics. Indeed, this is the correct prediction as can be seen in (27), where we observe full vowels in the proclitics included in the CG. (27)

a. [ţi l [aduce]PW ]CG b. [mi ţi l [aduce]PW ]CG

= [tsiladute] ‘(he) brings it for you’ = [mitsiladute] ‘(he) brings it to you for me’

Since the relevant instances of /i/ are not at the right edge of the CG, they are not subject to PAL. Beyond such basic cases of pronominal proclitics, there are additional structures that further support the analysis advanced here. For example, if we use a full pronominal form instead of a clitic, as in (28a), PAL applies at the end of the pronoun, which must be considered its own PW and CG. When a clitic (optionally) adjoins with a preceding word as in (28b) and is in CG final position, it also exhibits PAL as in (28b-c). By contrast, when a clitic is followed by another one, and is thus not final in a CG, PAL does not apply, as in (28d). (28)

a. [ [îmi]PW ]CG [ [duce]PW ]CG b. [ [nu mi]PW ]CG [ [duce]PW ]CG c. [ [că mi]PW ]CG [ [duce]PW ]CG d. [ [mi le va]PW ]CG [ [duce]PW ]CG

= [mj dute] ‘(he) carries for me’ = [numj dute] ‘(he) does not carry for me’ = [kəmj dute] ‘that (he) carries for me’ = [mileva dute] ‘(he) will carry them for me’

Interestingly, PAL also provides evidence that certain clitics adjoin phonologically with a host that is not the one expected on the basis of their syntactic structure. This is analogous to the case of the English auxiliary seen above in (13). For example, while the clitics mi and l in the following examples

THE DOMAIN OF PALATALIZATION IN ROMANIAN

317

would be syntactically associated with the following verb, phonologically they appear to cliticize to the preceding NP.4, 5 (29)

= [ioanamj trimite] ‘Ioana sends to me’ = [ioanamil trimite] b. [ [Ioana]PW mi l]CG [trimite]PW ‘Ioana sends it to me’ = [kalumj pare trist] c. [ [calu]PW mi]CG [pare]PW [trist]PW ‘The horse looks sad to me’ d. [ [bunu]PW mi]CG [cal]PW [pare]PW [trist]PW = [bunumj kal pare trist] ‘My good horse looks sad’

a. [ [Ioana]PW mi]CG [trimite]PW

In sum, it can be seen that the string identified as the CG in Romanian, which may include proclitics or enclitics, appropriately delimits the domain of application of the phenomenon of PAL. By contrast, the morpho-syntactic word and the PW both fail in this respect.6 5.

Conclusions An examination of Palatalization in Romanian has shown first of all that this phenomenon cannot be considered simply as applying at the word level. The fact that it is sensitive to the presence or absence of clitics was taken as an indication that the domain of PAL is most appropriately considered to be a postlexical prosodic constituent. It was shown that the Phonological Word could not serve as this domain, since the PW is the domain for stress assignment, which is not sensitive to the presence of clitics. In this regard, it was shown that Romanian is similar to (standard) Italian. It was demonstrated further that the use of a recursive PW structure to account for the different domains of PAL and stress assignment did not constitute a desirable solution. Such an analysis involves the identification of two distinct domains for stress assignment and PAL, the former applying to the “innermost PW” and the latter to the “outermost PW”. The terminology obscures the distinction, however, and one is led to believe that a single prosodic domain is involved, since both are referred to as “Phonological Words”. Rather than obscuring the fact that two distinct domains are required, it has been proposed in this paper that the domain of PAL is more appropriately viewed as the Clitic 4

Only the relevant CGs are indicated, although the rest of each sentence will be arranged into CGs as well. 5 We are grateful to LSRL participants Eulalia Bonet and Joan Mascaró for pointing out that certain Catalan clitics also show such a difference between their morpho-syntactic and their phonological associations. 6 There are other structures involving pronominal clitics as well as other items that might be considered clitics. It is beyond the scope of the present paper to consider all such cases, although ultimately the analysis of PAL must be shown to work for these as well.

318

IRENE VOGEL & LAURA SPINU

(Composite) Group, the constituent between the PW and the Phonological Phrase. 7 Stress Assignment, by contrast, applies in the PW domain. In this respect, Romanian was seen to be similar to Italian, where stress is assigned at the PW level and several other rules apply specifically in relation to the CG.

References Bhat, D.N.S. 1978. “A General Study of Palatalization”. Universals of Human Language, vol. 2, ed. by J.H. Greenberg, 47-92. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Booij, Geert. 1999. “The Role of the Prosodic Word in Phonotactic Generalizations”. Studies on the Phonological Word, ed. by T.A. Hall & U. Kleinhenz, 47-72. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Chiţoran, Ioana. 2002. The Phonology of Romanian: A Constraint-based Approach. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Hall, T. Alan. 1999. “The Phonological Word: A Review”. Studies on the Phonological Word, ed. by T.A. Hall & U. Kleinhenz, 1-22. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Hume, Elizabeth V. 1994. Front Vowels, Coronal Consonants, and their Interaction in Nonlinear Phonology. New York: Garland. Kabak, Baris & Irene Vogel. 2001. “Stress in Turkish”. Phonology 18.315-360. Kochetov, Alexei. 2002. Production, Perception, and Emergent Phonotactic Patterns: A Case of Contrastive Palatalization. New York: Routledge. Legendre, Géraldine. 2000. “Positioning Romanian Verbal Clitics at PF: An Optimality-Theoretic Analysis”. Clitics from Different Perspectives, ed. by B. Gerlach & J. Grijzenhout, 219-254. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Loporcaro, Michele. 2000. “Stress Stability under Cliticization and the Prosodic Status of Romance Clitics”. Phonological Theory and the Dialects of Italy, ed. by L. Repetti, 137-168. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Monachesi, Paola. 2000. “Clitic Placement in the Romanian Verbal Complex”. Clitics in Phonology, Morphology, and Syntax. (= Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 36), ed. by B. Gerlach & J. Grijzenhout, 255293. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Nespor, Marina & Irene Vogel. 1986. Prosodic Phonology. Dordrecht: Foris. Padgett, Jaye. 2001. “Contrast Dispersion and Russian Palatalization”. The Role of Speech Perception in Phonology, ed. by E. Hume & K. Johnson, 187-218. New York: Academic Press. 7

Ultimately it will need to be shown that the clitics are grouped into the CG and not directly into the PPh in Romanian, but this is beyond the scope of the present paper. The relevance of the CG has been assumed here on the basis of its motivation in other languages (cf. among others Vogel 1999, Kabak & Vogel 2001).

THE DOMAIN OF PALATALIZATION IN ROMANIAN

319

Peperkamp, Sharon. 1996. “On the Prosodic Representation of Clitics”. Interfaces in Phonology, ed. by U. Kleinhenz, 102-127. Berlin: Akademie Verlag. Peperkamp, Sharon. 1997. Prosodic Words. The Hague: Holland Academic Graphics. Repetti, Lori. To appear. The Prosodic Structures of Northern Italian Dialects. Amsterdam & Boston: Kluwer. Ruhlen, Frank Merritt. 1973. Rumanian Phonology. Ph.D. dissertation, Stanford University. Schane, Sanford A. 1971. “The Phoneme Revisited”. Language 47.503-521. Selkirk, Elizabeth. 1981 [1978]. “On Prosodic Structure and its Relation to Syntactic Structure”. Nordic Prosody II, ed. by T. Fretheim, 111-140. Trondheim: TAPIR. Selkirk, Elizabeth. 1986. “On Derived Domains in Sentence Phonology”. Phonology Yearbook 3.371- 405. Selkirk, Elizabeth. 1996. “The Prosodic Structure of Function Words”. Signal to Syntax: Bootstrapping from Syntax to Grammar in Early Acquisition, ed. by J. Morgan & K. Demuth, 187-213. Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum. Steriade, Donca. 1984. “Glides and Vowels in Romanian”. Proceedings of the Tenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 10.47-64. Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Linguistics Society. Vogel, Irene. 1994. “Phonological Interfaces in Italian”. Issues and Theory in Romance Linguistics: Selected Papers from the Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages XXIII, ed. by M. Mazzola, 109-125. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press. Vogel, Irene. 1999. “Subminimal Constituents in Prosodic Phonology”. Issues in Phonological Structure, ed. by S.J. Hannahs & M. Davenport, 249-267. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Vogel, Irene. 2008. “The Morphology-Phonology Interface: Isolating to Polysynthetic Languages”. Selected Papers from the 12th International Morphology Meeting. Special Issue of Acta Linguistica Hungarica, ed. by F. Kiefer & P. Siptar, vol. 54:2. Budapest, Hungary.

RHOTIC METATHESIS ASYMMETRIES IN ROMANCE FORMALIZING THE EFFECTS OF ARTICULATION * AND PERCEPTION ON SOUND CHANGE

ERIC RUSSELL WEBB & TRAVIS G. BRADLEY University of California, Davis

Blevins & Garrett (1998, 2004) argue that rhotic metathesis occurs when listeners reinterpret an elongated [low F3] feature in a non-historical position. However, not all cases are amenable to this account, as no single phonetic property unifies the class of rhotics. We examine two cases involving intrasyllabic rhotic metathesis: rightward movement of // in French and leftward movement of // in Spanish. In Optimality Theory (Prince & Smolensky 1993), we formalize diachronic metathesis in terms of separate production and perception grammars, which account for the source of variance and the selection of innovative underlying forms, respectively. In production, gestural alignment constraints favor complete overlap of adjacent rhotic and vowel gestures, whose linear ordering is thereby rendered indeterminate. The output of the production grammar serves as input to the perception grammar, which maps surface forms to underlying forms in accordance with attested patterns of the language.

1.

Introduction Metathesis, or the linear reordering of phonological segments, is noted throughout Romance and other languages and frequently involves rhotics or “rlike” phonemes. In a cross-linguistic survey, Blevins & Garrett (2004; see also 1998) identify four main types of metathesis. Perceptual metathesis results from the elongation of phonetic cues associated with a segment, which is subsequently reanalyzed in an innovative position. Compensatory metathesis involves stressinduced temporal shifts in VCV sequences. Coarticulatory metathesis affects adjacent stops that differ in place of articulation. Auditory metathesis results from the decoupling of sibilant noise from the speech stream. Instances of rhotic metathesis are subsumed under the category of perceptual metathesis. Crucial to their analysis is the feature rhoticity, which they define in terms of low or lowered third formant (F3) resonance (2004:123). Rhotic metathesis is triggered by the

*

For helpful comments and discussion, we would like to thank Laura Colantoni, Carlos-Eduardo Piñeros, and Jeffrey Steele, and audience members at the 37th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages, held March 15-18, 2007, by the University of Pittsburgh. This paper has also benefited from the comments of three anonymous reviewers. We are responsible for any shortcomings.

322

ERIC RUSSELL WEBB & TRAVIS G. BRADLEY

elongation of low F3 across a rhotic-vowel or vowel-rhotic domain, whereby listeners reinterpret the spread-out feature in a non-historical position. A review of the phonetic characteristics of rhotics poses several problems for a perceptual account based on the feature rhoticity. Foremost among these is the absence of a single phonetic property which plausibly defines the phonological class of rhotics (for discussion of rhoticity and possible rhotic classhood, see Lindau 1985, Ladefoged & Maddieson 1996:244-5, Wiese 2001, Russell Webb 2002). Most importantly, not all rhotics involve gestures resulting in a low or lowered F3. For example, the apical flap or tap [] involves an extra-short duration of constriction and minimal formant structure. Both the velar/uvular fricative [] and the uvular trill [] involve a relatively high F3 (3000 Hz or greater). Indeed, only coronal approximant rhotics, such as the bunched [] of American English, can be plausibly subsumed under Blevins & Garrett’s definition of rhoticity. It may be preferable to define the class of rhotics in more abstract terms, based on cross-linguistic similarities in phonotactic distributions and phonological alternations (see, e.g., Russell Webb 2002, Walsh Dickey 1997, Wiese 2001), but such a definition is incompatible with Blevins & Garrett’s explanation, as the latter depends upon an acoustic property with long duration, and not a paradigmatic or syntagmatic relation. In sum, few cases of rhotic metathesis are amenable to a perceptual account involving low F3. In this paper, we examine two cases of intrasyllabic rhotic metathesis in Romance: rightward movement of // in French and leftward movement of // in Spanish (§2). We argue that an adequate analysis should take into account both productive (i.e., articulatory) and receptive (i.e., perceptual) knowledge and demonstrate the interaction of these in sequenced grammars (§3). From this analysis, it emerges that knowledge relevant to consonant-vowel overlap and vowel intrusion underlies productive innovation (§4), and that perceptual habituation and parsing of innovative auditory input lead to the eventual selection of novel phonological forms (§5). Proposed diachronic scenarios accounting for rhotic metathesis involve both articulation and perception, underscoring the conspiracy between different phonological knowledge types in sound change. 2.

Data A comparison of data from non-standard French and Spanish dialects reveals an asymmetry in the directionality of historical rhotic-vowel metathesis within the syllable. 1 In non-standard French varieties, many words now have 1

Our data sources include the following: for Normand French, Desgrippes (1982:55), Grammont (1965:239-248, 1905 [=1950]); for varieties spoken in Saint Pol sur Ternoise/Pas de Calais and St. Pierre-Port/Guernsey, Atlas Linguistique de France [Giliéron & Edmont 1968] n. 284, 399; for popular Spanish dialects, Lipski (1990), which is based on “[his] own fieldwork in many Spanishspeaking regions as well as a cross section of published descriptions” (90, Fn. 2) cited therein. The examples presented here are representative of the most frequently attested patterns.

RHOTIC METATHESIS ASYMMETRIES IN ROMANCE

323

unstressed /CV/ where their Standard correspondents have /CV/, as seen in (1). Leftward metathesis, /CV/ > /CV/, is attested but atypical. (1) premier breton frémir entreprise vendredi crever grelot

Standard form pœmje bœto femi atœpiz vadœdi kœve œlo

Dialectal form pmje ‘first’ bto ‘Breton’ fmi ‘shake’ etpe ‘business’ vadœdi ‘Friday’ kœve ‘die, waste away’ œlo ‘bell’

Rightward metathesis is also attested in word-initial position, as shown by the examples in (2). (2) refroidir regorger relier remanier renifler repas relevée (3)

Standard form abarcar conturbiar deperder deperdición intervalo pedernal dormir fortuna garbanzo perdonar perfecto permiso perspicaz porfiar

Standard form œfwadi œe œlje œmanje œnifle œpa œløve Dialectal form abracar controbiar depreder depredición intrevalo pedrenal drumir frutuna grabanzo predonar prefecto premiso prespicaz profiar

Dialectal form afwadi ‘cool down’ ae ‘spill out’ aloje ‘bind’ amane ‘revise’ anifle ‘sniff’ apas ‘meal’ aleve ‘spicy, refined’ ‘to cover, take on’ ‘to disturb, bother’ ‘to lose’ ‘loss’ ‘interval’ ‘flint’ ‘to sleep’ ‘fortune’ ‘chickpea’ ‘to pardon’ ‘perfect’ ‘permission’ ‘perceptive, sharp’ ‘to insist’

In popular Spanish, many inherited words that contained unstressed /CV/ demisyllables now have corresponding /CV/, as seen in (3), but rightward

324

ERIC RUSSELL WEBB & TRAVIS G. BRADLEY

metathesis, /CV/ > /CV/, is infrequent and considered exceptional (Lipski 1990:92).2 In sum, rhotic metathesis operates in a rightward direction in the French data, transposing // with a following vowel in both C_C and #_C contexts. The Spanish data show the opposite directionality, whereby // is transposed with a preceding vowel in C_C contexts. 3.

Theoretical orientation Contemporary work on sound change has placed relatively greater emphasis on the role of listeners in diachronic innovation (e.g., Blevins 2004, Ohala 1993), presumably in response to the prior emphasis placed on factors such as ease of articulation and productive economy (e.g., Martinet 1964). As such, the speaker is considered to be responsible for variant surface forms and the listener for the selection of one or more of these and their innovative categorization; when the underlying form of the listener differs from that of the speaker, change has occurred (see e.g., Haspelmath 1999, McMahon 2000). Insights gleaned from these theories notwithstanding, several considerations remain unaddressed with regard to rhotic metathesis as a listener-instantiated process. Most notably, it is observed (see §4) that gestural innovation is not always haphazard but is in many instances governed by phonological knowledge. The approach advocated here assumes that any account of sound change, in general, and of rhotic metathesis, in particular, must refer to all phonological knowledge. Where there is strong evidence for knowledge involved in speech production, the analysis must consider the complementary roles of speakers and listeners in order to achieve a tenable description and explanation of diachronic data. 4.

Articulation: formalizing productive knowledge In this section, we examine phonetic patterns of Spanish and French rhotics in consonant clusters, developing a formal account of the gestural configurations that ultimately give rise to intrasyllabic metathesis. 4.1

Vowel intrusion in Spanish and rhotic lenition in French Transitory vowels are well documented in Spanish consonant clusters that contain //. For a review, see Blecua (2001) and more recently, Bradley (2005, 2006) and Colantoni & Steele (2005, 2007). Following Hall (2003, 2006), we refer to the transitory vowels as intrusive vowels and to the phenomenon itself as

2

Lipski (1990) provides two examples of leftward metathesis within a stressed syllable: taberna > tabrena ‘tavern’ and turbio > trubio ‘cloudy, muddy’. Other examples show // moving leftward into a preceding syllable: fábrica > frábica ‘factory’, madre > marde ‘mother’. See Bradley (2007a) for an Optimality-theoretic analysis of metathesis involving several types of sonorant consonants in Judeo-Spanish, including long-distance movement of //.

RHOTIC METATHESIS ASYMMETRIES IN ROMANCE

325

vowel intrusion. 3 In an acoustic study of Peninsular Spanish rhotics, Blecua (2001) finds that vowel intrusion occurs at a higher frequency in tautosyllabic /C/ onsets than in heterosyllabic /C/ clusters (78.8% vs. 63%). Sample realizations of such clusters are illustrated by the waveforms in Figure 1. In (a), an intrusive vowel intervenes between the constriction period of the voiceless dental stop and the following apical tap. In (b), the tap constriction is adjacent to that of the following nasal, without an intrusive vowel. Other phonetic realizations are attested in these contexts, e.g., sporadic deletion of // in complex onsets and emphatic trilling of // in coda. Nonetheless, intrusive vowels appear more frequently in /C/ than /C/. (a)

intrusive vowel

voiced tap

(b)

voiced tap

Figure 1: (en)contró ‘s/he found’ vs. pierna ‘leg’ (Blecua 2001:§3.1.1, §3.2.1)

Bradley (1999, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007b) and Hall (2003, 2006), building upon a proposal by Steriade (1990), analyze vowel intrusion within the Articulatory Phonology framework (Browman & Goldstein 1989 et seq.). In these analyses, intrusive vowels are the result of a vowel gesture being heard between two adjacent consonant gestures that are minimally overlapped. While vowel intrusion is a variable phenomenon in Peninsular Spanish, there is a clear tendency for intrusive vowels to appear more often in /C/ onsets than in /C/ sequences, which suggests that onset clusters are less susceptible to gestural overlap than are heterosyllabic clusters. In French, there is an allophonic distribution of fricative and approximant rhotics (Russell Webb 2002, 2008, in press, Tranel 1987, Walker 2001). Fricative [] appears after obstruents and in word-initial position, as in (4a), while approximant [] appears between vowels and in coda position, as in (4b).4 (4)

3

a. brosse pro robe

[bs] [p] [b]

‘brush’5 ‘pro’ ‘dress’

This terminological distinction is necessary to distinguish vowel intrusion from phonological vowel epenthesis. See Hall (2003, 2006) for a discussion of vowel intrusion diagnostics. 4 We abstract away from voicing assimilation, which targets both post- and preconsonantal //. 5 For Quebec and European French, Colantoni & Steele (2005, 2007) document vowel intrusion in /C/ complex onsets, but only when the initial C is [+voice] (e.g., brosse [bs], cf. (4a)). They do not consider /C/ clusters.

ERIC RUSSELL WEBB & TRAVIS G. BRADLEY

326 b. morose orgue or

[mz] [] []

‘morose’ ‘organ’ ‘gold’

Widely acknowledged descriptions in the literature make it clear that // is more likely to undergo weakening or approximantization in /VC/ sequences than in /CV/. In all subsequent discussion, we use the IPA lowering diacritic in a narrow transcription of [C] clusters, following the examples in (4b). As we will show in §5, the relatively higher frequency of vowel intrusion in Spanish /C/ and of rhotic lenition in French /C/ has consequences for the perception grammar of each language and is key to explaining the directionality asymmetry observed in intrasyllabic metathesis. 4.2

The articulatory origins of intrasyllabic rhotic metathesis As in the case of vowel intrusion with Peninsular Spanish //, Articulatory Phonology can also model certain types of C/V metathesis as the movement of a consonant gesture across a tautosyllabic vowel gesture (Steriade 1990). Based on a typological survey of vowel intrusion in consonant clusters, Hall (2003) establishes the hierarchy in (5), which also has implications for the analysis of intrasyllabic metathesis. (5)

obstruents → glides, nasals → [r] → [l] → [], [] → gutturals

If a given consonant type can be completely overlapped by a tautosyllabic vowel, then so can other types to the right in the hierarchy. Interestingly, the greater propensity of [] and [] to tolerate complete overlap by an adjacent vowel correlates with the frequent metathesis of these rhotics within the syllable, as seen in the data from non-standard French and Spanish. Following recent work in gestural Optimality Theory (Bradley 2005, 2006, 2007b, Davidson 2003, Gafos 2002, Hall 2003), we formalize a production grammar accounting for variation in the coordination of rhotics and vowels within the syllable. In this framework, alignment constraints coordinate articulatory gestures with reference to temporal landmarks, as shown in (6) (Gafos 2002).6

6

Not all phonologists agree on the proper location of gestural representations and constraints within the grammar. See Hall (2003) and more recently, Bradley (2005, 2006, 2007b), for an explanation of why it is unnecessary to relegate gestural coordination to a low-level phonetic implementation component, as long as the phonological grammar contains no faithfulness constraints on input coordination. See also Boersma (2007a,b), who proposes a more elaborate model of speech production involving multiple representational levels and constraint types.

RHOTIC METATHESIS ASYMMETRIES IN ROMANCE

(6)

327

a. ALIGN(G1, LANDMARK1, G2, LANDMARK2) Align landmark1 of gesture1 with landmark2 of gesture2. TARGET CENTER RELEASE b. ONSET

OFFSET

More specifically, we propose the context-specific constraint in (7), abbreviated as C//V-OVERLAP, which requires the consonant gesture of an interconsonantal CV or VC sequence to be centered on the adjacent vowel gesture.7 (7)

ALIGN(C, CENTER // V, CENTER) IN C_C (=C//V-OVERLAP) In an interconsonantal /CV/ or /VC/ sequence, align the center of C with the center of V.

Hall (2003) formalizes the implicational hierarchy of vowel intrusion triggers in (5) as a universal ranking of markedness constraints, shown in (8). (8)

a. *GESTUREX IN GESTUREY A gesture of type y does not fully surround a gesture of type x. b. *OBSTRUENT IN V » *GLIDE IN V, *NASAL IN V » *[r] IN V » *[l] IN V » *[] IN V, *[] IN V » *GUTTURAL IN V

Ranking C//V-OVERLAP along the hierarchy in (8b) distinguishes those consonants that can move across an adjacent vowel from those consonants that cannot. We propose a variable ranking of the overlap constraint with *[] IN V and *[] IN V. When C//V-OVERLAP falls above these constraints in a particular evaluation, both rhotic gestures must be centered at the mid-point of a tautosyllabic vowel. Figure 2 illustrates the effects of this ranking for the segmental strings /CRVC/ and /CVRC/ (where ‘R’ is a cover symbol encompassing both types of rhotic). Maximal overlap of the rhotic-vowel sequence produces an auditory form in which the vowel gesture is heard as two symmetrically intrusive vowels on either side of the rhotic, as shown in (a) for Spanish and in (b) for French. Furthermore, blending of the tongue body gesture of uvular // with the tongue body gesture of the vowel reduces the rhotic constriction to that of an approximant [] in (b). Overlap of // and the tongue body gesture of a vowel does not produce gestural blending since apical // engages a different articulator.

7 C//V-OVERLAP should probably be expanded to include both #_C and C_C contexts, in order to account for word-initial /V/ metathesis in French (2). Alternatively, word-initial shifts may have begun in postconsonantal phrasal contexts and then become lexicalized.

ERIC RUSSELL WEBB & TRAVIS G. BRADLEY

328

C

Segments:

R

V

C

C

V

R

C

Gestures: Auditory Form: (a) [ (b) [

C C

V V

 

V V

C C

] ]

[ [

C C

V V

 

V V

C C

] ]

Figure 2: Centering of the rhotic gesture on a tautosyllabic vowel

Alternatively, maximal overlap of // and the tautosyllabic vowel in French may best be considered an instance of vowel elision and syllabic //. In the majority of cases, intrasyllabic rhotic metathesis occurred when the adjacent vowel was schwa. This vowel is unique in French in that it is the only vowel subject to elision in certain environments. On the common assumption that syllabic consonants are longer than their non-syllabic counterparts, a lengthened tongue body gesture for // in Figure 2 would eclipse the tongue body gesture for schwa, and the symmetrically intrusive vowels would be absent from the auditory form, i.e., [CC]. Alternatively, schwa elision might involve deletion of a phonological segment and its associated tongue body gesture. Space limitations prevent us from developing a comprehensive formal account here. The interaction of gestural coordination constraints is shown in Tableau 1 for /CVC/ and /CVC/ strings in Spanish. Candidates (a) and (c) violate C//VOVERLAP because the gestures of the interconsonantal /V/ and /V/ sequences are not centered on one another. Since C//V-OVERLAP dominates *[] IN V, maximal overlap between the tap and the vowel is optimal in candidates (b) and (d). /CVC/

C//V-OVERLAP

a.

[C VC]AudF

) b.

[CVVC]AudF

V

*[] IN V

*! *

/CVC/ c.

[CVC]AudF

) d.

[CVVC]AudF

*! *

Tableau 1: Maximal overlap of /V/ and /V/ sequences in Spanish

As shown in Tableau 2, the analysis works the same for French. Candidates (a) and (c) violate C//V-OVERLAP because the /V/ and /V/ sequences are not maximally overlapped. The ranking of C//V-OVERLAP » *[] IN V selects the gestural coordinations in candidates (b) and (d), in which maximal

RHOTIC METATHESIS ASYMMETRIES IN ROMANCE

329

overlap reduces the tongue body gesture of the rhotic to that of an approximant []. /CVC/

C//V-OVERLAP

a.

[CVC]AudF

) b.

[CVVC]AudF

*[] IN V

*! *

/CVC/ c.

[CVC]AudF

) d.

[CVVC]AudF

*! *

Tableau 2: Maximal overlap of /V/ and /V/ sequences in French

Higher-ranking constraints of the hierarchy in (8b) keep other consonant types from being maximally overlapped by a tautosyllabic vowel. For example, the high ranking of *[l] IN V in both French and Spanish prevents maximal overlap of interconsonantal /lV/ and /Vl/ sequences, as seen in (a) and (c) of Tableau 3. /ClVC/

*[l] IN V

) a.

[ClVC]AudF

b.

[CVlVC]AudF

C//V-OVERLAP *

*!

/CVlC/ ) c.

[CVlC]AudF

d.

[CVlVC]AudF

* *!

Tableau 3: Minimal overlap of /lV/ and /Vl/ sequences in Spanish and French

As demonstrated above, the production grammars of Spanish and French yield occasional outputs in which // and // (but not other consonants) are maximally overlapped by a tautosyllabic vowel. As shown in Figure 2, maximal overlap has the effect of neutralizing the underlying linear order of /CRVC/ and /CVRC/ strings. Based on the auditory forms alone, it is not obvious whether [CVVC]AudF corresponds to input /CVC/ or /CVC/ in Spanish, nor whether [CVVC]AudF corresponds to input /CVC/ or /CVC/ in French. 5.

Perception: formalizing receptive knowledge Recent work in Optimality Theory has focused on the interaction of constraints in the perception grammar (Boersma 1998, 2007a,b, Russell Webb

330

ERIC RUSSELL WEBB & TRAVIS G. BRADLEY

2008). In the present study, we assume that the output of the production grammar pairs a gestural representation with its corresponding auditory form, as seen in the tableaux of the previous section. The auditory form then serves as input to a separate perception grammar, which formalizes the listener’s mapping of continuous cues in the auditory form to discrete phonological elements in the underlying form. We assume that the perception grammar consists of faithfulness constraints, as in (9a), which regulate correspondence between input auditory forms and output underlying forms, and markedness constraints, as in (9b), which promote structural well-formedness in output underlying forms.8 (9)

a. PARSE(x) Surface item x appears in the underlying form. b. *CATEG(x, v) Surface item x is not recognized as the value v (i.e., the value v is not a categorization of x).

The ranking of PARSE and *CATEG establishes a formal model of perceptual habituation, reflecting the listener’s knowledge of learned phonotactic patterns, and attenuation to gradient detail (Hume 2004, Kuhl & Iverson 1995, Kuhl et al. 1992, Peperkamp & Dupoux 2003). In this instance, habituation refers to listeners’ relative attention to novel detail in the auditory input; listeners are more habituated to typical patterns of the language and less habituated to novel patterns. Habituation to language patterns and attenuation to novel input can be formalized as the outcome of constraint interaction. For a given input to the perception grammar, the ranking of PARSE(x) » *CATEG(x, v) predicts that x will appear in the output underlying form, i.e., that x will be posited as contrastive. The reverse ranking establishes that x will fail to appear in the output underlying form, i.e., that x will not be posited as contrastive. Our formalization of perception grammars for French and Spanish is based on the constraints given in (10). (10a) requires that a vocoid in the auditory form be mapped to a corresponding vocoid in the underlying form, where ‘vocoid’ denotes both shorter intrusive and longer full vowels. (10b) prevents consonants from functioning as syllable peaks in the underlying form. The constraints in (10c,d) are ranked high in Spanish and French, respectively, and reflect the prototypical realizations of rhotics described in §4.1. Recall that for Peninsular 8

In the model of the perception grammar developed by Boersma (2007a,b, inter alia), (i) auditory forms are mapped to phonological surface forms through the interaction of cue constraints with structural markedness constraints; (ii) surface forms are mapped to underlying forms by interacting faithfulness and structural markedness constraints; and (iii) both of these mappings are carried out completely in parallel. The approach we pursue here simplifies the perception grammar somewhat, with a single mapping from auditory to underlying forms. See Boersma (2007a) for a more thorough discussion of multiple levels and constraint types in production and perception.

RHOTIC METATHESIS ASYMMETRIES IN ROMANCE

331

Spanish, vowel intrusion is more frequent in tautosyllabic /C/ than in heterosyllabic /C/. (10c) encodes the listener’s knowledge that a vocalic element appearing before [] in the former cluster is most likely an intrusive vowel and not a phonologically-specified full vowel. In French, approximant [] is more common in /VC/ sequences than in /CV/. (10d) encodes the listener’s knowledge that an approximant rhotic is most likely not prevocalic. (10)

a. b. c. d.

PARSE(vocoid) A vocoid in the auditory form appears in the underlying form. *CATEG(C, peak) A consonant is not recognized as a syllable peak. *CATEG(V, V) A sequence [V] is not recognized as the sequence /V/. *CATEG(V, V) A sequence [V] is not recognized as the sequence /V/.

An anonymous reviewer worries that the type of *CATEG constraints formalized in (10c,d) can be a rather powerful mechanism and could include all kinds of segments and contexts. However, we are not the first to make use of such constraints in the perception grammar (see, e.g., Boersma 2007b, who employs cue constraints on segment sequences in an analysis of h-aspiré in French). Furthermore, (10c,d) are not specific to Spanish and French but instead are potentially high-ranking in any language with similar asymmetries involving vowel intrusion and rhotic approximantization. “The language-specificity of perception [...] corresponds to the freedom that every language possesses to rank the constraints in its own order” (Boersma 2007a:12). The perception grammar for Spanish is illustrated in Tableau 4. The input is the auditory form [peesona], which the speaker’s grammar already selected as the optimal realization of underlying /pesona/ ‘person’ (see candidate (d) of Tableau 1). Candidate (b) violates *CATEG(C, peak) because the input rhotic is mapped onto a syllable peak. Candidates (a) and (c) both violate *CATEG(V, V) because the intrusive vowel of input [e] is mapped onto the full vowel /e/. Candidate (d) violates PARSE(vocoid) because the same intrusive vowel has no output correspondent. Because PARSE(vocoid) ranks below *CATEG(V, V), the violation is tolerated, and (d) emerges as optimal. In sum, Tableau 4 formalizes the listener’s knowledge of Spanish phonotactic and phonetic patterns. Diachronic metathesis results from the listener’s biased resolution of the indeterminate linear order of the auditory form [peesona] in favor of the underlying form /pesona/.

ERIC RUSSELL WEBB & TRAVIS G. BRADLEY

332

[peesona]AudF a.

/peesona/UF

b.

/psona/UF

c.

/pesona/UF

) d.

/pesona/UF

*CATEG(C, peak)

*CATEG(V, V)

PARSE(vocoid)

*! *!

** *!

* *

Tableau 4: Metathesis: indeterminate [peesona] (< /pesona/ ‘person’) is mapped to historically innovative /pesona/

Tableau 5 shows the evaluation of indeterminate [peesjo], which is the speaker’s pronunciation of /pesjo/ ‘price’ (see candidate (b) of Tableau 1). The constraints evaluate output underlying forms in the same way as in Tableau 4, with candidate (d) selected as optimal. Since the listener selects /pesjo/, an underlying form that is identical to that of the speaker, intrasyllabic metathesis does not occur. By contrast, metathesis does occur in Tableau 4, since the optimal underlying form, /pesona/, differs from that of the speaker, /pesona/. [peesjo]AudF a.

/peesjo/UF

b.

/psjo/UF

c.

/pesjo/UF

) d.

/pesjo/UF

*CATEG(C, peak)

*CATEG(V, V)

PARSE(vocoid)

*! *!

** *!

* *

Tableau 5: No metathesis: indeterminate [peesjo] (< /pesjo/ ‘price’) is mapped to etymological /pesjo/

In some cases, intrusive vowels in Spanish /C/ clusters have been reinterpreted as full lexical vowels over time, e.g., crónica > corónica ‘chronicle’, trabilla > tarabilla ‘stirrup’, chacra > chácara ‘farm’ (see Bradley 2006 and the references cited therein). In the present analysis, such cases are easily accounted for by the occasional demotion of *CATEG(V, V) below PARSE(vocoid) in the perception grammar. As illustrated in Tableau 6, the listener maps the intrusive vowel of input [ko] onto the full vowel /o/ in candidate (b). [koonika]AudF a. ) b.

/konika/UF /koonika/UF

PARSE(vocoid)

*CATEG(V, V)

*! *

Tableau 6: Epenthesis: the auditory form [koonika] (< /konika/ ‘chronicle’) is mapped to historically innovative /koonika/

RHOTIC METATHESIS ASYMMETRIES IN ROMANCE

333

Tableau 7 exemplifies the interaction of perceptual constraints in the evaluation of the French auditory input [kve], which is the speaker’s pronunciation of /kve/ ‘die’ (see candidate (b) of Tableau 2). Evaluation proceeds in a manner similar to the Spanish perception grammar, except that *CATEG(V, V) replaces *CATEG(V, V). The grammar selects /kve/ in (c) as the optimal output, leading to a diachronically distinct underlying form. [kve]AudF a.

/kve/UF

b.

/kve/UF

) c.

/kve/UF

d.

/kve/UF

*CATEG(C, peak)

*CATEG(V, V)

PARSE(vocoid)

*! *!

** * *!

*

Tableau 7: Metathesis: indeterminate [kve] (< /kve/ ‘die’) is mapped to historically innovative /kve/

In cases such as the input [pt], corresponding to /pt/ ‘loss,’ the perception grammar selects an underlying form that is identical to that of the speaker, and intrasyllabic metathesis does not occur. This is exemplified in Tableau 8. [pt]AudF a. b.

*CATEG(C, peak)

/pt/UF /pt/UF

) c.

/pt/UF

d.

/pt/UF

*CATEG(V, V)

PARSE(vocoid)

*! *!

** * *!

*

Tableau 8: No metathesis: indeterminate [pt] ( V (or the reverse). The articulation of taps typically involves transitory vowels preceding and following the brief constriction; if a phonetically predictable transition is reinterpreted as a full vowel, and a historical vowel is reinterpreted as a transition, metathesis will have occurred (Blevins and Garrett 2004:141).

In a diachronic study of Slavic languages, Jetchev (1995) had already proposed an explanation of Bulgarian rhotic-vowel metathesis in terms of the reinterpretation of transitory vowels. Recall the alternative hypothesis for French involving schwa elision and syllabic // formation, as discussed in §4.2. In a cross-linguistic survey of syllabic consonants, Bell (1978:168) had already noted that one source of vowel-consonant metathesis is the loss of the consonant’s syllabicity followed by vowel epenthesis. Independently of any preconceived notion of rhoticity, our analysis is founded upon the complementary roles of productive and receptive knowledge, as well as the importance of language-specific patterns in the generation of variant auditory forms and in the parsing of diachronically innovative underlying forms. Building upon proposals of Blevins & Garrett (1998, 2004) and related works, the present analysis specifically includes phonologically governed, predictable articulatory patterns, formalized in a constraint-based production grammar. The output of the production grammar serves as the basis for perceptually-induced shifts affecting the linear sequence, themselves the output of a separate perception grammar. Our approach has implications for the treatment of sound change and, especially, for any analysis of phonological behavior involving rhotics. While providing a definition of rhotic classhood is beyond the scope of the present work, an extension of the approach taken here to similar phonological patterns involving phonetically distinct rhotics might serve as a starting point for closer examination of cross-linguistic similarities among such segments, absent of ad hoc groupings or prima facie classhood.

References Bell, Alan. 1978. “Syllabic Consonants”. Universals of Human Language, vol. 2, ed. by Joseph Greenberg, 153-201. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Blecua, Beatriz. 2001. Las Vibrantes en Español: Manifestaciones acústicas y procesos fonéticos. Ph.D. dissertation, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. Blevins, Juliette. 2004. Evolutionary Phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Blevins, Juliette & Andrew Garrett. 1998. “The Origins of Consonant-vowel Metathesis”. Language 74:2.508-556.

RHOTIC METATHESIS ASYMMETRIES IN ROMANCE

335

Blevins, Juliette & Andrew Garrett. 2004. “The Evolution of Metathesis”. Phonetically Based Phonology, ed. by Bruce Hayes, Robert Kirchner & Donca Steriade, 117-156. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Boersma, Paul. 1998. Functional Phonology: Formalizing the Interactions between Articulatory and Perceptual Drives. Leiden: Holland Academic. Boersma, Paul. 2007a. “Cue Constraints and Their Interactions in Phonological Perception and Production”. Downloadable from Rutgers Optimality Archive http://roa.rutgers.edu [ROA #944]. Boersma, Paul. 2007b. “Some Listener-oriented Accounts of h-aspiré in French”. Lingua 117:12.1989-2054. Bradley, Travis G. 1999. “Assibilation in Ecuadorian Spanish: A PhonologyPhonetics Account”. Formal Perspectives on Romance Linguistics: Selected Papers from the 28th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL), University Park, 16-19 April 1998, ed. by Jean-Marc Authier, Barbara E. Bullock & Lisa A. Reed, 57-71. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Bradley, Travis G. 2004. “Gestural Timing and Rhotic Variation in Spanish Codas”. Laboratory Approaches to Spanish Phonology, ed. by Timothy L. Face, 197-224. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Bradley, Travis G. 2005. “Systemic Markedness and Phonetic Detail in Phonology”. Experimental and Theoretical Approaches to Romance Linguistics: Selected Papers from the 34th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL), Salt Lake City, March 2004, ed. by Randall Gess & Edward J. Rubin, 41-62. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Bradley, Travis G. 2006. “Spanish Complex Onsets and the Phonetics-Phonology Interface”. Optimality-Theoretic Studies in Spanish Phonology, ed. by Fernando Martínez-Gil & Sonia Colina, 15-38. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Bradley, Travis G. 2007a. “Constraints on the Metathesis of Sonorant Consonants in Judeo-Spanish”. Probus 19:2.171-207. Bradley, Travis G. 2007b. “Morphological Derived-Environment Effects in Gestural Coordination: A Case Study of Norwegian Clusters”. Lingua 117:6.950-985. Browman, Catherine & Louis Goldstein. 1989. “Articulatory Gestures as Phonological Units”. Haskins Laboratories Status Report on Speech Research, SR-99/100.69-101. Colantoni, Laura & Jeffrey Steele. 2005. “Phonetically-driven Epenthesis Asymmetries in French and Spanish Obstruent-liquid Clusters”. Experimental and Theoretical Approaches to Romance Linguistics: Selected papers from the 34th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL), Salt Lake City, March 2004, ed. by Randall S. Gess & Edward J. Rubin, 77-96. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

336

ERIC RUSSELL WEBB & TRAVIS G. BRADLEY

Colantoni, Laura & Jeffrey Steele. 2007. “Voicing-dependent Cluster Simplification Asymmetries in Spanish and French”. Segmental and Prosodic Issues in Romance Phonology, ed. by Pilar Prieto, Joan Mascaró & Maria-Josep Solé, 109-129. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Davidson, Lisa. 2003. The Atoms of Phonological Representation: Gestures, Coordination, and Perceptual Features in Consonant Cluster Phonotactics. Ph.D. dissertation, Johns Hopkins University. Desgrippes, Bernard. 1982. “Le patois du domfrontais”. Le Pays Bas-Normand 165.1. Flers: Imp. E. Vicq. Gafos, Adamantios. 2002. “A Grammar of Gestural Coordination”. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 20.269-337. Gilliéron, Jules & Edouard Edmont. 1968. Atlas linguistique de la France. Bologna: Forni. Grammont, Maurice. 1950. Traité de phonétique. Paris: Delagrave. Grammont, Maurice. 1965. Traité de phonétique avec 179 figures [La métathèse dans le parler de Bagnères-de-Luchon]. Paris: Delagrave. Hall, Nancy. 2003. Gestures and Segments: Vowel Intrusion as Overlap. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Hall, Nancy. 2006. “Cross-linguistic Patterns of Vowel Intrusion”. Phonology 23.387-429. Haspelmath, Martin. 1999. “Optimality and Diachronic Adaptation”. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 18:2.180-205. Hume, Elizabeth. 2004. “The Indeterminacy/Attestation Model of Metathesis”. Language 80:2.203-237. Jetchev, Georgi. 1995. “Rhotics, Jers and Schwa in the History of Bulgarian”. Paper presented at the 13th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (ICPhS), Stockholm, August 1995. Kuhl, Patricia & Paul Iverson. 1995. “Linguistic Experience and the ‘Perceptual Magnet Effect’”. Speech Perception and Linguistic Processing: Issues in Cross-Linguistic Research, ed. by Winifred Strange, 121-154. Baltimore, MD: York Press. Kuhl, Patricia, Karen Williams, Francisco Lacerda, Kenneth Stevens & Björn Lindblom. 1992. “Linguistic Experience Alters Phonetic Perception in Infants by 6 Months of Age”. Science 255.606-608. Ladefoged, Peter & Ian Maddieson. 1996. The Sounds of the World’s Languages. London: Blackwell. Lindau, Mona. 1985. “The Story of /r/”. Phonetic Linguistics: Essays in Honor of Peter Ladefoged, ed. by Victoria A. Fromkin, 157-168. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.

RHOTIC METATHESIS ASYMMETRIES IN ROMANCE

337

Lipski, John M. 1990/1991. “Metathesis as Template Matching: A Case Study from Spanish”. Folia Linguistica Historica 11.89-104 (= 12 (1991) 127-145). Martinet, André. 1964. Economie des changements phonétiques: Traité de phonologie diachronique. Bern: Francke. McMahon, April. 2000. Change, Chance, and Optimality. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ohala, John J. 1993. “The Phonetics of Sound Change”. Historical Linguistics: Problems and Perspectives, ed. by Charles Jones, 237-278. London: Longman. Peperkamp, Sharon & Emmanuel Dupoux. 2003. “Reinterpreting Loanword Adaptations: The Role of Perception”. Proceedings of the 15th International Conference of Phonetic Sciences (ICPhS), Barcelona, 3-11 August 2003, ed. by Maria-Josep Solé, Daniel Recasens & Joaquin Romero, 367-370. Prince, Alan & Paul Smolensky. 1993. “Optimality Theory: Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar”. Ms., Rutgers University & University of Colorado, Boulder. Russell Webb, Eric. 2002. The Relational /R/: Three Case Studies of Rhotic Integrity and Variation. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Texas, Austin. Russell Webb, Eric. 2004. “Explanatory Adequacy in Phonology: A Deductive Approach to /R/”. Linguistica Atlantica 25.77-94. Russell Webb, Eric. 2008. “Formalizing Creole Sound Change: An Optimality Theoretic Account”. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Linguistics 23.227-263. Russell Webb, Eric. In press. “Lenition, Elision, Epenthesis and the Variable Nature of French //”. VaRiations: Contemporary Research on Rhotics, ed. by Hans van de Velde, Willem Zonneveld & Didier Demoulin. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Steriade, Donca. 1990. “Gestures and Autosegments: Comments on Browman and Goldstein’s Paper”. Papers in Laboratory Phonology I: Between the Grammar and Physics of Speech, ed. by Mary Beckman & John Kingston, 382-397. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Tranel, Bernard. 1987. The Sounds of French. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Walker, Douglas C. 2001. French Sound Structure. Calgary: University of Calgary Press. Walsh-Dickey, Laura. 1997. The Phonology of Liquids. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Wiese, Richard. 2001. “The Phonology of /r/”. Distinctive Feature Theory, ed. by Tracy Alan Hall, 335-368. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

THE LEFT EDGE IN THE SPANISH CLAUSAL STRUCTURE *

MARIA LUISA ZUBIZARRETA University of Southern California

This paper reexamines several ideas and empirical data uncovered during the last decade regarding the left-edge part of the clause in Standard Spanish in the light of what is also known about other closely related languages, such as Italian and Caribbean Spanish. Two facts about Standard Spanish are identified as being intimately related to its rich agreement paradigm: the availability of the VSO order and the “subject inversion” phenomenon in informational questions. A particular formalism is proposed which allows us to identify the left-most edge in the I-domain (above Tense) as the projection of “rich” agreement (phi-P) and as the locus of the EPP feature.

1.

The Issue In Standard Modern Spanish, the order VSO is still attested, namely in cases where some element other than the subject functions as the subject of predication, see Zubizarreta (1994, 1998). The subject of predication may be overt as in (1) or covert as in (2), i.e. a silent pronominal bound by a clitic. Examples are from Zubizarreta (1998:100-101). (1)

a. Todos los días compra Juan el diario. every day buys Juan the newspaper “Juan buys the newspaper every day.” b. Ayer presentó María su renuncia. yesterday handed-in Maria her resignation “Maria handed in her resignation yesterday.” c. A María le regaló su abuelo un caballo de pura raza to María dat.cl. gave his grandfather a horse of pure breed “Her grandfather gave María a purebred horse.”

(2)

a. Me devolvió María el libro que le presté. Dat.cl. retruned María the book that to-her (I) lent “María returned to me the book that I lent her.” b. Se comieron los niños todo el pastel. Ben.cl. ate the boys all the cake “The boys ate up all the cake.”

340

MARIA LUISA ZUBIZARRETA

In Zubizarreta (1994), it was argued that the postverbal subject occupies a position outside the VP.1 A simple argument in favor of that view is provided by the distribution of low adverbs. As shown by the examples in (3), low VP adverbs (such as manner and aspectuals) can appear between the Subject and the Object in the VSO construction. (3)

a. Aquí hablan todos muy bien el Inglés. Here speaks everyone very well English b. Ayer explicó el maestro integramente el teorema. Yesterday explained the teacher entirely the theorem c. En la ducha canta Pedro amenudo La Marsellesa. In the shower sings Pedro often the Marsellesa

The comparison with Italian is particularly revealing. In this language, VSO is possible when the subject is a pronoun, but not when it is lexical; see (4). As expected, low VP adverbs can follow postverbal pronominal subjects but not postverbal lexical subjects; see (5). Examples are from Belletti (2004). (4)

a. Di quel cassetto ho io le chiavi. Of that drawer have I the keys b.*?Di quel cassetto ha Maria le chiavi. Of that drawer has Maria the keys

(5)

a. Di questo mi informerò io bene. Of this refl.cl.inform I well b. *?Di questo si informerà Maria bene. c. Di questo si informerà bene Maria.

While subject pronouns move to Spec of T in Italian, lexical subjects do not. They remain in Spec of V. The illformedness of (4b) suggests that the subject in Spec of VP interferes with the Case-licensing of the object (deeply embedded within VP). If the postverbal subject in Spanish is outside the VP, say in Spec of T, where is the verb? Obviously, it is above T, in a position left-adjacent to T. See also Beas (2007) for the same conclusion.2 The goal of this paper is to elucidate the nature of that position. *

I am grateful to Anna Cardinaletti and Patricia Schneider-Zioga for detailed comments. In Zubizarreta (1998), those arguments were ignored for the sake of simplicity and the most common assumption that the postverbal subject is within the VP was adopted. 2 A. Cardinaletti points out that if the tensed verb moves above T in Italian, it would wrongly predict the grammaticality of examples like *di quel casetto ho io avuto le chiavi (of that drawer have I had the keys). Note that in Spanish the subject can appear after a tensed auxiliary: ‘de ésto ya les había yo hablado muchas veces’ (of this already to them have I spoken several times). This suggests that the participle in Italian is higher than in Spanish. In our analysis, the participle in 1

THE LEFT EDGE IN THE SPANISH CLAUSAL STRUCTURE

341

2.

The left-edge in Old Spanish Before we address the issue of where the Verb sits in Spanish, it is useful to examine briefly the distribution of clitics in Old Spanish. This will help us to identify the domains at the left-edge of the clausal structure. In Old Spanish, clitic pronouns were syntactically weak pronominal phrases, which generally cliticized onto the element on its left; see Rivero (1986), (1991), Fontana (1993). Rivero (1997) distinguishes two distinct domains in the left-periphery for clitics in Old Spanish: the C-domain and the I-domain. Negation clearly demarcates the two domains. (6)

[C [ CL [Neg [CL [T…..

The I-domain is below Neg and left-adjacent to the position occupied by tensed V; see examples in (7). On the other hand, the C-domain is above Neg and below C; see examples in (8). The clitic located above the subject in (8c) is also assumed to be in the C-domain. (Examples from Rivero (1997).) (7)

a. Seméjame que vos tienen en estrechura, si Dios non vos ayuda. seems.to.me that you have in difficulties, if God not you helps “It seems to me that if God does not help you, they have you in a difficult position.” b. E el arcobispo dixo que se non trabajase ende…, and the archbishop said that himself not work of.it…, ca non ge- lo darían. since not to.him-it would.give “And the archbishop said not to get excited about it…, since they would not give it to him.”

(8)

a. E grant derecho sería que me matases.., si me de ti non and big right would.be that me kill…., if me from you not guardase. protect “And it would be your right to kill me…, if I did not protect myself from you.”

Italian would move above T. This might be related to another difference between the two languages. Modern Italian, but not Modern Spanish, has the phenomenon known as Stylistic fronting; see Cardinaletti (2003).

342

MARIA LUISA ZUBIZARRETA

b. Fue a la corte a demandar el palio e non lo pudo cabar,…, went to the court to ask the pennant and no it could obtain que ge- lo non darían en ninguna manera. that to.him.it not would.give in no manner “He went to court to ask for the pennant and could not get it,…, since they would not give it to him at all.” c. Si lo el rey por bien toviere, mándeme quemar. and it the king for good had, order.me burn “If the king considered it good, let him order that they burn me.” With Rivero, we will refer to the domain above Neg as the C-domain, where multiple topic constituents (or point-of-view elements, as suggested by Rivero) can appear. Constituents other than weak pronominal clitics, such as full DPs and PPs can appear in the C-domain, as is clearly illustrated by the examples below from Fontana (1993); see also example (8a) above. (9)

a. Si dios lo non fizies… if God it not did… “If God did not do it…” b. Sy el físico la bien connosce… if the physician it well knows… “If the physician knows it well” c. Si buen entendimiento le Dios quiso dar para entender… if good understanding him God wanted give to understand… “If God wanted to give him a good mind to understand…”

For the meanwhile, we will refer to the projection below Neg as Ext(nded) I(nfl). When Neg is present, only clitics can surface in Spec of Ext-I because Neg must procliticize onto V (Rivero 1991). This means that when Neg is present, lexical DPs in Spec of Ext-I must move out to the C-domain. In conclusion, the CL positions in (6) are available for lexical DPs as well. (A CL position at the left-edge of the I-domain was also identified in Zubizarreta 2001; cf. also Uriagereka 2005’s F projection.) 3.

The left-edge in Modern Standard Spanish The I-domain and the C-domain are qualitatively distinct positions. The Idomain is the inflectional domain of the verb, while the C-domain is where sentence grammar meets discourse. The left-edge of the C-domain is where the force of the sentence (declarative, interrogative, exclamative) is encoded and where wh-phrases in interrogatives and exclamatives are attracted to. The middle field of the C-domain is where topics and point-of-view related-constituents are hosted, as well as discourse-linked focus, (i.e. so-called “contrastive focus”). The

THE LEFT EDGE IN THE SPANISH CLAUSAL STRUCTURE

343

right-edge of the C-domain is where the proposition is asserted or denied, referred to as Pol(arity). The C-domain is summarized in (10). (10)

[Force [Wh [Top [Foc [Pol …

There are also topics above the Force P (at the left-most edge of the clause). These only occur in root clauses; a María, quién la invitó? ‘Maria, who invited her?’ We will not discuss this type of topic here, nor will we be concerned with contrastive focus in this paper. We will therefore omit the FocP from future structures. The I-domain is composed of temporal elements such as Tense and Aspect. The Ext-I projection (the nature of which is yet to be determined) is at the left-most edge of the I-domain, right below the Pol projection. The combination of the Cdomain and the I-domain, with the V projection immediately below it, yields the following PS schema:3 (11)

[Force [ Wh [ Top [ Pol [ Ext-I [T [ Asp [ V

The topics and point-of-view elements in the C-domain are referentially specific (i.e. they are part of the speaker/hearer discourse domain). And crucially, they are outside the scope of negation. On the other hand, the constituent that appears in the Spec of Ext-I is not required to be specific. This can best be illustrated by comparing the two types of subjects identified by Suñer (2003) and Beas (2006), (2007) for Spanish. These authors have shown (contra Alexiadou and Anagnostopoulou (1998)) that the preverbal subject in Spanish need not be specific, as in (12) below. On the other hand, the subject above Pol, as in (13), must be specific (Beas op.cit.). (12)

a. Un estudiante (cualquiera) publicará su tésis este año. A student (whichever) will.publish his thesis this year. b. Un estudiante que se gradúe con honores publicará a student that refl.graduates-SUBJ with honors will.publish su tésis este año. his thesis this year “A student that graduates with honors will publish his thesis this year.”

(13)

a. Un estudiante (*cualquiera) no/sí publicará su tésis este año. A student (whichever) no/yes will.publish his thesis this year.

3

Rizzi (1997) argues for the following left-periphery structure: Force (Top*) Foc (Top) Fin. This author assumes that the landing site of wh-phrases is the same landing site as the contrastive Focus, immediately below Top*. While we do not discuss Foc P here, we assume that wh-phrases are attracted to a higher position, close to Force. See section 7.2. for arguments. We do not recognize a Top position below Foc P, at least not for Spanish. See Beninca & Poletto (2004) for discussion of the nature of this projection in Italian.

344

MARIA LUISA ZUBIZARRETA

b. *Un estudiante que se gradúe con honores no/sí a student that refl.graduates-SUBJ with honors no/yes publicará su tésis este año. will.publish his thesis this year Furthermore, a subject above Pol is outside the scope of negation. Compare (14b) with (14a), in which the subject is below Pol and the sentence is ambiguous. (14)

a. Aquí no leen muchos lingüistas libros de textos. [AMBIGUOUS] Here neg.reads many linguists textbooks “There are many linguists here such that they do not read textbooks.” “There are few linguists that read textbooks.” b. Muchos lingüistas no leen libros de textos. [NON-AMBIGUOUS] Many linguists neg read textbooks “There are many linguists such that they do not read textbooks.”

The expectation for a subject in Spec of Ext-I is that it should be able to have narrow scope with respect to Neg. But this is not testable in Spanish because no lexical DP can surface between negation and the verb, the reason being that Neg must procliticize onto the verb. Consequently, lexical DPs must move out from this field into the topic field in the higher C-domain. 4.

What sits in the Ext-I projection? Ext-I is where the inflected verb sits in Spanish. In Old Sp, the Spec of this projection was a landing site for a variety of scrambled constituents, including objects; see (15) (cited by Fontana (1993)). Possibly, this was the position where weak pronominals were licensed in old Spanish as well. (15)

a. Grande duelo avien las yentes christianas. great grief had the people Christian “The Christian people experienced great grief.” b. este logar mostro dios a abraam. this place showed God to Abraham “God showed Abraham this place.” c. Uino & agua deue el clerigo mexclar en el caliz. Wine & water must the priest mix in the chalice “The priest must mix wine and water in the chalice.”

Fontana op.cit. has argued that the loss of object scrambling in Old Sp was related to the reanalysis of clitics as heads. As is well-known, a preverbal object in Mod Sp requires the presence of an object clitic (unless the preverbal object is contrastively focused).

THE LEFT EDGE IN THE SPANISH CLAUSAL STRUCTURE

(16)

a. El vino lo comprará Juan the wine 3rd.p.s.acc.ill.buy Juan b. A Juan le regalaremos una botella de vino. bottle of wine Acc.Juan 3rd.p.s.dat.cl.give a

(17)

a. *El vino comprará Juan. b. *A Juan regalaremos una botella de vino.

345

This suggests that that DP arguments (whether subject or object) cannot be fronted from a thematic position within VP into Spec of Ext-I in Mod Sp. Preverbal DP arguments are directly merged to the Ext-I and linked via Agree to the clitic in the case of objects and to Agr in the case of subjects. In turn, the clitic(or Agr) is linked to a silent pronominal in argument position also via Agree. Following Rizzi (1982), we assume that Agr has the same syntactic status as a clitic. (Note that pro does not impose a specific interpretation.) (18)

a. [DPi [ cli [V+T]] …[ V proi]]] b. [DPi [[V+T]agri ]] … [proi V..]]]

The derivations in (18) are preferred to the derivations in (19). This could be attributed to the preference for derivations that involve Shortest Links, as proposed in Zubizarreta (1994). (On the Shortest Link Condition, see Chomsky (1993).) In effect, the representations in (18) involve two short links (DP,cl) and (cl,pro). Fewer brackets separate the two elements in each of these links than in the case of the link (DP, e) in (19). Two representations can be compared with each other only to the extent that the two involve the same Numeration (i.e. the same set of lexical items or LI). We can indeed assume that (18) and (19) involve the same Numeration if we consider that the phi-features in the {cl, pro} and {Agr, pro} chains are copies of the phi-features of the DP object and DP subject, respectively, rather than independent items in the Numeration. (19)

a. [DPi [ V+T ….. [ V ei]]] b. [DPi [ V+T ….[ ei V ..]]]

There is some evidence based on reconstruction that the preverbal object in sentences like (16) are indeed merged at the left-edge of the clause (i.e. in Spec of Infl-I), rather than merged within the VP and then subsequently moved to the leftedge of the clause. As noted in Zubizarreta (1998, 2001), a pronoun contained within a left-dislocated object can be bound by a preverbal subject that follows the object; see (20a) and (21a). On the other hand, a pronoun contained within a preverbal object cannot be bound by a postverbal subject; see (20b) and (201b).

346

MARIA LUISA ZUBIZARRETA

(20)

a. A sui hijo, cada madrei lo acompañará el primer día de escuela. Acc. his child each mother him-will-accompany the first day of school. “Each mother will accompany his child on the first day of school.” b. *A sui hijo, lo acompañará cada madrei el primer día de escuela.

(21)

a. A sui propio hijo, ningún padrei lo quiere castigar. Acc. his own child, no father him-wants punish “No father wants to punish his own child.” b. *A sui propio hijo, no lo quiere castigar ningún padrei.

That the source of the contrast is indeed structural is shown by the fact that there is no preverbal/postverbal asymmetry when the binder is a matrix subject and the dislocated object originates at the left-edge of the embedded clause: (22)

a. A sui hijo, ninguna madrei desea que se lo regañe. Acc his child no mother wants that indef.subj.-him-reprimand “No mother desires that his son be reprimanded.” b. A sui hijo, no desea ninguna madrei que se lo regañe. c. No desea ninguna madrei que a sui hijo se lo regañe.

The above paradigms suggest that the object in (20a) and (21a) is merged with Ext-I and the subject is merged in the C-domain. The object is then moved to the C-domain above the subject, giving rise to the left-edge structure shown in (23). The object can then be reconstructed to its original position below the subject and the binding relation can be established. (23)

[ CP A su hijok [ cada madre [Ext-I ek lo-acompañará. [ T ……

Further evidence for direct merge is provided by sentences like the following (first noted by Suñer (1988)). As expected, when the object is directly merged in Ext-I, it does not give rise to weak-cross over effects. (24)

A quiéni no loi aguanta ni sui madre? Who not acc.cl. stand even his mother

Finally, note that while a preverbal object linked to the accusative clitic must be specific, this is not the case with a preverbal object linked to a dative clitic. This shows that the specificity effect in the first case is due to the clitic and not to the position. (25)

a. *(A) Una persona que hable tres idiomas la estamos buscando. A person that speaks(subj) 3 languages acc.cl. (we) are looking for

THE LEFT EDGE IN THE SPANISH CLAUSAL STRUCTURE

347

b. A una persona que hable tres idiomas le pagaremos un buen To a person that speaks(subj) 3 languages (we) dat. Cl. will-pay a good salario. salary In the next section, we propose that the Ext-I projection consists of a bundle of person/number features, to which we refer as phi-projection. In order to motivate and formalize such a projection, we will adopt a proposal put forth by Biberauer & Roberts (B&R) 2008. 5. 5.1

Formalizing the Ext-I projection Biberauer & Roberts (B&R) 2008 B&R suggests that the syntactic dependency between T and V is due to the fact that T is inherently verbal, but lacks arg-structure; therefore T has an unvalued V feature. On the other hand, V has no inherent temporal content, but it is associated with an arg-structure; therefore V has a valued verbal feature and an unvalued T feature. The unvalued features get valued via the Agree-relation, which is universally available. Yet, despite the universal nature of the Agree-relation, in Romance, the Vto-T mechanism is also active. Why is this? B&R propose that V-to-T movement is related to the richness of “tense” morphology in the Romance verbal paradigm. These authors argue that richness of “tense” inflection should be distinguished from richness of “agreement” inflection. As illustrated by the examples in (26), the Romance languages (e.g., French, Italian, Spanish) are richer than the Germanic languages in their synthetic tense paradigm: (26)

Romance: French: parle (present indicative/subjunctive), parlerai (future), parlerais (conditional), parlais (imperfect), [parlai (preterit), parlasse (past subjunctive)]; Italian: parlo (present), parlerò (future), parlerei (conditional), parlavo (imperfect), parli (present subjunctive), parlassi (past subjunctive); Spanish: hablo (present), hablará (future), hablarei (conditional), hablaba (imperfect), hablé (preterit), hable (present subjunctive), hablase (past subjunctive I), hablara (past subjunctive II). Germanic: German: spreche (present indicative/subjunctive), sprach (past), spräche (past subjunctive) English: speak (present), spoke (past) Swedish: snakker (present), snakket (past)

348

MARIA LUISA ZUBIZARRETA

While richness of tense inflection is related to V-to-T movement, richness of agreement inflection is related to licensing of subject drop. Indeed, languages with rich agreement and rich tense inflection have both null subjects and V-to-T movement (e.g. Spanish, Italian). Languages with poor agreement and poor tense inflection lack both null subjects and V-to-T movement (e.g., English, Modern Scandinavian). Languages with poor agreement and rich tense inflection lack null subjects but have V-to-T movement (e.g., French).4 B&R put forth the following proposal to formalize the dependency between rich tense morphology and the V-to-T mechanism. In languages with a rich tense inflectional paradigm, synthetic Vs are actually compound words consisting of V and T. The V part of the compound requires that it merge with a V-complement to form a VP, and the T part of the compound requires that it merge with a T complement to form a TP. In other words, the compound T+V must double merge in order to satisfy its subcategorization requirements, giving rise to the effect of V-to-T. 5.2

Extending B&R’s proposal to “rich agreement” We propose that in languages with rich agreement and rich tense inflection, synthetic Vs are not only compounded with T, but also with a bundle of person/number/D features referred to as phi-features: i.e. V+T+phi. Therefore, in languages with both rich tense inflection and rich agreement inflection, the verb undergoes triple merge: (27)

1. Merge with complement of V (forming a VP) 2. Merge with complement of T (forming a TP) 3. Merge with complement of phi (forming a phiP)

(28)

[phiP V+T+ phi [TP V+T+ phi [VP V+T+ phi ….]]]

The projection that we called the Ex-Infl is phiP. The phi projection bears some resemblance to the AgrS projection proposed by Cardinaletti (2004) and others, but it is different from AgrS in an important respect. The Spec of phiP, unlike the Spec of AgrS, is not restricted to subjects Indeed, we propose here to dissociate subject-verb agreement and Nom Case assignment from the EPP feature. Syntactically, the EPP is the structural requirement that requires the presence of a Specifier for a given head. Semantically, that Specifier is the Subject of Predication, which may or may not correspond to the logical subject. Indeed, while it is generally the case that the logical subject both agrees with the verb and is Case marked nominative in 4

The question arises as to whether there are languages with rich agreement and poor tense inflection. B&R suggests that Icelandic may be a case in point. Interestingly, Icelandic lacks subject-drop and, according to B&R, it should also lack V-to-T movement. See note 5 for further discussion.

THE LEFT EDGE IN THE SPANISH CLAUSAL STRUCTURE

349

Romance, the logical subject is not always the Subject of Predication in the clause. This dissociation arises from the fact that Subj-Verb agreement is established early on, namely via the Spec-head relation between a Specifier and V within VP, while Nom Case is licensed in TP via the Spec-head relation that holds between T and its Specifier.5 On the other hand, the host of the EPP feature may vary. We assume that unlike phi and T, the EPP feature cannot project on its own because it lacks categorial feature. It is therefore necessarily parasitic on another category. In languages with a nominal phi compounded to V, EPP merges with phi (as in Spanish and Italian). In this case, the EPP feature is valued by the specifier of phi. Recall that languages with poor agreement inflection (such as English and French) lack a category phi. In such cases, the EPP feature is combined with verbal T and it is checked by Spec of T.6 As for the null subject licensing property of languages with rich agreement, we adopt Rizzi (1982)’s original analysis in which “rich” agreement licenses a silent pro because syntactically it has a status comparable to that of an object clitic. More precisely, the nominal category phi, although morphologically a suffix, has the syntactic status of a head. 6. 6.1

Consequences of the Proposal Some general consequences: Summary An important consequence of the above proposal is that in languages with “rich” agreement, V must move above T to project phi. Therefore, the verb is necessarily above T in such languages. We thus expect VSO order in such languages. This is the case in Spanish with both lexical and pronominal subjects. In Italian, the VSO order arises only with pronominal subjects; see (4). This must be due to independent constraints on the position of lexical subjects rather than on the position of the verb. In other words, while postverbal pronominal subjects in Italian are in Spec of T, postverbal lexical subjects in Italian are in Spec of V. The latter then interferes with the Case-licensing of the object within VP; see

5

It is possible that in languages with rich “tense” inflection, in which V and T are compounded as one complex word, Nom Case can also be checked within the VP (via spec-head between V+T and Spec of V). This might be the case in Italian, in which postverbal lexical subjects are in Spec of V (rather than in Spec of T). But see note 7 for an alternative view. 6 B&R propose that in the Germanic languages with poor tense inflection, there is no V-to-T per se. On the other hand, the V2 Germanic languages have V-to-C, and only in such cases does V transit through T (due to minimality considerations). This would also be the case in Icelandic, a language with generalized V-to-C (Vikner 1995). As mentioned in note 1, Icelandic has rich agreement but no subject drop. This could be due to the fact that the category phi must be compounded to T, which itself must be compounded to V. If the tense paradigm is weak, then T cannot be compounded to V and in turn phi cannot be compounded to T on V. Therefore, Icelandic lacks a phi-projection and cannot license subject drop.

350

MARIA LUISA ZUBIZARRETA

Zubizarreta (1994), Belletti (2004). The VSO order when S is a lexical subject is thus blocked in Italian.7 As mentioned earlier, in languages with a phiP, the logical subject and the Subject of Predication may be dissociated. This is because Spec of phiP is an “open” position. Any argument or adverb may occupy that position, check the EPP feature on phi, and function as the Subject of Predication; as in examples (1)(3). The phiP is close in spirit to the SubjP in Cardinaletti (2004). Yet, this author dissociates the Subject of Predication from the EPP feature, while we propose that the two are intimately related.8 6.2

Consequences for Word Order in Questions: The phenomenon of subjectinversion The above analysis makes a prediction in the case of wh-questions in languages like Spanish, based on the Shortest Link Condition; see Chomsky (1993). Given that the wh-phrase must front to the left-edge of the C-domain to check its wh-feature, it can satisfy the EPP feature on phi by moving through Spec of phi on its way to the C-domain. Such a derivation, shown in (29c), is preferred to the one in (29d), because the wh-movement part of the derivation in the former case involves shortest steps (or links) than in the latter case. This would force the wh-phrase to merge with phi, thus satisfying the EPP requirement of phi in passing. There would then be no motivation for merging any other constituent with phi.9 (Alternatively, we can reformulate this idea in terms of the theory of phase along the lines of Chomsky (2001), if we assume that PhiP constitutes a phase domain.) (29)

7

a. Qué diarios lee Juana siempre? What newspapers reads Juana always b. ??Qué diarios Juana lee siempre c. [CP qué diariosi [PhiP ei lee [TP Juanak T [VP ek V ei ]]]] d. [CP qué diariosi [PhiP Juanak lee [TP prok T [VP ek V ei ]]]]

The difference between Spanish and Italian can be described by assuming that lexical DPs are complex objects in that they are composed of a lexical DP embedded within a DP headed by a silent nominal pro; see Boeckx (2003); Belletti (2005). When such a DP undergoes movement in Spanish (in particular from Spec of V to Spec of T), it moves the entire complex DP. On the other hand, in Italian, only the pro part moves to Spec of T, stranding the lexical part in Spec of V. If we assume such a complex analysis of DPs, there is an alternative to the proposal suggested in note 3 regarding the Case-checking of postverbal subjects in Italian. It is possible that the pro in Spec of T can “transmit” its valued Case feature to the lexical part of the DP stranded in Spec of V. But see Cardinaletti (2004) for a different view. 8 Other authors have proposed an “open” subject Infl position for Spanish; e.g., Goodall (1991) Masullo (1992), Zubizarreta (1998). See also the proposal in Fontana (1993) for Old Spanish. 9 The authors mentioned in note 8 also propose that wh-fronting in Spanish involves movement through an “open” Infl position. See also Cardinaletti (2006) for a similar proposal regarding the SubjP in her system.

THE LEFT EDGE IN THE SPANISH CLAUSAL STRUCTURE

351

Interestingly, there are cases in which the “subj-inversion” requirement disappears. One case, noted by Inclán (1997) and also discussed by Beas (2007), are questions in which a negative polarity (realized as no or as the adverb nunca ‘never’) or a positive polarity (realized as si or as an adverb like siempre ‘always’) is present; see (30) and (31). We assume that NPIs as well as negative and positive polarity adverbs may occupy the Spec of Pol position.10 (30)

a. Qué diarios Juana no lee nunca? What newspapers Juana neg. reads never? b. Qué diarios Juana nunca lee? What newspapers Juana never reads?

(31)

a. Qué diarios Juana sí lee siempre? What newspapers Juana aff.pol reads always? b. Qué diarios Juana siempre lee? What newspapers Juana always reads?

Note that more than one topic may appear between the wh-phrase and polarity adverb: (32)

Qué cuentos, a María, su madre siempre le lee antes de dormir? What stories to Maria her mother always dat. cl. reads before sleeping

The other well-known case in which preverbal subjects may appear in whquestions is when the wh-phrase is specific, as shown by the lack of contrast between (33a) and (33b); see Arnaiz (1992), Ordoñez & Treviño (1999), Inclán (1997), Zubizarreta (2001), Beas (2007), among others. Compare (33) with (29). (33)

a. Cuál de los diarios lee Juana siempre? Which of the newspapers reads Juana always b. Cuál de los diarios Juana lee siempre?

Note that the preverbal subject in such cases must be specific or D-linked (Beas 2007), which suggests that the preverbal subject in these cases is a topic. (34)

10

a. *Qué diarios alguien no lee nunca? Which newspaper someone not reads ever b. Qué diarios alguien que tu conoces/*conozcas sí lee Which newspapers someone that you know.ind/*subj yes reads siempre? always

Note that qué N, unlike cual N, is non-specific.

352

MARIA LUISA ZUBIZARRETA

The above paradigms suggest that in the presence of polarity and in the presence of a D-linked wh-phrase, the topic-field in the C-domain gets activated in questions, but not otherwise. Questions are different from assertions in that an Assertion Force freely activates the topic in the middle field in the C-domain, but not the Question Force. In the case of (33), the D-linked wh-phrase may be assumed to move through a topic position in the middle field of the C-domain before moving to the left-edge of the C-domain, thus activating the topic field and allowing for a subject topic to be merged there as well. As for wh-questions that contain an overt positive or negative polarity, it is to be noted that these are not informational questions but contrastive questions. One indication of this is that the answer cannot negate the presupposition. Thus, an answer such as “ninguno” (‘none’) for the questions in (30) and (31) is not acceptable (as noted by Inclán and Beas op.cit.). 11 French wh-in-situ questions (in a conservative dialect of French) exhibit the same property; see Boeckx (2000), Zubizarreta (2003). Interestingly, non-D-linked subjects are infelicitous in that construction: (35)

a. *Quelqun a mangé quoi? Someone ate what b. Chacun a mangé quoi? Each ate what?

The above paradigms suggest that contrastive questions (unlike informational questions) favor a topic/comment articulation of the underlying presupposition. In other words, Force Q disallows a topic within its scope, unless it is a contrastive Q. If Force Q is contrastive, a topic (including a topic subject) can be directly merged in the middle field of the C-domain. 6.3

PhiP and language change Given the analysis of category phi put forth above, we expect that if a language originally with a rich, distinctive verbal agreement paradigm begins evolving towards a system with more syncretism, this will have a considerable effect in its syntactic system. Caribbean Spanish might indeed be a case in point; see Lizardi (1993), Toribio (1993), (2000), Pérez-Leroux (1995). Caribbean Spanish is still rich in its tense paradigm, but its agreement paradigm has undergone syncretism due to its loss of syllable final –s. This resulted “in the convergence of second with third persons, and in the imperfect and conditional, first, second, and third person are rendered homophonous” (Toribio 2000:318). As Toribio notes, native speakers of Caribbean Spanish are also speakers of Standard Spanish; therefore some of the predictions are not always easily testable. The prediction that null subjects should no longer be available for a speaker of 11

A. Cardinaletti points out that the same facts hold in Italian. Quali libri Maria non legge mai? (which book Maria not read more?) *Nessuno. (none).

THE LEFT EDGE IN THE SPANISH CLAUSAL STRUCTURE

353

Caribbean Spanish cannot be readily tested because of the interference from Standard Spanish. Yet, the above authors have noted that in Caribbean Spanish, unlike Standard Spanish, overt pronouns have a wider semantic usage, namely they are readily used in non-contrastive contexts and to refer to non-human subjects, as well as in the cases of non-thematic subjects (i.e. the expletive subject ello). On the other hand, there are two observable differences that are expected. One is the loss of “subject” inversion in questions, and this is indeed attested; see Lizardi and Toribio op.cit. Some examples from Toribio (2001) are cited below.12 (36)

a. Qué ese letrero dice? What that signs says b. Qué número tú anotaste? What number you wrote down c. Qué yo les voy a mandar a esos muchachos? What I to-them. going.to send to those boys?

Caribbean Spanish still has a rich tense paradigm. Therefore, Caribbean has the V+T compound (like French) and V therefore moves to T, but not any higher (since it lacks phi). Unlike French, Caribbean Spanish still allows for postverbal subject (subjects in Spec of V). This can best be observed in a construction that is proper to Caribbean, namely the copula focus construction: (37)

a. Juan le regaló fué un libro a Pedro. Juan to-them gave was a book to Pedro “It was a book that Juan gave to Pedro.” b. Juan le regaló un libro fué a Pedro. “It was to Pedro that Juan gave a book.” c. Los niños comieron fueron patatas. The chidren ate was potatoes “It was potatoes that the children ate.”

Bosque (1999) has argued that the above construction is distinct from clefts and that the focused phrase in such cases is part of the verbal phrase. Therefore, examples like the following, where a postverbal subject is focused, must be analyzed as involving a VP internal subject:

12

An anonymous referee remarks that inverted subjects are preferred in CS. It would be important to do a generational study (also taking into consideration urban vs. non-urban parameter) to determine how the two competing grammars (Standard Spanish and CS) are evolving. The view that there are two competing grammars involved (as suggested by Toribio) has the benefit of accounting for an apparent optionality in these speakers speech. But see Ordóñez & Olarrea (2006) for a different view.

354 (38)

MARIA LUISA ZUBIZARRETA

a. Las patatas las comieron fueron los niños. “The potatoes, it was the children that ate them.” b. El libro me lo regaló fué Maria. “The book, it was María that gave it to me.”

The above sentences indicate that in Caribbean (unlike French), Nom Case can still be licensed within VP. On the other hand, Italian has shown that a VP internal subject blocks Acc licensing on an object contained within the same VP. Therefore, we predict that the VSO order should not be compatible with the copula-focus construction. Based on preliminary data, this indeed appears to be the case (the examples below were provided to us by A.T. Pérez-Leroux): (39)

a. *Pa las navidades le compró Juan fué un carro. For Christmas for-them bought Juan was a car “For Christmas, it was a car that Juan bought for them.” b. *Pa las navidades le compró fué Juan un carro. “For Christmas, it was Juan that bought them a car.”

7.

Conclusion In this paper, we have reexamined several ideas and empirical data uncovered during the last decade regarding the left-edge part of the clause in Standard Spanish in the light of what is also know about other closely related languages, such as Italian and Caribbean Spanish. We have identified two facts about Standard Spanish as being intimately related to its rich agreement paradigm: the availability of the VSO order and the “subject inversion” phenomenon in informational questions. We suggested a particular formalization of “rich” agreement based on ideas of Biberauer and Roberts (2008). That formalism allow us to identify the left-most edge in the I-domain as the projection of “rich” agreement (the phi-P), which is also the locus of the EPP feature. Spec of phiP is an “open” position, which checks EPP feature and functions as Subject of Predication. While we claim that the VSO order is intrinsically related to rich agreement in Romance, we do not intend this correlation to be taken as a universal. Indeed, in languages with V-to-C (and poor agreement), like German and Dutch, a VSO order is also attested.

References Belletti, Adriana. 2004. “Aspects of the Low IP Area”. The Structure of CP and IP, ed. by L. Rizzi, 16-51. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Belletti, Adriana. 2005. “Extended Doubling and the VP Periphery”. Probus 17:1.1-36.

THE LEFT EDGE IN THE SPANISH CLAUSAL STRUCTURE

355

Beninca, Paola & Cecilia Poletto. 2004. “Topic, Focus, and V2: Defining the CP Sublayers”. The Structure of CP and IP: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, vol. 2, ed. by L. Rizzi, 52-75. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Beas, Omar. 2007. Agreement on the Left Edge: The Syntax of Left Dislocation in Spanish. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Southern California. Biberauer, Theresa & Ian Roberts. 2008. “Subject, Tense and Verb-Movement in Germanic and Romance”. Cambridge Occasional Papers in Linguistics (COPiL) 3.24-43. Boeckx, Cédric. 2000. “Properties of French Interrogatives”. Ms., University of Connecticut, Storrs. Bosque, Ignacio. 1999 “Sobre la estructura sintáctica de una construcción focalizadora”. Homenaje a D. Ambrosio Rabanales. Santiago de Chile: Universidad de Chile. Cardinaletti, Anna. 2003. “Stylistic Fronting in Italian”. Grammar in Focus: Festschrift for Christer Platzack, vol. 2, ed. by L.-O. Delsing et al., 47-55. Lund: Wallin and Dalholm. Cardinaletti, Anna. 2003. 2004. “Towards a Cartography of Subject Positions”. The Structure of CP and IP: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, vol. 2, ed. by L. Rizzi, 115-165. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Cardinaletti, Anna. 2006. “Subjects and Wh-questions: Some New Generalizations.” The Best Romance: Selected Papers from the 36th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL), New Brunswick, March-April 2006, ed. by J. Camacho et al., 57-78. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Chomsky, Noam. 1993. “A Minimalist Program for Linguistic Theory”. The View from Building 20: Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger, ed. by K. Hale & S.J. Keyser, 1-52. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Chomsky, Noam. 2001. “Derivation by Phase”. Ken Hale: A Life in Language, ed. by M. Kenstowicz, 1-52. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Fontana, Josep. 1993. Phrase Structure and the Syntax of Clitics in the History of Spanish. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania. Goodall, Grant. 1991. “On the Status of Spec of IP”. Proceedings of the Tenth West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (WCCFL), ed. by D. Bates. Standford, CA: CSLI Publications. Inclán Nichol, Sara. 1997. Absence of Verb Inversion and Specificity in Peninsular Spanish Wh-questions. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles. Lizardi, Carmen. 1993. Subject Position in Puerto Rican wh-questions: Syntactic, Sociolinguistic and Discourse Factors. Ph.D. dissertation, Cornell University. Masullo, Pascual. 1992. Incorporation and Case Theory in Spanish: A Crosslinguistic Perspective. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Washington, Seattle.

356

MARIA LUISA ZUBIZARRETA

Pérez-Leroux, Ana Teresa. 1995. “Syntactic Change in Caribbean Spanish: Verb Movement and Word Order in Infinitivals”. Proceedings of the Conference on the Languages of the Rio Bravo, New Orleans, 9-10 January 1995, ed. by H. Howard. New Orleans: Tulane University. Downloadable from http://www.tulane.edu/~ling/LSoRB/LSoRB.html Ordóñez, Francisco & Esthela Treviño. 1999. “Left Dislocated Subjects and the Prodrop Parameter: A Case Study of Spanish”. Lingua 107.39-68. Ordóñez, Francisco & Antxon Olarrea. 2006. “Microvariation in Caribbean/nonCaribbean Spanish interrogatives”. Probus 18:1.59-96. Rivero, Maria Luisa. 1991. “Clitic and NP climbing in Old Spanish”. Current Studies in Spanish Linguistics, ed. by H. Campos & F. Martínez-Gil, 241282. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press. Rivero, Maria Luisa. 1997. “On Two Locations for Complement Clitic Pronouns: Serbo-Croatian, Bulgarian, and Old Spanish”. Parameters of Morphosyntactic Change, ed. by A. van Kemendande & N. Vincent, 170206. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Rizzi, Luigi. 1997. “The Fine Structure of the Left Periphery”. Elements of Grammar, ed. by L. Haegeman, 281-337. Dordrecht & Boston: Kluwer. Suñer, Margarita. 1988. “The Role of Agreement in Clitic-Doubled Constructions”. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 6.391-434. Suñer, Margarita. 2003. “The Lexical Preverbal Subject in a Romance Null Subject Language: Where are Thou?” A Romance Perspective in Language Knowledge and Use: Selected Papers from the 31st Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL), Chicago, 19–22 April 2001, ed. by R. NúñezCedeño, L. López & R. Cameron, 341-357. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Toribio, Jacqueline. 1993. Parametric Variation in the Licencing of Nominals. Ph.D. dissertation, Cornell University. Toribio, Jacqueline. 2000. “Setting Parametric Limits on Dialectal Variation in Spanish”. Lingua 10.315-341. Uriagereka, Juan. 1995. “Aspects of the Syntax of Clitic Placement in Western Romance”. Linguistic Inquiry 26.79-123. Zubizarreta, Maria Luisa. 1994. “El orden de palabras en español y el caso nominativo”. Special issue of Nueva Revista de Filología Hispánica VI, ed. by V. Demonte, 21-49. Mexico City: Colegio de México. Zubizarreta, Maria Luisa. 1998. Prosody, Focus, and Word Order. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Zubizarreta, Maria Luisa. 2001. “The Constraint on Preverbal Subjects in Romance Interrogatives: A Minimality Effect”. Subject Inversion in Romance and the Theory of Universal Grammar, ed. by A. Hulke & J.-Y. Pollock, 183-204. New York: Oxford University Press.

THE LEFT EDGE IN THE SPANISH CLAUSAL STRUCTURE

357

Zubizarreta, Maria Luisa. 2003. “Intervention Effects in the French wh-in-situ Construction: Syntax or Interpretation?” Romance Perspective in Language Knowledge and Use: Selected Papers from the 31st Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL), Chicago, 19-22 April 2001, ed. by R. NúñezCedeño, L. López & R. Cameron, 359-379. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

INDEX OF TERMS & CONCEPTS

A Agreement, 1-6, 8, 13, 16, 89-90, 96, 99, 101 Amount relative clauses, 218 (Anti-)licensing, 105-110, 113-119 Antimorphy, 105, 108-111, 113, 115, 118 Anti-symmetric framework, 209-215 Auxiliary switch, 37-38

C Case, 1-16 Catalan, 227-228, 230, 232-235, 238 Chain resolution (see Phonetic resolution of chains) Clitic group, 307, 308, 313 Clitics, 4-6, 12, 89-99, 101-102, 177, 180-181, 310-317 Clitic-second, 89, 94-98, 100-102 Cognate complements, 234 Comparatives, 164-165, 167-169 Competence, 173-174, 177, 179, 185-188 Composite group, 307, 308, 313, 315-317 Conflation, 228, 230-231, 233, 235-236 Constraint indexation (see Indexed constraints) Contiguity, 196f Control and raising, 44-45 Coordination of relative clause heads, 214-219, 223 Co-phonologies, 195, 205-206 Correlative clauses derivation of, 124, 126, 128, 131, 136, 138 Correlativization, 121-123, 125, 129-130, 136, 138 Crypto-variation, 193, 205

D Declaratives, 21-22, 243-244 Definiteness effects within relative clauses, 217-219 Degree quantifiers, 124-125, 127-128, 133, 138

Degrees, 9, 121-123, 125-126, 128, 130, 132-135, 137-138 Dissimilation, 144, 147-148, 150, 152-154

E ‘Easy-to-please’ constructions, 37-39, 41-42 English, 228, 230, 233-234, 237-238 EPP, 1, 7, 8, 10, 13 EPP feature, 1, 12, 19-20, 28-33, 339, 349-350, 354 Equatives: 164-168 Exception (see Lexical exception) Expletive, 1, 2, 7-16, 24-29, 32-33

F Feature checking, 163 First language acquisition (L1A), 173-175 Free word order, 8, 70-71 Functional verbs, 37, 43-47

G Glide, 51-59, 62-63

H Hale’s conjecture, 71-72, 74, 83 Hierarchical relation, 291, 294

I I-language, 173-174, 176, 178-179, 181-184, 187-188 Indexed constraints, 195, 203 Interlanguage, 173-174, 179, 181, 183-184, 186-187 Intonation, 243-252, 255-257 Italian, 2-5, 9, 13-14, 37, 39, 41, 45-48, 80, 83, 187, 193-195, 197, 200, 205, 217, 227-228, 232-236, 238-239, 308, 310, 312-314, 317-319, 339-341, 343, 347350, 352, 354

360

INDEX OF TERMS & CONCEPTS

J Judeo-Spanish, 51-53

L Lexical decision task, 194, 200 Lexical exception, 194 Lexical subject, 1-5, 9-16 Lexicon, 8-9, 13 Licensing, 1, 6, 12, 15, 19, 21, 27, 32 Linearization, 9, 12, 74, 76, 83

M Matching analysis of relative clauses, 214224 Metaphony, 147 Metathesis, 321-324, 326-329, 331-334 Morphological alternation, 145-147, 151

N Naming task, 265, 267, 271 Nasal place assimilation, 51, 55, 60-61, 6364 Negative concord, 108, 115-116, 118-119 Negative concord items, 159, 160 Negative fragments, 162-163 Negative polarity items, 166-169 Nominal ellipsis, 291-292, 303-304 Nonce-word test, 193 Non-finite, 1-5, 7-9, 12, 14-16 Null complementizers, 19-33

O Old French, 19, 22-34, 89-90 Optimality Theory (OT), 51, 52, 57, 63-64, 93-94, 97-98, 101, 321, 326, 329

P Palatalisation, palatalization, 63, 193-206, 277-287, 307-309 Paradigm effect, 196, 201ff Parallel Structures Model, 196 Parataxis, 19, 20, 23, 30-33 Partial cliticization, 291-292, 302 Path, 228, 230, 234-236 Peak alignment, 243-249, 251-252, 255-257 Perception, 245, 247, 251-252, 256-257, 277, 279-287, 321-322, 326, 329-334 Performance, 173-174, 176, 179, 183, 185, 188 PF interface, 295, 300 Phase, 1, 2, 4, 6, 10, 15-16 Phi-feature, 1, 2, 4, 95-97, 345, 348 Phonetic resolution of chains, 291, 295, 299300, 304 Phonological gaps, 264-265, 267, 272-273 Phonological orders, 291-292, 304 (see also Surface linear order) Phrasal verbs, 228, 233, 237 Place of articulation, 54, 56, 63-64, 277, 279-280, 282, 283, 285 Polarity, 351-352 Positive polarity, 105, 107-108, 110-111, 113, 115-116, 118-119 Presuppositions (of degree terms), 132, 136 Principle C (anti-reconstruction) effects in relative clauses, 212-213, 221-222 Probabilistic lexicon, 273 Promotion (NP-raising) analysis of relative clauses, 210-212, 217-218, 220-222, 224 Prosodic structure, 307, 311-312, 314-317

R Reconstruction effects in relative clauses, 211-214, 217, 220-222 Relative clauses, 28 Resumptive (quantification), 105-106, 115116, 118-119 Rhotic, 321-322, 324, 326-329, 331, 333334 Romanian, 1-3, 5-6, 8-14, 95, 102, 105, 108110, 112, 114-118, 216, 277-287, 307311, 313-319 Root vowels, 143-144, 146-154

INDEX OF TERMS & CONCEPTS

S Secondary labialization, 51, 56-57, 59, 62-64 Second language acquisition (L2A), 173 Shortest Link Condition, 345, 350 Spanish, 3, 9, 47, 51, 52, 56-57, 59, 64, 6970, 72-74, 77-83, 96-97, 101, 121-122, 125-126, 131, 136, 138, 143-147, 149154, 180, 183, 209-224, 232-234, 238, 243-249, 251-252, 254-257, 291-296, 298, 300-302, 304, 339-344, 347-350, 352-354 Spanish phonotactics, 261-262, 264, 271273 Subject inversion, 339, 354 Subject of predication, 9-10, 339 Subordinate clauses, 19, 22-23, 25-33 Surface linear order, 291, 293-295, 299-300, 305 Syllable weight, 261-262, 264, 267, 272

361

T Tobler-Mussafia, 89-91, 92, 94, 101-102 ‘Too-many-solutions’ problem in Optimality Theory, 51, 63

V V2 word order, 22-23, 26-27, 29-33 Verb class, 143-144, 151-154 Verb-second, 89, 95, 97, 101 Vowel epenthesis, 51-52, 54-56, 59-64, 325, 334 VSO, 339-340, 349, 354

W Warlpiri, 69, 70-71, 74-77 Weak islands within relative clauses, 219220 Wug test, 198

CURRENT ISSUES IN LINGUISTIC THEORY

E. F. K. Koerner, Editor

Zentrum für Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft, Typologie und Universalienforschung, Berlin [email protected] Current Issues in Linguistic Theory (CILT) is a theory-oriented series which welcomes contributions from scholars who have significant proposals to make towards the advancement of our understanding of language, its structure, functioning and development. CILT has been established in order to provide a forum for the presentation and discussion of linguistic opinions of scholars who do not necessarily accept the prevailing mode of thought in linguistic science. It offers an outlet for meaningful contributions to the current linguistic debate, and furnishes the diversity of opinion which a healthy discipline must have. A complete list of titles in this series can be found on the publishers’ website, www.benjamins.com 305 Bubenik, Vit, John Hewson and Sarah Rose (eds.): Grammatical Change in Indo-European Languages. Papers presented at the workshop on Indo-European Linguistics at the XVIIIth International Conference. on Historical Linguistics, Montreal, 2007. Expected June 2009 304 Masullo, Pascual José, Erin O'Rourke and Chia-Hui Huang (eds.): Romance Linguistics 2007. Selected papers from the 37th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL), Pittsburgh, 15–18 March 2007. 2009. vii, 361 pp. 303 Torck, Danièle and W. Leo Wetzels (eds.): Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2006. Selected papers from ‘Going Romance’, Amsterdam, 7–9 December 2006. viii, 293 pp. Expected August 2009 302 Ferraresi, Gisella and Maria Goldbach (eds.): Principles of Syntactic Reconstruction. 2008. xvii, 219 pp. 301 Parkinson, Dilworth B. (ed.): Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics. Papers from the annual symposium on Arabic linguistics. Volume XXI: Provo, Utah, March 2007. 2008. x, 206 pp. 300 Vajda, Edward J. (ed.): Subordination and Coordination Strategies in North Asian Languages. 2008. xii, 218 pp. 299 González-Díaz, Victorina: English Adjective Comparison. A historical perspective. 2008. xix, 252 pp. 298 Bowern, Claire, Bethwyn Evans and Luisa Miceli (eds.): Morphology and Language History. In honour of Harold Koch. 2008. x, 364 pp. 297 Dossena, Marina, Richard Dury and Maurizio Gotti (eds.): English Historical Linguistics 2006. Selected papers from the fourteenth International Conference on English Historical Linguistics (ICEHL 14), Bergamo, 21–25 August 2006. Volume III: Geo-Historical Variation in English. 2008. xiii, 197 pp. 296 Dury, Richard, Maurizio Gotti and Marina Dossena (eds.): English Historical Linguistics 2006. Selected papers from the fourteenth International Conference on English Historical Linguistics (ICEHL 14), Bergamo, 21–25 August 2006. Volume II: Lexical and Semantic Change. 2008. xiii, 264 pp. 295 Gotti, Maurizio, Marina Dossena and Richard Dury (eds.): English Historical Linguistics 2006. Selected papers from the fourteenth International Conference on English Historical Linguistics (ICEHL 14), Bergamo, 21–25 August 2006. Volume I: Syntax and Morphology. 2008. xiv, 259 pp. 294 Frellesvig, Bjarke and John Whitman (eds.): Proto-Japanese. Issues and Prospects. 2008. vii, 229 pp. 293 Detges, Ulrich and Richard Waltereit (eds.): The Paradox of Grammatical Change. Perspectives from Romance. 2008. vi, 252 pp. 292 Nicolov, Nicolas, Kalina Bontcheva, Galia Angelova and Ruslan Mitkov (eds.): Recent Advances in Natural Language Processing IV. Selected papers from RANLP 2005. 2007. xii, 307 pp. 291 Baauw, Sergio, Frank Drijkoningen and Manuela Pinto (eds.): Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2005. Selected papers from ‘Going Romance’, Utrecht, 8–10 December 2005. 2007. viii, 338 pp. 290 Mughazy, Mustafa A. (ed.): Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics. Papers from the annual symposium on Arabic linguistics. Volume XX: Kalamazoo, Michigan, March 2006. 2007. xii, 247 pp. 289 Benmamoun, Elabbas (ed.): Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics. Papers from the annual symposium on Arabic Linguistics. Volume XIX: Urbana, Illinois, April 2005. 2007. xiv, 304 pp. 288 Toivonen, Ida and Diane Nelson (eds.): Saami Linguistics. 2007. viii, 321 pp. 287 Camacho, José, Nydia Flores-Ferrán, Liliana Sánchez, Viviane Déprez and María José Cabrera (eds.): Romance Linguistics 2006. Selected papers from the 36th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL), New Brunswick, March-April 2006. 2007. viii, 340 pp. 286 Weijer, Jeroen van de and Erik Jan van der Torre (eds.): Voicing in Dutch. (De)voicing – phonology, phonetics, and psycholinguistics. 2007. x, 186 pp.

285 Sackmann, Robin (ed.): Explorations in Integrational Linguistics. Four essays on German, French, and Guaraní. 2008. ix, 239 pp. 284 Salmons, Joseph C. and Shannon Dubenion-Smith (eds.): Historical Linguistics 2005. Selected papers from the 17th International Conference on Historical Linguistics, Madison, Wisconsin, 31 July - 5 August 2005. 2007. viii, 413 pp. 283 Lenker, Ursula and Anneli Meurman-Solin (eds.): Connectives in the History of English. 2007. viii, 318 pp. 282 Prieto, Pilar, Joan Mascaró and Maria-Josep Solé (eds.): Segmental and prosodic issues in Romance phonology. 2007. xvi, 262 pp. 281 Vermeerbergen, Myriam, Lorraine Leeson and Onno Crasborn (eds.): Simultaneity in Signed Languages. Form and function. 2007. viii, 360 pp. (incl. CD-Rom). 280 Hewson, John and Vit Bubenik: From Case to Adposition. The development of configurational syntax in Indo-European languages. 2006. xxx, 420 pp. 279 Nedergaard Thomsen, Ole (ed.): Competing Models of Linguistic Change. Evolution and beyond. 2006. vi, 344 pp. 278 Doetjes, Jenny and Paz González (eds.): Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2004. Selected papers from ‘Going Romance’, Leiden, 9–11 December 2004. 2006. viii, 320 pp. 277 Helasvuo, Marja-Liisa and Lyle Campbell (eds.): Grammar from the Human Perspective. Case, space and person in Finnish. 2006. x, 280 pp. 276 Montreuil, Jean-Pierre Y. (ed.): New Perspectives on Romance Linguistics. Vol. II: Phonetics, Phonology and Dialectology. Selected papers from the 35th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL), Austin, Texas, February 2005. 2006. x, 213 pp. 275 Nishida, Chiyo and Jean-Pierre Y. Montreuil (eds.): New Perspectives on Romance Linguistics. Vol. I: Morphology, Syntax, Semantics, and Pragmatics. Selected papers from the 35th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL), Austin, Texas, February 2005. 2006. xiv, 288 pp. 274 Gess, Randall S. and Deborah Arteaga (eds.): Historical Romance Linguistics. Retrospective and perspectives. 2006. viii, 393 pp. 273 Filppula, Markku, Juhani Klemola, Marjatta Palander and Esa Penttilä (eds.): Dialects Across Borders. Selected papers from the 11th International Conference on Methods in Dialectology (Methods XI), Joensuu, August 2002. 2005. xii, 291 pp. 272 Gess, Randall S. and Edward J. Rubin (eds.): Theoretical and Experimental Approaches to Romance Linguistics. Selected papers from the 34th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL), Salt Lake City, March 2004. 2005. viii, 367 pp. 271 Branner, David Prager (ed.): The Chinese Rime Tables. Linguistic philosophy and historicalcomparative phonology. 2006. viii, 358 pp. 270 Geerts, Twan, Ivo van Ginneken and Haike Jacobs (eds.): Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2003. Selected papers from ‘Going Romance’ 2003, Nijmegen, 20–22 November. 2005. viii, 369 pp. 269 Hargus, Sharon and Keren Rice (eds.): Athabaskan Prosody. 2005. xii, 432 pp. 268 Cravens, Thomas D. (ed.): Variation and Reconstruction. 2006. viii, 223 pp. 267 Alhawary, Mohammad T. and Elabbas Benmamoun (eds.): Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics. Papers from the annual symposium on Arabic linguistics. Volume XVII–XVIII: Alexandria, 2003 and Norman, Oklahoma 2004. 2005. xvi, 315 pp. 266 Boudelaa, Sami (ed.): Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics. Papers from the annual symposium on Arabic linguistics. Volume XVI: , Cambridge, March 2002. 2006. xii, 181 pp. 265 Cornips, Leonie and Karen P. Corrigan (eds.): Syntax and Variation. Reconciling the Biological and the Social. 2005. vi, 312 pp. 264 Dressler, Wolfgang U., Dieter Kastovsky, Oskar E. Pfeiffer and Franz Rainer (eds.): Morphology and its demarcations. Selected papers from the 11th Morphology meeting, Vienna, February 2004. With the assistance of Francesco Gardani and Markus A. Pöchtrager. 2005. xiv, 320 pp. 263 Branco, António, Tony McEnery and Ruslan Mitkov (eds.): Anaphora Processing. Linguistic, cognitive and computational modelling. 2005. x, 449 pp. 262 Vajda, Edward J. (ed.): Languages and Prehistory of Central Siberia. 2004. x, 275 pp. 261 Kay, Christian J. and Jeremy J. Smith (eds.): Categorization in the History of English. 2004. viii, 268 pp. 260 Nicolov, Nicolas, Kalina Bontcheva, Galia Angelova and Ruslan Mitkov (eds.): Recent Advances in Natural Language Processing III. Selected papers from RANLP 2003. 2004. xii, 402 pp. 259 Carr, Philip, Jacques Durand and Colin J. Ewen (eds.): Headhood, Elements, Specification and Contrastivity. Phonological papers in honour of John Anderson. 2005. xxviii, 405 pp.