An International Handbook of Contemporary Research. Romanian has a complementizer that is exclusively used in subjunctives: ca. In Portuguese and French, on the other hand, the order wh-Subject-V is fine in embedded questions and alternates with inversion. It also suggests that the diachronic emergence of a V2 grammar is entirely plausible on the basis of the available data. The Italian ban on short wh-movement of the subject may be virtually identical to the Hebrew facts if Italian null subject sentences necessarily contain a pronominal subject—pro in the third person, a verbal suffix in the first and second, if Kayne 1999a is correct.
Sujets syntaxiques, positions, inversion etpro. Drawing on work by Dobrovie-Sorin 1994 , we see that a subject may not intervene between the subjunctive particle and the verbal cluster. Quel genre de cadeau envisage de donner Marie a Jean-Jacques? Aafke Hulk and Jean-Yves Pollock eds. One important point of consensus among the authors in this volume is that purely syntactic approaches, which fail to permit a consideration of discoursal factors or features, are unlikely to adequately account for the empirical facts of subject inversion. For example, some authors assume foci are rightmost constituents for the purpose of receiving nuclear stress, while others assume focus is a functional feature, heading its own functional projection and attracting constituents to satisfy feature checking, but a projection of the left periphery.
Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. Case position, is systematically available for certain indefinite objects. First, it raises the question of why I-to-C movement should interfere with Case checking in Romance but not in Germanic. What have you given back to Maria? An analysis of the dialects is obviously outside the scope of this chapter. The northern Italian examples show without question that the landing site for the question operator is not the Spec of the Infl head that contains the verbal cluster. Raposo and an anonymous reviewer for implicitly raising the issue of a comparison between the two types of structures. The variety of subjects utilized—definite, indefinite, and proper name—is meant to indicate that the contrast is detectable independently from this variable.
Crede Maria che Gianni sia partito believes Maria that Gianni has left d. Example 64 represents the structure of the left periphery in Romanian: This is essentially the structure proposed in the previous section for Romanian, Catalan, and Iberian Spanish, except that Fin is now incorporated in the structure as the highest head in the inflectional system. The real A-position occupied by subjects is postverbal. You can change your cookie settings at any time. I wonder whose article they're reading.
Let us propose that direct object topicalization, although quite generally prohibited in French across an ordinary subject, is in fact available if the crossed subject is strongly focussed. The preverbal position does not trigger multiple topicalization effects. Linguistics and Philosophy, 16, 45-77. Papers from the Thirtieth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society, Volume 2: The Parasession on Variation in Linguistic Theory, 180-201. My goal in this chapter is to provide a unified account of the dissimilarities between Germanic and Romance wh-triggered inversion while also capturing the different word order patterns found in Romance.
A position of this type is assumed in the analysis of the left periphery by Rizzi 1997 , where it is located immediately above the clause-external Focus Projection. It then seems plausible to hypothesize that Focalization plays the crucial role in the licensing of the low postverbal subject. Among the Romance languages, Portuguese is the only one that has English-type Topicalization, as illustrated below see Duarte 1987 and Raposo 1994, 1996. This solution, however, is clearly unsatisfactory. This prediction is fulfilled: i A Maria quando vira? They can also involve additional layers, depending on whether the Topic or Focus layer is activated. E' entrato un ladro dalla finestra has come in a thief from the window In 1.
I require that be proceeded to the revision of the law. A qui a parle qui? As a general approach, I assume that verbal agreement is obtained through the relation with the associate expletive in the preverbal subject position. This is an analysis interestingly convergent with the one to be developed here. This is true despite the fact that -ant forms and finite verbs behave similarly in the placement of adverbs; cf. Quel beau visage a cette personnel 'what nice face has this person' d.
A qui voulait donner ce livre Jean-Jacques? The analysis developed by Vallduvi 1992 for Catalan extends rather naturally to this paradigm. Sabes quando chegou a Maria? Concerning the first two, we refer the reader to the work just cited. The generalization underlying the distribution of ca appears to be that ca is obligatory as long as there is a topic in the left periphery of the clause. Such a position can be identified with the one filled by postverbal subjects of nonunaccusative verbs, which we have identified with the specifier of the clause-internal Focus Phrase. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 18: 525-578.
Theoretical Implications of Complementation in Romanian. Preverbal focused subjects, on the other hand, form a pattern with Focalized adverbs or objects. Credo, il tuo libro, di apprezzarlo molto. Starting with Italian, we observe that the order Aux-Subject-Prt is barred in declaratives, as well as interrogatives: 21 a. Optimality Theory: An Overview, 171-99. Nor has consensus been reached on how subjects arrive or remain in their positions.