Left dislocated subjects and the pro-drop parameter: A case study of Spanish☆

Abstract The typical assumption in a pro-drop language like Spanish is that covert as well as overt subjects occupy a preverbal position at Spell Out in which their case and agreement properties are satisfied. This paper presents evidence against such a claim. On the one hand, we show that pre-verbal overt subjects pattern with left dislocated DOs and IOs in a wide range of syntactic contexts: ellipsis, extraction of quantifiers and interpretation of preverbal quantifiers. In these same contexts, sentences with a silent subject differ from sentences with overt ones. We conclude that overt pre-verbal subjects are necessarily left dislocated. In order to account for the left dislocated nature of overt subjects, we propose to eliminate AgrS as a functional projection. Instead we take the idea that subject agreement should be considered a clitic (Taraldsen, 1992), and the relation between the agreement and subject to be one of clitic doubling. Evidence in favor of this claim comes from striking parallelisms between standard clitic doubling constructions and agreement-subject constructions. Specifically, both cases pattern similarly in relation to the determination of binding in certain cases of mismatches in person between the doubling DP and the clitic. Since we take agreement to be a clitic that absorbs theta role and case, movement of the doubling DP subject to a preverbal position cannot be driven by agreement or case reasons. Instead, movement of the subject to a pre-verbal position is driven by discourse considerations as is typical in left dislocations.

[1]  Dominique Sportiche,et al.  The position of subjects , 1991 .

[2]  Ivan A. Sag,et al.  Deletion And Logical Form , 1976 .

[3]  Alain Rouveret FUNCTIONAL CATEGORIES AND AGREEMENT , 1991 .

[4]  Noam Chomsky,et al.  Lectures on Government and Binding , 1981 .

[5]  Sanford A. Schane,et al.  Modern Studies in English: Readings in Transformational Grammar , 1974 .

[6]  L. Haegeman,et al.  NEGATIVE HEADS AND THE NEG CRITERION , 1991 .

[7]  L. Rizzi The Fine Structure of the Left Periphery , 1997 .

[8]  Luigi Rizzi,et al.  Issues in Italian Syntax , 1981 .

[9]  Heles Contreras On the Position of Subjects , 1991 .

[10]  Juan Uriagereka,et al.  Minimal Restrictions on Basque Movements , 1999 .

[11]  Elabbas Benmamoun,et al.  The Feature Structure of Functional Categories: A Comparative Study of Arabic Dialects , 2000 .

[12]  Johan Rooryck,et al.  Phrase structure and the lexicon , 1996 .

[13]  Esther Torrego Salcedo On inversion in Spanish and some of its effects , 1984 .

[14]  I. Laka Negation in syntax--on the nature of functional categories and projections , 1990 .

[15]  Noam Chomsky,et al.  The Minimalist Program , 1992 .

[16]  J. S. Y. Pujols,et al.  Agreement and subjects , 1992 .

[17]  R. Larson On the double object construction , 1988 .

[18]  Wolfgang Sternefeld,et al.  Improper movement and unambiguous binding , 1993 .

[19]  Carmen Dobrovic-Sorin Clitic doubling, 'Wh'-movement and quatification in Romanian , 1990 .

[20]  Margarita Suñer,et al.  The role of agreement in clitic-doubled constructions , 1988 .

[21]  Yves Roberge,et al.  The syntactic recoverability of null arguments , 1990 .

[22]  Samuel David Espstein Derivational constraints oh A-chain formation , 1992 .

[23]  Dominique Sportiche A theory of floating quantifiers and its corollaries for constituent structure , 1988 .

[24]  Jean-Yves Pollock Verb movement, universal grammar and the structure of IP , 1989 .

[25]  Yoshihisa Kitagawa Subjects in Japanese and English , 2018 .

[26]  Noam Chomsky Some Concepts and Consequences of the Theory of Government and Binding , 1982 .

[27]  Mario Montalbetti,et al.  After binding : on the interpretation of pronouns , 1984 .

[28]  Ángel López García Gramática del español , 1994 .

[29]  E. Jelinek Empty categories, case, and configurationality , 1984 .

[30]  R. Larson Double Objects Revisited: Reply to Jackendoff , 1990 .

[31]  Francisco Ordóñez,et al.  Post-Verbal Asymmetries in Spanish , 1998 .

[32]  Katalin É. Kiss,et al.  Discourse configurational languages , 1995 .

[33]  A. Cardinaletti Subjects and clause structure , 1996 .

[34]  J. Rooryck,et al.  CLITIC CONSTRUCTIONS , 2000 .

[35]  L. Rizzi Null objects in Italian and the theory of 'pro' , 1986 .

[36]  Esther Torrego Salcedo On quantifier float in control clauses , 1996 .

[37]  Myriam Uribe-Etxebarria,et al.  On the structural positions of the subject in Spanish, their nature and their consequences for quantification , 2013 .

[38]  Mark C. Baker,et al.  The Polysynthesis Parameter , 1995 .

[39]  Liliane Haegeman,et al.  Elements of Grammar: Handbook In Generative Syntax , 1998 .

[40]  Aaron L. Halpern,et al.  Approaching second : second position clitics and related phenomena , 1996 .

[41]  F. Ordóñez,et al.  Word order and clausal structure in Spanish and other Romance languages , 1997 .

[42]  Howard Lasnik,et al.  Move α: Conditions on Its Application and Output , 1992 .

[43]  Jon Ortiz de Urbina,et al.  Syntactic theory and Basque syntax , 1992 .

[44]  Juan Uriagereka Aspects of the syntax of clitic placement in western romance , 1995 .

[45]  Maria Luisa Zubizarreta El orden de palabras en español y el caso nominativo , 1994 .

[46]  Ortiz de Urbina Negation in Syntax : On the Nature of Functional Categories and Projections , 2022 .

[47]  Guglielmo Cinque,et al.  Types of Ā-dependencies , 1990 .

[48]  Margarita Suner,et al.  V-movement and the licensing of argumental Wh-phrases in Spanish , 1994 .

[49]  James Pustejovsky,et al.  Proceedings of NELS , 1978 .

[50]  Asa Kasher,et al.  The Chomskyan Turn , 1993 .

[51]  Richard S. Kayne Connectedness and binary branching , 1984 .