It is well-known that German allows for the topicalisation of bare verbs, as is illustrated in (1a). In GB-theory and in the principles and parameters framework, data like (1a) prima facie were problematic, since it was assumed that only XPs can move into XP-positions. Thus, in Den Besten and Webelhuth’s (1987) original account of V-preposing in German and Dutch, they argue that what has been moved into [Spec,CP] in (1a) is not simply a verb, but must constitute an entire VP. Consequently, they propose to analyze (1a) parallel to cases of VP-preposing (cf. (1b)) in which the direct object has been scrambled out prior to VP-to-CP movement, as is illustrated in (1c).
[1]
Noam Chomsky,et al.
Bare Phrase Structure
,
1994
.
[3]
Roland Hinterhölzl,et al.
Scrambling, Remnant Movement, and Restructuring in West Germanic
,
2006
.
[4]
Molly Diesing,et al.
Yiddish VP Order and the Typology of Object Movement in Germanic
,
1997
.
[5]
Sten Vikner,et al.
Verb movement variation in Germanic and optimality theory
,
2001
.
[6]
E. Selkirk.
On derived domains in sentence phonology
,
1986,
Phonology.
[7]
G. Fanselow.
6. Against remnant VP-movement
,
2002
.