Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
-
Upload
manuel-arturo-abreu -
Category
Documents
-
view
223 -
download
0
Transcript of Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
1/120
Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish
A Thesis
Presented to
The Division of Philosophy, Religion, Psychology, and Linguistics
Reed College
In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree
Bachelor of Arts
Manuel Abreu
May 2014
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
2/120
Approved for the Division
(Linguistics)
Matt Pearson
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
3/120
Acknowledgments
Thanks first and foremost to my family. Thanks to my interlocutors in the Bronx.
Thanks to everyone who also loves the Dominican ways of talking. Thanks to my friendswho kept me sane. Thanks for guidance to my adviser Matt Pearson it's been an honor
working with you and I'm grateful for your patience throughout the year. Thanks to my
second reader Katy McKinney-Bock, as well as to my third and fourth readers, Elizabeth
Drumm and Morgan Luker. Thanks to Reed College for what I could say has been a
thoroughly transformative experience.
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
4/120
Table of Contents
1. Introduction..................................................................................................................10
1.1 What is a clitic?........................................................................................................15
1.2 ACC and DAT clitics...............................................................................................20
1.3 What is clitic doubling? ......................................................................................... 23
1.3.1. Distinguishing doubling from dislocation....................................................... 26
1.4. What is object marker a?........................................................................................ 31
1.4.1. Animacy and definiteness................................................................................ 32
1.4.2. Object marker vs. preposition.......................................................................... 35
1.4.3. Specificity........................................................................................................ 38
1.5. Summary.................................................................................................................41
2. Analyzing DOCD......................................................................................................... 44
2.1. Movement vs. base-generation............................................................................... 45
2.2. Specificity and clitics..............................................................................................52
2.2.1. Partitivity effects..............................................................................................59
2.2.2. Scope and presuppositionality......................................................................... 65
2.3. Modifying Sportiche for my proposal.................................................................... 72
2.4. Summary.................................................................................................................83
3. Dominican Spanish...................................................................................................... 85
3.1. Dominican ACC Clitics.......................................................................................... 85
3.2. Intensionality & mood............................................................................................ 88
3.3. The syntax of DOCD.............................................................................................. 94
3.4. Summary...............................................................................................................101
4. Conclusion.................................................................................................................. 103
4.1. Summary of the study........................................................................................... 1044.2. A potential alternative...........................................................................................106
4.3. Notes for further research..................................................................................... 109
4.3. Final remarks........................................................................................................ 113
Bibliography................................................................................................................... 115
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
5/120
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
6/120
List of Abbreviations
1/2/3 = first-/second-/third- personACC = AccusativeCL = clitic (in syntax trees)CP = Co ple enti!er Phrase"A# = "ative"et = "eter iner"$C" = "irect o%&ect clitic dou%lin'"P = "eter iner Phrase" = "o inican panish
= e ale (as in 3p * 3rd-person plural fe ale)P = unctional Pro&ection+# = uture tense
, P = , perative ood, P. = , personal, = ,nfinitive,$C" = ,ndirect o%&ect clitic dou%lin'0 = 0ayne s enerali!ationL = Lo'ical or
= ale (as in 3s * 3rd-person sin'ular ale)e' = e'ation
$ = $%&ect ar ers or = sin'ularp or PL = pluralP = Phonolo'ical orPP = Prepositional PhraseP 4 = Perfective aspect P. = Pro'ressive aspect P.5 = Present tenseP # = Past tense6P = 6uantifier Phrase. L7 = .eflexive
+89 = u%&unctive ood#P = #ense Phrase4P = 4er% Phrase
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
7/120
List of Figures
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
8/120
Abstract
Dominican Spanish violates Kayne's Generalization (Jaeggli 1986) by allo ingclitic !o"bling itho"t a licensing preposition prece!ing the !o"ble! ob#ect$ %hisis notable& since most !ialects o Spanish abi!e by Kayne's Generalization$
"il!ing on investigations into clitics as agreement mar ers ( orer 198*) hichevi!ence speci icity e ects (S"+er 1988)& , a!opt an ,n!epen!ence -ypothesis( leam 1999) hich arg"es there is no ca"sal connection bet een clitic !o"blingan! !i erential ob#ect mar ing. separate grammaticality con!itions license thet o phenomena$ , sho that ob#ect mar er a obligatorily mar s speci ic animateob#ects& that across !ialects clitics are only available or speci ic arg"ments& an!that in Dominican Spanish (DS) clitic !o"bling is optionally available or speci ic!irect ob#ects& both animate an! inanimate$
, arg"e that the ob#ect mar er !oes not assign case& an! that clitics !o notreceive case (S"+er 1988)$ ,nstea!& b"il!ing on S"+er's research on speci icitye ects& , posit that clitics hea! "nctional pro#ections (Sportiche 199/)$ %hir!0person acc"sative clitics hea! one in! o 2 an! other clitics hea! another in!$%he /344 "nctional hea! probes into its c0comman! !omain or an element
hich can lan! in its Spec position an! chec its "ninterpretable eat"res$Do"ble! ob#ects evac"ate the 52 at logical orm ( ) in or!er to ta e 520e7ternal
scope an! th"s speci ic interpretation& an! , arg"e that speci ic arg"ments lan!in the Spec position o the "nctional pro#ection hea!e! by the clitic$
hether the "nctional hea! has any correspon!ing material at phonologicalorm (2 ) is !etermine! by a parameter the settings o hich !i er across
!ialects. so or Stan!ar! Spanish& the clitic only emerges at 2 i it is in anagreement relation ith a :strong prono"n; or empty category (ec)$ Kayne'sGeneralization in this analysis re!"ces to an epiphenomenon o this parameter&an! my arg"ment entails that any time an arg"ment ' ants' speci icinterpretation& the !erivation b"il!s the /344 clitic "nctional pro#ection to
acilitate 520evac"ation& regar!less o hether the "nctional hea! has anycorrespon!ing material at 2 $
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
9/120
%his thesis is !e!icate! to
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
10/120
1. Introduction
4litics are ea pronominal elements hich e7press arg"ments an! re>"ire
a!#"nction to a host (%oivonen ?@@?)$ 4litic !o"bling is the co0occ"rrence o a
clitic ith a coin!e7e! arg"ment s"ch that the clitic an! the !o"ble! arg"ment
bear the same arg"ment relation$
,n Stan!ar! Spanish& acc"sative clitic !o"bling is obligatory or strong
prono"ns an! available ith "niversal >"anti ier todos, an! arg"ments mo!i ie!
by it ( ranco ?@@/)& b"t "ngrammatical in all other conte7ts$ ,n !ialects that have
looser restrictions on clitic !o"bling& it is typically only available or animates&
an! beca"se Spanish animates are mar e! by ob#ect mar er a, Kayne notes that
clitic !o"bling is only grammatical hen the !o"ble! ob#ect is prece!e! by a
licensing preposition (a in Spanish) . %his is no n as Kayne's Generalization
(Jaeggli 198?)$
Dominican Spanish is a !ialect o Spanish spo en in the Dominican
=ep"blic$ , elicite! grammaticality #"!gments rom ?1 Dominicans in the
Aor oo! neighborhoo! o the ron7& ranging in age rom 18 to 6@& an! o"n!
that seven spea ers& all "n!er /@& allo e! !o"bling ith !e inite inanimates$
%his grammaticality is notable& since these sentences& as in (1) belo & violate
Kayne's Generalization (Jaeggli 1986)& %h"s Dominican Spanish (DS hence orth)&
li e 2orte+o an! al an lang"ages s"ch as Gree an! 3lbanian& presents
empirical evi!ence against Kayne's Generalization& an! necessitates an analysis
o clitics as agreement mar ers$
, arg"e that a change in progress seems to be occ"rring hich increasingly
allo s acc"sative (344) clitics to !o"ble inanimate ob#ects in Dominican Spanish
1@
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
11/120
(DS)$ 4onsi!er the ollo ing$ or clarity& the clitic is bol!e! an! the !o"ble!
ob#ect italicize!& an! , ollo this convention thro"gho"t$ 3s ell& the B symbol
is "se! to signi y cross0!ialectal !isagreement ith respect to grammaticality.
(1) B la leC ( a) la revista
/s $344 rea!$1s2S% E< Det$s< magazine
', rea! the magazine$'
(1) is "ngrammatical or ol!er spea ers b"t grammatical or yo"nger spea ers$
eca"se the presence o ob#ect mar er a is "ngrammatical or inanimates& as
in!icate! by the star insi!e the parentheses above& this change in progress
violates Kayne's Generalization$
Kayne's analysis o clitics is that they are arg"ments an! th"s receive case
rom the verb$ %hey are generate! in verbal complement position an! move to
their s"r ace positions beca"se o proso!ic ea ness$ Government o the
!o"ble! ob#ect by the ob#ect mar er licenses !o"bling beca"se the ob#ect mar er
assigns the ob#ect case$ "t i clitics are case0receiving arg"ments& hat licenses
!o"bling or yo"nger DS spea ers in (1) aboveF
Prima facie there are a n"mber o alternative e7planations hich might
or & potentially in tan!em. it co"l! be that the ob#ect mar er !oes not in act
assign case& or that clitics !o not in act absorb case& or that the e7ample in (1)
!oes not constit"te tr"e clitic !o"bling& b"t is an instance o clitic right0
!islocation& in hich the !o"ble! ob#ect is in an a!#"nct position& not an
arg"ment position$ , "ltimately arg"e that (1) above is a case o tr"e clitic
!o"bling& rom my tests in section 1$* belo or !isting"ishing !o"bling rom
!islocation$ ollo ing S"+er (1988)& , arg"e that clitics !o not receive case an!
are not arg"ments$
11
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
12/120
3s ell& important !ata rom S"+er (1988) sho that DE4D is limite! to
speci ic arg"ments only !e inites& partitives& an! >"anti ier phrases patterning
as HstrongI (in "estion allo s it to$ %h"s& all !ialects
o Spanish employ this means o ma ing speci ic rea!ings available b"t& or
instance& Stan!ar! Spanish only allo s the overt realization o 344 clitics
!o"bling strong prono"ns& an! =ioplatense only allo s the overt realization o
344 clitics !o"bling animates$
,n or!er to present this analysis or the grammaticality o (1) in DS& , m"st
irst !e ine my terms& hich , !o in the ollo ing sections o this chapter. hat
1?
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
13/120
are clitics& hat in!s are there& hat is clitic !o"bling& an! hat is the role o
the ob#ect mar erF
,n chapter ?& , consi!er ays o analyzing Spanish acc"sative (344)clitics$ 3ss"ming an ,n!epen!ence -ypothesis ( leam 1999) accor!ing to hich
the grammaticality o clitic !o"bling an! the Spanish ob#ect mar er are governe!
by separate sets o con!itions& , revie vario"s theoretical positions an! analytic
in>"iries ith respect to !irect ob#ect clitic !o"bling (DE4D)$
Kayne hol!s that clitics are arg"ments hich move to their s"r ace
positions as verbal a!#"ncts& hile other analyses ( orer 198*& S"+er 1988) hol!that clitics are base0generate! in their s"r ace& a!#"nct positions$ 3pproaches li e
orer's (198*) acco"nt or Kayne's Generalization by hol!ing that clitics receive
case& b"t , !isc"ss the importance o S"+er's HcaselessI approach to clitic
!o"bling$ or her& clitics !o not receive case an! the ob#ect mar er !oes not
assign case$ She sho s evi!ence rom 2orte+o& a !ialect spo en in 3rgentina an!
r"g"ay& hich& li e DS& violates Kayne's Generalization$ -er !ata regar!ing
speci icity e ects& in tan!em ith the proli eration o "nctional pro#ections an!
the e7pansion o ,A & catalyze! ne approaches to clitic !o"bling hich
allo e! or reconciliation o the base0generation an! movement approaches$
3rme! ith a theoretical bac gro"n!& chapter ? concl"!es ith my
proposal ollo ing Sportiche (1996)$ , posit that clitics hea! "nctional
pro#ections& an! license the !o"ble! ob#ect's 'evac"ation' rom complement0to0
verb position to the Speci ier o the "nctional pro#ection hea!e! by the clitic$
%his is hat allo s !o"ble! ob#ects to have a pres"ppositional& speci ic rea!ing$
-o ever& the Spell0o"t o this "nctional hea! (the clitic) across !ialects is s"b#ect
to a parameter regar!ing hich in!s o 0hea!s can have correspon!ing 2
material$
1/
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
14/120
,n chapter /& , present the !ata rom Dominican Spanish$ DS spea ers only
allo DE4D ith speci ic arg"ments& b"t there are cross0generational
!i erences ith respect to hether animacy is a actor in the grammatically o
the "nctional hea! being spelle! o"t at 2 $ , sho that my proposal rom
chapter ? can acco"nt or both generations o DS !ata. a "nctional hea! licenses
speci ic arg"ments to evac"ate the 52 an! lan! in the speci ier o that hea!'s
"nctional pro#ection& an! the generational !istinction regar!ing the presence o
correspon!ing 2 material is acco"nte! or as a !i erence ith respect to the
H2 parameter$I or ol!er spea ers& only "nctional hea!s in agreement relations
ith :animate; arg"ments can be spelle! o"t at 2 $ ,n this ay& ol!er spea ers
pattern ith =ioplatense spea ers (, !isc"ss this !ialect in !etail later)$ %his is
not the case or yo"nger spea ers& an! the "nctional hea! may optionally be
spelle! o"t at 2 or inanimate speci ics$
4hapter * concl"!es the st"!y ith a s"mmary o the res"lts& a
consi!eration o an alternative analysis& an! some notes or "t"re research$ %he
primary p"rpose o this st"!y is to provi!e !ata or DE4D in Dominican
Spanish& a !ialect hose acc"sative clitic behavior has never been analyze! let
alone presente! be ore$ ven as the DS pattern might seem aberrant& , sho that
my analysis may act"ally acco"nt or DE4D variation across !ialects& as ell as
across generations o DS spea ers& i a "ni icationist approach to the clitic synta7
is a!opte!$ , also consi!er a potential alternative& a variationist acco"nt here
the syntactic stat"s o the clitic changes across !ialects$
Does the !i erence in clitic behaviors& both cross0!ialectally an! ithin
the propose! change in progress or yo"nger DS spea ers& amo"nt to a le7ical
parameter (some !i erence in the eat"ral matri7 speci ications o clitics in
!i erent !ialectal le7icons) or a grammatical parameter (some !i erence in the
1*
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
15/120
grammars o Spanish !ialects)F %he cross0!ialectal "ni ormity o speci icity
e ects in Spanish lea!s me to ar! a "ni ication approach clitics are the same in
all Spanish !ialects& an! in hich speci icity is grammatically0parametric$ "ence cannot be !isr"pte!N prono"ns nee! not bea!#acent to verb
1O
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
16/120
4onsi!er the ollo ing.
(/) clitics cannot be coor!inate!
a$ la y lo vC/s $344 an! /s
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
17/120
3s ell& thir!0person clitics are morphologically0mar e! or case in
Spanish& hile prono"ns are not$ %h"s thir!0person clitics are la/lo or acc"sative
an! le or !ative& hile prono"ns are invariably l/ella. inally& 3nagnastopo"lo"
(?@@O. ?O) points o"t that the clitic05erb se>"ence cannot be interr"pte!& hile
prono"ns have reer or! or!er$ 4onsi!er the ollo ing.
(6) te m"cho >"iero
?s344 very$m"ch ant$1s2= S
', love yo" very m"ch$'
%h"s& ive behavioral !i erences motivate a !istinction clitics an!
prono"ns. clitics cannot be coor!inate!& mo!i ie!& or stresse!N prono"ns& on the
other han!& can$ ,n act& or prono"ns stress is obligatory$ 3s ell& clitics are
mar e! or case& hile prono"ns are not& an! clitics have more rigi! or! or!er
than prono"ns& since clitics m"st appear imme!iately to the le t or right e!ge o
the verb$
,n Spanish& inite verbs re>"ire procliticization (attachment to the le t e!ge
o the verb)& hile non0 inite verbs re>"ire encliticization (attachment to the right
e!ge o the verb) ( ips i 1996)$ -o ever& hen a non0 inite cla"se is selecte! by
a inite higher verb& the clitic may be realize! as either a proclitic or an enclitic$
4onsi!er the ollo ing.
(R) clitics attach to the left edges of finite verbs
a$ te >"iero
?s344 love$1s2= S', love yo"$'
b$ >"iero 0te
love$1s2= S0?s344
', love yo"$'
1R
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
18/120
4litics attach to the right e!ges o non inite verbs$ 4onsi!er the ollo ing
e7amples& ith the case o imperatives in (8)& the case o in initives in (9)& an! the
case o progressive participles in (1@).
(8) clitics attach to the right edges of imperatives
a$ cQme 0te 0lo
eat$,
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
19/120
-o ever& hen a higher verb selects a non0 inite cla"se& a clitic !enoting a
semantic arg"ment o the lo er cla"se can raise to s"r ace attache! to the higher
verb$ %his phenomenon is calle! clitic climbing (3nagnostopo"lo" ?@@O. 1?)$
4onsi!er the ollo ing.
(11) a$ >"iero comprar0 lo
ant$1s2= S b"y$,A 0/s"iero comprar
/s
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
20/120
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
21/120
b$ te M les !ieron
?s344 M ?p344 hit$/p2S%
'%hey hit yo"My'all$'
...are homophonous with 1/2 A! clitics"
c$ me / nos man!aron "n regalo
1sD3% M 1pD3% sen!$/p2S% one gi t
'%hey sent meM"s a gi t$'
!$ te / les man!aron "n regalo?sD3% ?pD3% sen!$/p2S% one gi t
'%hey sent yo"My'all a gi t$'
%hese e7amples !o not motivate positing a case !istinction or Spanish verbal
ob#ects$ "t consi!er the clear phonological !istinction bet een case roles
Spanish ma es in the thir! person& an! that a gen!er !istinction is only
evi!ence! in the thir!0person sing"lar para!igm.
(1/) a$ la / lo / los vieron
/s $344 M /s
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
22/120
%he 2erson04ase 4onstraint !etermines hat in!s o clitic cl"sters can
occ"r$ ,t pre!ominantly ollo s t o patterns.
, the cl"ster is D3%& 344& then the 344 arg"ment m"st be /r!0person&other ise cl"stering is impossible
all cl"ster combinations are allo e! e7cept or /D3%& 1M?344T
Spanish ten!s more to ar! the irst pattern$ %his is clear beca"se irstMsecon!0
person clitics cannot co0occ"r ith each other& an! beca"se hen the cl"ster is
/D3%& /344& the D3%T ta es the se orm instea! o le. 4onsi!er the ollo ing.
(1*) te me man!aron
?s$344 1s$D3% sen!$/p2S%'%hey sent yo" to me$'
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
23/120
c$ te me la man!aron
?sD3% 1sD3% /s$344
'%hey sent her to yo" or me$'
3n appeal to a template o three slots or clitics co"l! be ma!e here& here the
re le7iveMimpersonal al ays prece!es the !ative& hich al ays prece!es the
acc"sative& an! some other set o con!itions governs their complementary
!istrib"tion s"ch that cl"sters contain at most t o clitics$ ater& , sho that my
analysis& in hich t o in!s o "nctional pro#ections ith eat"ral !i erences
correspon! to the t o in!s o clitics& acco"nts or this cl"stering ma7im"m$
,n concl"sion& Spanish has 344 an! D3% case roles& b"t only thir!0person
clitics phonologically !isting"ish or 344 an! D3% case& an! only thir!0person
sing"lar clitics bear gen!er eat"res$ 4litics can co0occ"r at a ma7 o t o clitics
per cl"ster& an! cl"sters evi!ence a range o restrictions$ irst& hen 344 clitics
cl"ster& they m"st be /344$ Secon!& irstMsecon!0person clitics cannot co0occ"r
ith each other$ inally& cl"sters evi!ence a strict or!ering o ,
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
24/120
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
25/120
(19) a$ lo conozco a $l hombre
/s
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
26/120
tr"e clitic !o"bling rom clitic le t0 an! right0!islocation in the ne7t section& in
or!er to con irm that phenomena s"ch as in (19)0(?@) are in act instances o clitic
!o"bling$
1.3.1. Distinguishing doubling from dislocation
4litic !islocation is hen a clitic co0occ"rs ith an V2 at the sentential periphery
(3nagnostopo"lo" ?@@O. O?/)$ 4o0occ"rring ob#ects can be !islocate! to the le t
e!ge as in (?1a)& or to the right e!ge as in (?1b)$ 4onsi!er the ollo ing& in hich
Z is "se! to signi y an intonational brea stran!ing the !islocate! element at the
e!ge o the sentence.
(?1) a$ a J"an Z le man!aron "n regalo
a J"an& /sD3% sen!$/p2S% one gi t
'John& they sent him a gi t$'
b$ le man!aron "n regalo el otro !ia Z a J"an
/sD3% sen!$/p2S% one gi t Det$s< other !ay& E< J"an
'%hey sent him a gi t the other !ay& John$'
Dislocate! elements are o ten analyze! as being in a!#"nct positions& as oppose!
to arg"ment positions (Kayne 19RO)$ ith this in min!& consi!er the ollo ing
minimal pair or Stan!ar! Spanish.
(??) a$ lo leCmos el libro
/s
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
27/120
eca"se this s"ggests that the grammaticality o (??) or DS involves !islocation&
criteria or !isting"ishing !o"bling rom !islocation become necessary in or!er
to arg"e& as , !o& that !o"ble! ob#ects are in act arg"ments$ %here are o"r ays
to !isting"ish !o"bling rom !islocation.
!islocation re>"ires an intonational brea bet een the !islocate! elementan! the sentential n"cle"s (S"+er 1988. /**)& signi ie! by Z in (?1) above&an! ith commas in the nglish translations
!o"ble! ob#ects can be stresse!N !islocate! ones cannot
!o"ble! ob#ects can prece!e a oc"s phraseN !islocate! ones cannot
!o"ble! ob#ects can prece!e a negative polarity itemsN !islocate! onescannot
3nother ay o !isting"ishing !o"bling rom !islocation is that
!islocate! elements cannot bear stress$ ith stresse! elements "n!erline! an!
intonational brea in!icate! by Z& (?/a) sho s that that a !o"ble! !ative may
carry n"clear stress& hile (?/b) sho s that !islocate! elements cannot be
stresse!$
(?/) a$ se lo enviQ a mam% Z
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
28/120
3s ell& tr"e !o"ble! arg"ments can prece!e a oc"s phrase (Y"bizarreta 1988)$
4onsi!er the ollo ing$ (?*a) sho s that a !o"ble! acc"sative can prece!e a
right0e!ge oc"s phrase& hile (?*b) sho s that a !islocate! element may not$ ,
in!icate contrastive oc"s ith [ ; in the Spanish& an! ith italics an!
parentheticals in the translation.
(?*) a$ esta ma+ana lo castigQ a l la ma!re
this morning /s
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
29/120
Ene inal test or !isting"ishing !o"bling rom !islocation is the case o
polarity items$ Generally& polarity items m"st be c0comman!e! by a licensing
operator in or!er to s"r ace grammatically ( a!"sa 19R9)$ %his hol!s tr"e in the
case o Spanish negative0polarity items& hich m"st be license! by no"
(?O) a$ no conozco a na!ie
Aeg no $1s2= S E< no0one
', !on't no anyone$'
b$ conozco a na!ie
no $1s2= S E< no0one
', !on't no anyone$',n ime+o Spanish& spo en in ima (
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
30/120
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
31/120
the sentence (S"+er 1988)$ %h"s& having sho n that !o"ble! ob#ects are in non0
!islocate! positions an! that they pattern li e arg"ments& , ass"me !o"ble!
ob#ects are arg"ments$ , go on to !isc"ss the Spanish ob#ect mar er$
1.4. What is object marker a?
,n Spanish& an instance o !i erential ob#ect mar ing (DE
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
32/120
,n !isc"ssing the ob#ect mar er's properties& , or ar! my investigation
regar!ing hether there is a ca"sal lin bet een the constraints governing
DE4D an! those or DE
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
33/120
%his apparent optionality is available not only or animates hea!e! by in!e inite
!eterminers& b"t also or animates hea!e! by !i erent sorts o >"anti iers& as
ell as bare pl"rals$ 4onsi!er the ollo ing$ (/?a) sho s that animate bare
pl"rals !o not re>"ire the ob#ect mar er& (/?b) sho s this or animates hea!e! by
car!inal >"anti iers& (/?c) sho s this or animates hea!e! by the e7istential
>"anti ier some & an! (/?!) sho s this or the e7istential >"anti ier man' $
(/?) a$ veo personas
see$1s2= S people
', see people$'
b$ veo (a) !os personas
see$1s2= S E< t o persons
', see t o people$'
c$ veo (a) alg"na0s personas
see$1s2= S E< some02 persons
', see t o people$'!$ veo (a) m"cha0s personas
see$1s2= S E< many02 people
', see many people$'
are pl"rals& car!inal >"anti iers& an! the e7istential >"anti iers as in (/?a0
!) correspon! to hat "anti icational e7pressions$
H ea I e7pressions can occ"r in e7istential cla"ses ('there are$$$')& hile
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
34/120
(//) wea)* +uantifierscan occur in e istential clauses"
a$ hay personas en el par>"e
3"7$/p2res people in Det$s< par
'%here are people in the par $'
b$ hay alg"nas M!os personas en el par>"e
3"7$/p2= S some Mt o people in Det$s< par
'%here are t o people in the par $'
c$ hay m"chas personas en el par>"e
3"7$/p2= S many people in Det$s< par
'%here are many people in the par $'
(/*) strong* +uantifiers cannot occur in e istential clauses"
a$ hay to!os en el par>"e
3"7$/p2= S all in Det$s< par
'%here are all in the par $'
b$ hay Pl M J"an M las gatas en el par>"e3"7$/p2= S him M J"an M Det$p cats in Det$s< par
'%here is him M J"an M the oman in the par $'
%here ore& ollo ing
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
35/120
1.4.2. Object marker vs. preposition
%he orma in Spanish mar s certain ob#ects o the verb$ , have sho n that at least
one "se is or animates& tho"gh so ar it seems only obligatory or !e inite
animates$ "t is the ob#ect mar er a prepositionF
Prima facie, it is pla"sible to posit that there are !i erent morphemes
homophono"sly e7presse! as a by consi!ering evi!ence ith respect to
!islocation$ or e7ample& !islocate! goal 22s cannot be core erential ith a clitic&
as in (/Oa) belo & hile in!irect an! !irect ob#ect patients can& as in (/Ob) belo
(3nagnostopo"lo" ?@@O. O?*).
(/O) a$ a on!res&lo "C
to onon /s"iero man!ar
E< J"an thin $1s2= S 4mpl /sD3% ant$1s2= S sen!$,A
"n gi t
one regalo
'John& , thin , ant to sen! him a gi t$'
c$ a J"an Z creo >"e lo >"iero ver
E< J"an& thin $1s2= S 4mpl /s
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
36/120
b$ >"eremos a M hacia J"an
ant$1p2= S E< M to ar! J"an
' e ant J"an M e ant to ar! (F) J"an$'
S"+er (1988) points o"t "rther evi!ence o a n"mber o behaviors hich
!isting"ish the ob#ect mar er rom a preposition$ She "ses ,E4D to #"sti y her
claims& an! , procee! ca"tio"sly& since #"st beca"se the a hich mar s in!irect
ob#ects o !itransitives in ,E4D conte7ts is not a preposition& it !oesn't
necessarily ollo that the ob#ect mar er or !irect ob#ects o monotransitives in
DE4D conte7ts isn't a preposition either$ "t the arg"ments are nevertheless
relevant here$ S"+er (1988) sho s that the ob#ect mar er is not a governing
category& an! that the complement o a preposition cannot bin! an anaphor
hich is o"tsi!e the 22 hea!e! by that preposition$
2ronominals hea!e! by tr"e prepositions can be reely coin!e7e!
(in!icate! by s"bscripts in the e7amples belo ) ith s"b#ects o cla"ses& as in
(/Ra)& hile !o"ble! in!irect ob#ect pronominals cannot be coin!e7e! ith
s"b#ects& an! m"st be !is#oint in re erence& as in (/Rb)$
,n (/Ra)& S"+er sho s that the preposition de is a governing category or
the prepositional complement. beca"se l can be bo"n! by the 2=E s"b#ect& it
m"st the that 2=E is o"tsi!e the governing category or l & since the prono"n is
s"b#ect to 2rinciple (a pronominal m"st be ree in its governing category)$ ,n
(/Rb)&ella cannot be bo"n! by -aria, hich means that -ara m"st be insi!e the
governing category or the prono"n$ %his means the ob#ect mar er cannot hea!the governing category or ella, "nli e the preposition de in (/?a)& hich can$ %his
s"ggests that the ob#ect mar er a is not a preposition.
/6
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
37/120
(/R) a$ ese se+or i n"nca se cansa !e 2=E i hablar
that man never = l7 tire$/s2= S o 2=E spea $,A
22 !e Pl iM# ; o /s
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
38/120
(/9) 2aco i lo encontrQ a$l profesor viendo
2aco /s
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
39/120
(*@) a$ b"sco "n hombre >"e sabe rancPs
see $1s2= S one man 4mpl no $/s2= S rench
','m loo ing or a man ho spea s rench (any man)$'
b$ b"sco a "n hombre >"e sabe rancPs
see $1s2= S E< one man 4mpl no $/s2= S rench
','m loo ing or a man ho spea s rench (one in partic"lar)$'
S"+er arg"es that the orm a hich is not a preposition is an ob#ect mar er hich
obligatorily hea!s speci ic animates (S"+er 1988& 3nagnostopo"lo" ?@@O& elloro
?@@R)$ y 'speci ic' S"+er means having a partic"lar& re erential entity i!enti iable
in the !isco"rse$ -er hypothesis is that speci icity is a ormal eat"re o the
synta7& enco!e! on animates by ob#ect mar er a. %he imme!iate ass"mption here
o"l! be !e inite animates are inherently speci ic& since they are obligatorily
hea!e! by the ob#ect mar er$ %h"s& a connection to
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
40/120
%here ore& consi!er the ollo ing$ (*1a) sho s that ' no ' cannot ta e a
complement mo!i ie! by a s"b#"nctive0moo! relative cla"se (an! that the ob#ect
mar er's presence !oes not save the sentence)& hile (*1b) sho s that 'see &' an
intensional verb& can ta e s"ch a complement.
(*1) a$ conozco (a) "n hombre >"e sepa rancPs
no $1s2= S E< one man 4mpl no $/sS J rench
', no Msee a man ho o"l! no rench$'
b$ b"sco "n hombre >"e sepa rancPs
ant$1s2= S one man 4mpl no $/sS J rench', ant to meet a man ho no s rench$'
3s ell& e can see rom (*?) that the ob#ect mar er cannot grammatically hea!
intensional0verb complements mo!i ie! by s"b#"nctive0moo! relative cla"ses$
%he intensional verb here is the higher verb ' ant&' hich sets "p a scope !omain
in hich a complement hea!e! by the ob#ect mar er is not grammatical.
(*?) >"iero conocer ( a) "n hombre >"e sepa rancPs
ant$1s2= S no $,A E< one man 4mpl no $/sS J rench
', ant to meet a man ho spea s rench (a partic"lar man)$'
(S"+er 1988. *@@)
,t seems that ob#ects mo!i ie! by s"b#"nctive0moo! relative cla"ses m"st resi!e
ithin the scopal !omain o their c0comman!ing verb$ , only intensional verbs
can set "p scope !omains& this e7plains the "ngrammaticality o (*1a)& an! hy
the ob#ect mar er is "ngrammatical in (*?)$ %he complements o intensional verbsare there ore not inherently re erential& an! since mo!i ication by a s"b#"nctive
(irrealis) moo! relative cla"se ren!ers s"ch complements nonre erential& these
complements cannot be speci ic$ %his is hy S"+er claims that speci ic
arg"ments m"st be re erential$ 3t least ith respect to animates& this seems to be
tr"e rom (*?)$
*@
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
41/120
, have sho n that ob#ect mar er a obligatorily hea!s HstrongI e7pressions
(in
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
42/120
, !isc"sse! the 344 an! D3% clitics& sho ing that only the thir! person
!isting"ishe! or case& an! only the thir!0person sing"lar !isting"ishe! or
gen!er$ , intro!"ce! clitic !o"bling& noting the i!e !ialectal variation
regar!ing the grammaticality o DE4D or certain arg"ments$ eca"se the novel
DS DE4D !ata co"l! be !ismisse! as a case o clitic !islocation& , sho e! o"r
ays in hich !o"bling an! !islocation !i er. !islocate! elements are separate!
rom the rest o the sentence by an intonational brea N !o"ble! ob#ects can bear
stress hile !islocate! elements cannotN !o"ble! ob#ects can !irectly prece!e
oc"se! phrases an! negative polarity items hile !islocate! elements cannot$
%hese !isting"ishing behaviors are the same as those o arg"ments& in!icating
that !o"ble! ob#ects are arg"ments (S"+er 1988)$
ith this in min!& , intro!"ce! the ob#ect mar er a & the ostensible
licensing preposition or DE4D& accor!ing to Kayne$ , sho e! that the ob#ect
mar er is obligatory or !e inite animates$ , !isc"sse! its apparent optionality
ith inanimates& b"t irst !isting"ishe! it rom the homophono"s preposition a
by means o S"+er's (1988) evi!ence that prepositions b"t not the ob#ect mar er
are a governing category& an! that the complement o a preposition cannot bin!
an anaphor hich is o"tsi!e the 22 hea!e! by that preposition& hile the ob#ect
mar er's complement can$ inally& , intro!"ce!
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
43/120
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
44/120
2. Analyzing DOCD
arly or on clitics& see ing a "ni ie! analysis o the phenomenon in spite o
the !iverse behaviors o clitics cross0ling"istically& oc"se! on hether they ere
(i) prono"ns hich ere generate! as complements to the verb an!& beca"se o
their proso!ic ea ness& move! "p ar! o"t o their !eep str"ct"re positions to
a!#oin to the verb (Kayne 19RO)& or (ii) in lections hich ere base0generate! in
their s"r ace positions ( orer 198*& Jaeggli 1986& S"+er 1988)$ 2osition (i)& the
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
45/120
3 ter revie ing the literat"re on clitic !o"bling& , present my analysis$
oc"sing on S"+er's claims abo"t DE4D speci icity e ects& hich hol! tr"e in
DS& , posit an analysis in the minimalist spirit (4homs y 199/) hich might
acco"nt or all o the !i erent behaviors o clitics$
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
46/120
c$ #e le vois Jean
, /s
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
47/120
-o ever& the complementary !istrib"tion o clitics an! D2s in rench
!oes not hol! or Spanish& 3lbanian& -ebre & Gree & an! other lang"ages ith
clitic !o"bling (Strozer 19R6& =ivas 19RR& Jaeggli 198?)$ 4onsi!er the ollo ing&
(*Oa) rom =ioplatense Spanish an! (*Ob) rom =omanian.
(*O) a$ lo vimos a #uan =ioplatense
/s
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
48/120
(*6)
(3nagnostopo"lo" ?@@O. O/?)
3nalysts arg"ing that clitics are base0generate! in their s"r ace positions
also hol! their positions or non0!o"ble! clitic constr"ctions s"ch as (*/a) above$
%hey posit that the only !i erence is that in non0!o"ble! clitic constr"ctions& the
complement to the verb is an empty category$ ,n both cases& the base0generate!
clitic is coin!e7e! ith complement c0comman!e! by the verb to hich the clitic
is a!#oine!& hether that complement be a "ll D2 or an empty category$
4onsi!er the ollo ing tree (3nagnostopo"lo" ?@@O)& ith ec signi ying the
empty category.
(*R)
or orer (198*. /O)& the clitic is a spell0o"t o eat"res o the verb an! its
arg"ments (case& L0 eat"res)& an! there ore receives case b"t not a theta role. this
*8
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
49/120
allo s the !o"ble! ob#ect& in arg"ment position& to be assigne! a theta role in the
normal ay$ Since it seems to capt"re the clitic !o"bling !ata& the base0
generation hypothesis is appealing$ "t hat con!itions the !i erence bet een
lang"ages that allo DE4D li e Spanish& an! those that !o not& li e renchF
Kayne points o"t that even as certain =omance lang"ages !i! allo clitic
!o"bling& DE4D an! ,E4D ere only grammatical i the !o"ble! ob#ect as
prece!e! by a licensing preposition$ ,n (*/) above& these apparent prepositions
are ob#ect mar er a or Spanish (*/a)& an! pe or =omanian (*/b)$ 3s e have
seen& the Spanish ob#ect mar er obligatorily mar s speci ic animate ob#ects$
Dobrovie0Sorin (199*b) ma es the same arg"ment or the =omanian ob#ect
mar er pe.
Kayne's Generalization (Jaeggli 1986)& then& states that clitic !o"bling is
only grammatical hen a licensing preposition hea!s the !o"ble! ob#ect$ or
Spanish& some interaction bet een clitics an! the ob#ect mar er ren!ers most
!ialects s"b#ect to Kayne's Generalization (3nagnostopo"lo" ?@@O)$ Kayne's
point is to sho that the movement analysis co"l! still apply to cases o clitic
!o"bling. he arg"es that !o"ble! ob#ects& hea!e! by the licensing preposition&
are a!#"ncts$
%his can be sho n in the ollo ing tree& in hich the clitic& an A2 verbal
complement& receives case rom the verb an! a!#oins to it rom proso!ic
ea ness& hile the !o"ble! ob#ect& in a!#"nct position& receives its case rom the
ob#ect mar er an! its theta role rom the verb.
*9
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
50/120
(*8)
"t , have sho n that the ob#ect mar er is not a preposition& an! that DS an!
2orte+o allo DE4D itho"t the ob#ect mar er in the case o inanimates$ Aot
only !o these t o !ialects o Spanish& as ell as others s"ch as
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
51/120
b$ la tienen la herramienta
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
52/120
2.2. Specificity and clitics
,n or!er to better characterize the nat"re o clitics in the ace o the !ialectal
variation& investigating their behaviors more closely becomes necessary$ %his
section !isc"sses S"+er's research into the speci icity e ects o DE4D$ She
arg"es that 344 clitics are :speci ic; in the le7icon& hile D3% clitics are not$
Since a clitic m"st match the eat"res o its associate s"ch that they both bear the
same arg"ment relation& 344 clitics may only !o"ble :speci ic; arg"ments$ ,
sho the evi!ence or s"ch claims an! consi!er the pla"sibility o the claim that
speci icity is a ormal eat"re o the synta7$ 3s ell& , consi!er three phenomena
at play ith respect to DE4D. partitivity& pres"ppositionality& an! scope$
3ny analysis o Spanish hich tries to acco"nt or KG posits a ca"sal
connection bet een clitic !o"bling an! !i erential ob#ect mar ing (DE"estion by
!ialects li e 2orte+o an! Dominican Spanish (DS)& here DE4D is allo e!
itho"t a preposition hea!ing the !o"ble! ob#ect& as in the ollo ing rom
2orte+o (S"+er 1988. /990*@@).
(O@) yolo voy a comprar el diario #"sto
1s /s
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
53/120
%he grammaticality o s"ch sentences sho s that& at least in 2orte+o& clitics !o
not absorb case& since the !o"ble! ob#ect in (O@) is in arg"ment position& an! is
"ttere!& S"+er claims& ith "nbro en intonation$ 3s ell& (O@) sho s that the
ob#ect mar er !oes not assign case& since it !oes not hea! the !o"ble! ob#ect
(recall that the ob#ect mar er is "ngrammatical ith inanimates)$
7amining !ata rom =ioplatense an! 2orte+o& S"+er (1988) ollo s the
spirit o orer's (198*) analysis& b"t arg"es that clitics !o not receive case or
theta0roles$ S"+er conse>"ently re#ects KG (S"+er 1988. /**)$ , ollo s"it on the
basis o evi!ence rom DS& in 2orte+o an! al an lang"ages li e Gree &
3lbanian& an!
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
54/120
earlier& verbal complements mo!i ie! by s"b#"nctive0moo! relative cla"ses are
nonre erential an! there ore cannot be speci ic.
(O1) a$ proper names& !e inite h"mans& an! !e inite animals may be!o"ble!
la oCan a -aria / la ni a
/s $344 hear$/p2S%$2=G E<
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
55/120
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
56/120
2erhaps& then& it is animacy hich is the g"i!ing actor or the
obligatoriness o the ob#ect mar er& an! its speci icity e ects are not syntactically
enco!e!& b"t simply arise rom interpretation an! !isco"rse conte7t$ ,n act& the
evi!ence rom (O1c)& (O1!)& an! (O?) is strong s"pport or the ,n!epen!ence
hypothesis ( leam 1999)& as ell as or S"+er's claim that 344 clitics are
Hinherently speci ic$I %he set o constraints !etermining the ob#ect mar er's
grammaticality is separate rom the set or DE4D's grammaticality$
3n! since the DS DE4D !ata ,'m analyzing !oes not involve the ob#ect
mar er& the set o constraints governing its grammaticality (my c"rrent
characterization o hich has been calle! into >"estion by (O/) above) is not
ca"sally relate! to the set o DS DE4D constraints , am analyzing$
(O1c) an! (O1!) in!icate that re erentiality may be necessary (b"t perhaps
not s" icient) or DE4D& hile re erentiality is not necessary or DE
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
57/120
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
58/120
allo s DE4D or a h0e7tracte! arg"ment& it is important to consi!er partitivity
ith respect to other arg"ments hich , have sho n cannot be 3440!o"ble!&
s"ch as e7istential >"anti iers$ =ecall that e7istential >"anti iers are H ea I
accor!ing to "anti ie!
e7pression !istinction an! consi!er the ollo ing$ (OR) sho s that in 2orte+o
(S"+er 1988)& DE4D is "ngrammatical ith e7istential ( ea ) >"anti iers hich
!on't appear in a partitive constr"ction& hile (O8) sho s that i the >"anti ier
!oes hea! a partitive constr"ction& the ob#ect may be !o"ble!$ , teste! this or my
DS spea ers an! the #"!gments ere share!. DE4D is only grammatical or
e7istential >"anti iers i they hea! a partitive constr"ction$
(OR) a$ la e7amino a una
/s $344 e7amine$/s2S% E< one
'SMhe e7amine! one$'
O8
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
59/120
b$ las e7amino a 3 algunas / muchas / varias 4
/s2$344 e7amine$/s2S% E< some M many M vario"s
'SMhe e7amine! some M many M several$'
(O8) a$ la e7amino a una de ellas
/s $344 e7amine$/s2S% E< one o them$
'SMhe e7amine! one o them$'
b$ las e7amino a 3 algunas / muchas / varias 4
/s2$344 e7amine$/s2S% E< some M many M vario"s
de ellaso them$
'SMhe e7amine! some M many M several o them$'
3ll o these& ho ever& are grammatical ith ,E4D& regar!less o hether the
e7istential >"anti ier hea!s a partitive.
(O9) a$ le !ieron "n premio a una (de ellas
/s$D3% give$/p2S% one prize E< one (o them$ )
'%hey gave a prize to one (o them)$'
b$ le !ieron "n premio a 3 algunas / muchas / varias 4
/s$D3% give$/p2S% one prize E< some M many M vario"s
(de ellas
(o them$ )
'%hey gave a prize to someMmanyMseveral o them$'
, both 344 clitics an! partitive constr"ctions are :speci ic;& it ma es sense that
DE4D ith e7istential >"anti iers ( hich are ea an! th"s not inherently
speci ic) o"l! only be grammatical i the >"anti iers hea! partitive e7pressions$
3n! since D3% clitics are not :speci ic; inherently& they H!on't careI abo"t the
O9
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
60/120
hether the e7istential >"anti ier hea!s a partitive& an! ,E4D is grammatical in
both cases& as (O9) sho s$
irstMsecon!0person clitics may be "se! in con#"nction ith e7istential>"anti iers to constr"ct a partitive rea!ing (-"rta!o 198*)& as in the ollo ing.
(6@) a$ nos e7aminaron a algunos
1p$344 e7amine$/p2S% E< some
'%hey e7amine! some o "s$'
b$ nos e7aminaron a algunos de nosotros
1p$344 e7amine$/p2S% E< some o "s
'%hey e7amine! some o "s$'
%his is also the case or h0e7tracte! ob#ects& hich are grammatical ith
irstMsecon!0person clitics& as in the ollo ing.
(61) ^a +uin nos !ieron el premioF
E< ho ?p344 give$/p2S% Det$s< prize
' hich o "s ill they give the prize toF'(S"+er 1988. *18)
%his can be analyze! as an instance o 'covert partitivity&' tho"gh notably this is
conte7t0contingent$ ttere! itho"t conte7t& (6@a) co"l! be interprete! as
containing a 1pD3% clitic& hich o"l! ren!er the sentence '%hey e7amine!
some or "s&' that is& as a bene active$ 3n e7ample in hich covert partitivity
o"l! be the more clearly0inten!e! rea!ing o"l! be as ollo s.
(6?) vinieron a n"estro p"eblo y nos e7aminaron a algunos
come$/p2S% to o"r village X 1p$344 e7amine$/p2S% E< some
'%hey came to o"r village an! e7amine! some o "s$'
6@
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
61/120
,n the case o /344 clitics& a covert partitive rea!ing similarly arises in s"ch a
conte7t$ %he ollo ing sentence as #"!ge! grammatical by both generations o
my DS spea ers.
(6/) encontraron cinco monos y los e7aminaron a algunos
in!$/p2S% ive mon eys X /p
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
62/120
since the partitive complement o a mo!i ying >"anti ier m"st al ays be a strong
e7pression& in
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
63/120
,n!ee!& i the co0occ"rrence o a clitic ith an e7istential >"anti ier mo!i ying
partitive e7pressions is as in (68) above& Kayne's movement hypothesis becomes
available as a potential analysis$ %his can be seen in the ollo ing tree.
(69)
%h"s& even as an important relationship bet een speci icity an! partitivity !oes
e7ist& in that the partitive complement mo!i ie! by a >"anti ier m"st al ays be a
strong e7pression in
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
64/120
2.2.2. Scope and presuppositionality
S"+er's research sho e! that in Spanish& in!e inites are ambig"o"s ith respect
to being interprete! as pres"ppositional or e7isential that is& certain in!e inites
pres"ppose the e7istence o an entity& hile other in!e inites assert that entity's
e7istence$ %hose in!e inites hich assert an entity's e7istence are those hich
correspon! to
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
65/120
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
66/120
i!e0scope one in hich every voter selects the same set o can!i!ates (S"+er
1988. *?/)$
(R1) ca!a can!i!ato le !i#o la ver!a! a algunos electoresevery can!i!ate /s$D3% say$/s2S% Det$s< tr"th E< some voters
' very can!i!ate tol! the tr"th to some voters$'
a$ Aarro scope. every can!i!ate tol! some voters the tr"th
b$ i!e scope. every can!i!ate tol! the same set o voters the tr"th
(R?) ca!a elector los eligio a algunos candidatosDet$s< voter /p
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
67/120
(R/) a$ lo b"sco a un doctor +ue sabe
/s
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
68/120
(R*) a$ lo b"sca a un mdico +ue vino
/s
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
69/120
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
70/120
%his is also tr"e or "lgarian ( ranco ?@@@& elloro ?@@R)$ (RR) belo sho s that
pismoto can only be 3440!o"ble! in the ans er i it has been mentione! in the
>"estion& an! is th"s pres"ppose!& that is& not part o the oc"s !omain.
(RR) a$ hat happene!F M hat !i! ,vo !oF
,vo ( go ) napisa pismoto
,vo /s
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
71/120
arg"ments mo!i ie! by s"b#"nctive0moo! relative cla"ses& as ell as arg"ments
ithin the oc"s !omain rame! by a >"estion& s"pports this claim$
%h"s one might p"t it in ormally as ollo s. since certain !eterminershave >"anti icational eat"res& it is only hen these >"anti iers scope over a set
o o amiliar or pres"ppose! ob#ects that DE4D is grammatical$ 3n element
achieves pres"ppositionality an! speci icity by evac"ating the 52$ ,n the ne7t
section& , propose my analysis or DE4D& in light o the previo"s literat"re , have
!isc"sse!$
2.3. Modifying Sportiche for my proposal
,n or!er to acco"nt or the DS !ata& an! in hopes o constr"cting the machinery
or !eveloping a "ni ie! analysis o cross0ling"istic DE4D variation& , a!opt
aspects o Sportiche's (199/) Hclitic voicesI proposal$ , arg"e that clitics hea!
"nctional pro#ections$ %he 3cc2 nee!s its "ninterpretable eat"re to be chec e!&
an! it probes its c0comman! !omain or a goal ith a matching interpretable
eat"re hich can lan! in its Speci ier position$ 3long the lines o Sportiche's
Do"bly0 ille! 5oice ilter (199/)& , arg"e that 3cc2 must have its Speci ier
position ille!$ Since only pres"ppose!& re erential e7pressions can ta e a speci ic
interpretation& DE4D is only grammatical ith speci ic arg"ments$ hether the
"nctional hea! o this 3cc2 has correspon!ing 2 material is !etermine! by a
H2 2arameterI hich only allo s the spello"t o hea!s that are in agreementrelations ith arg"ments that have certain in!s o eat"res$ ,n or!er to !evelop
my analysis& , irst !isc"ss Sportiche's (199/)$
,n light o S"+er's or & speci icity becomes the g"i!ing actor or a
"ni ication analysis o cross0!ialectal !i erences in DE4D behavior$ S"+er
R1
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
72/120
sho e! that regar!less o this !ialectal variation ith respect to hat in!s o
arg"ments co"l! be 3440!o"ble!& DE4D is onl' or speci ic arg"ments$ "rther&
the !evelopment o the theoretical machinery s"ch as 2olloc 's 'e7pansion' o the
,A 0hea! an! the proli eration o "nctional categories (2olloc 1989)& allo e!
or the possibility o (i) reconciling base0generation an! movement approaches
an! (ii) positing 'split' analyses o clitics& here these t o classes constit"te
!i erent syntactic elements ( ranco 199/& riagere a 199O& Gutirrez Rexach 2000 )
in or!er to acco"nt or S"+er's !iscoveries regar!ing speci icity e ects$ % o
in l"ential& contrasting e7amples o reconciling base0generation an! movement
are riagere a's ig D2 hypothesis (199O) an! Sportiche's 4litic 5oices proposal
(1996)$
Aoting the similarities bet een !eterminers an! /344 clitics& riagere a
arg"es that an 344 clitic is a !eterminer hea! ith a pro complement& an! that
the !o"ble! ob#ect is in the speci ier o the D2$ D3% clitics are simply in lections$
oth move "p ar! in the tree !"ring the co"rse o the !erivation$ -e ants to
arg"e that clitics are arg"ments (D0hea!s hich receive case in verbal
complement position)& b"t that !o"ble! ob#ects are not conse>"ently a!#"ncts$
%here ore consi!er the ollo ing trees& the ' ig D2' on the le t an! a reg"lar
!eterminer phrase on the right$ %he !o"ble is parenthetical on the le t to in!icate
that non0!o"ble! clitic constr"ctions "se the same big D2& e7cept ith an empty
Speci ier position$
(R9) a$ b$
R?
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
73/120
, !o not consi!er this proposal "rther& since , !o not ant to arg"e that clitics
receive case$ ,nstea!& , elaborate on a proposal Sportiche (199/)& the Hclitic
voicesI analysis$
Sportiche (199/) posite! that clitics hea! "nctional pro#ections& an! that
!o"ble! ob#ects move rom complement0to0verb position to the Speci ier position
o the clitic pro#ection$ %he Speci ierMhea! relationship o the clitic0phrase
capt"res the agreement bet een clitic an! !o"ble! ob#ect& an! the pro#ection or
344 clitics (3cc2& let "s say) contains an "ninterpretable eat"re hich Dat2
!oes not have& an! hich the !o"ble! ob#ect chec s by raising into the
Spec2osition$
%h"s& or Sportiche the clitic a!#oins to its s"r ace position beca"se o its
proso!ic ea ness& b"t not rom complement0to0verb position$ ,nstea!& it
originates as the hea! o a "nctional pro#ection$ , a!opt a proposal along similar
lines here& b"t mo!i y it in a n"mber o ays$ , arg"e only the 3cc2 re>"ires its
Speci ier position to be ille! %his is hy only speci ic arg"ments "n!ergo
DE4D& since it is these arg"ments hich nee! to be 520e7ternal to attain their
speci ic interpretation$ %h"s& the !erivation str"ct"res the 3cc2 in or!er to
license speci ic arg"ments to evac"ate the 52& lan!ing in the Speci ier o the
3cc2 to ta e speci ic interpretation$ Sportiche ass"mes& as , !o& the
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
74/120
(8@) te lo man!amos
?sD3% /s
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
75/120
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
76/120
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
77/120
(8?)
%hereason the clitic is not grammatical here is beca"se its "nctional pro#ection is
not necessary to begin ith& since un libro !oes not nee! to evac"ate the 52. it isnonspeci ic an! novel& not speci ic an! pres"ppose!$ %here ore& the !erivation
crashes beca"se 3cc2 in (8?) above has been generate! b"t can in! nothing ith
hich to ill its Speci ier position& ren!ering the sentence "ngrammatical$
"ire! to license the movement o the !irect ob#ect$ ,n!e inites onlyevac"ate the 52 hen they ta e a speci ic rea!ing& an! clitics ma es this speci ic
(520e7ternal scope) rea!ing "nambig"o"s$ %h"s& non0speci ic in!e inites remain
in the 52& an! the 0hea! is empty$ , posit that the correct tree or (8@) above is as
ollo s.
RR
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
78/120
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
79/120
Kayne's Generalization arises as an epiphenomenon o this parameter.
!ialects ith the parameter active happen to abi!e by KG& even tho"gh the
constraints !etermining the grammaticality o DE4D an! DE< are in!epen!ent
( leam 1999)$ 3ss"ming this "ni orm synta7 o DE4D across !ialects& it is air to
ass"me that this H2 parameterI is not active or my yo"nger DS spea ers& or
hom (as , sho in chapter /) DE4D patterns as in 2orte+o$
3s ell& the !i erence bet een 344 an! D3% clitics comes !o n to the
0hea!'s optionality ith respect to its Spec position being ille!. D3% clitics !o
not re>"ire their position to be "ll& hile 344 clitics !o$ 344 clitics are th"s
probes searching or s"itable elements to ill Spec 2& an! arg"ments evac"ating
the 52 to ta e speci ic interpretation serve as prime goals or the probe$ ,n this
ay , can posit& as S"+er !oes& that 344 clitics are 'inherently' speci ic$ hile ,
nee! not commit mysel to the ormal reality o speci icity as a eat"re& , do
ass"me the ormal reality o the "ninterpretable !riving movement$
, posit that the oc"s !omain at consists o 520internal elements$ %he
ollo ing e7amples rom 3lbanian ill"strate my claim ell$ (8*) sho s that in
3lbanian& DE4D is obligatory hen the !irect ob#ect is o"tsi!e the oc"s !omain
(Kall"lli ?@@@& Do e al X Kall"lli ?@1?) that is& hen it is mentione! in the
prece!ing >"estion& an! ren!ere! pres"ppose!$ "t hen the !irect ob#ect is in
the oc"s !omain hen it has not been mentione! in the >"estion it cannot
be clitic0!o"ble!$ %hese e7amples correspon! to the ones , gave rom Gree &
"lgarian& an! =omanian earlier$
(8*) 3. hat !i! 3na !oF M hat !i! 3na rea!F
. 3na ( e) le7oi librin
3na /s
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
80/120
(8O) 3. ho rea! the boo F
. 3na ( e) le7oi librin$
(86) 3. hat !i! 3na !o ithMto the boo F
. 3na ( e) le7oi librin$
, arg"e that Spanish is similar to 3lbanian in that DE4D is only
grammatical or ob#ects hich are o"tsi!e the oc"s !omain an! there ore
interprete! as pres"ppose!$ "t "nli e 3lbanian& DE4D is not obligatory in
Spanish& only optional an! the phonological realization o the "nctional hea!
(the clitic) varies cross0!ialectally& as !etermine! by the H2 2arameterI settings
in the given !ialect$
%he grammaticality o 3440!o"bling e7pressions hich o"l! normally
remain ithin the 52 an! be interprete! as H ea I (in
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
81/120
(88) (J"an est] hablan!o con cinco gente)
J"an 3"7$/s2= S spea $2=G ith ive people
y no los conozco a ningunos
an! no /p
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
82/120
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
83/120
a!#"ncts& b"t tr"e arg"ments$ %he a that accor!ing to Kayne's Generalization
assigns case is not in act a case assigner& b"t an ob#ect mar er or speci ic
animates& an instance o !i erential ob#ect mar ing$ S"+er instea! p"ts orth an
analysis here clitics are in lections& as in orer (198*)& hich m"st match in
eat"res ith the associates ith hich they orm a chain$ %he relationship
bet een DE< an! DE4D is no longer ca"sal in her analysis$
S"+er points o"t that DE4D is only grammatical ith speci ic arg"ments&
hile ,E4D is grammatical ith nonspeci ic arg"ments$ She posits that 344
clitics are speci ie! in the le7icon as :speci ic; an! may only orm chains ith
arg"ments that match this eat"re$ , !isc"sse! her important claims an! sho e!
!isc"sse! the relationships bet een speci icity& partivitiy& re erentiality& an!
scope$
, posit D2s are interprete! as speci ic hen they ta e 520e7ternal scope
(Diesing 199?& ranco 199/& G"tierrez0=e7ach ?@@@& Kall"lli ?@@1)$ ollo ing
Sportiche's (1996) Hclitic voicesI proposal& , posit that clitics are hea!s o
"nctional pro#ections into hose Speci ier positions !o"ble! ob#ects raise in
or!er to be interprete! as speci ic$ %he overtness o the "nctional hea! is
!etermine! by a parameter hich states that only 0hea!s in agreement relations
ith certain in!s o ob#ects may be phonologically realize!$
, go on to sho in chapter / that this parameter is not active or yo"nger
DS spea ers& an! , sho that my analysis can acco"nt or the DS !ata$ 3 ter
!isc"ssing DS& , try to sho that my analysis may point to ar! a ay o
"ni ying cross0!ialectal Spanish DE4D variation$
8/
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
84/120
3. Dominican Spanish
3s , sai! in the intro!"ction& , elicite! grammaticality #"!gments rom ?1
spea ers o Dominican Spanish (DS)an! o"n! that there as a change in
progress regar!ing DE4D. the ol!er generation ollo s the =ioplatense Spanish
pattern in allo ing DE4D only ith speci ic animates& hile the yo"nger
generation ollo s the 2orte+o Spanish pattern in allo ing DE4D ith all
speci ics& animate or inanimate$
,n this chapter , present an! !isc"ss the res"lts o my iel! or & then
sho that the analysis , posite! in chapter ? capt"res the !ata$
3.1. Dominican ACC Clitics
DS or ol!er spea ers patterns li e =ioplatense. it abi!es by Kayne's
Generalization& hich means that only !irect ob#ects hea!e! by ob#ect mar er a
can be 3440!o"ble!$ 3s in many other !ialects o Spanish& the ob#ect mar er in
DS is "ngrammatical ith inanimates$ 4onsi!er the ollo ing.
(91) leC ( a) "n libro
rea!$1s2S% E< one boo
', rea! a boo $'hile most o my spea ers abi!e! by Kayne's Generalization& RM?1 o them
allo e! DE4D ith inanimates& violating Kayne's Generalization$ 3ll o them
ere "n!er /@$ 4onsi!er the ollo ing$ %he B signi ies the grammaticality split
bet een yo"nger an! ol!er spea ers.
8*
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
85/120
(9?) DS re>"ires DE4D ith strong prono"ns& an! allo s it ith propernames an! !e inite animates.
a$ (la) vC a ella
/s $344 see$1s2S% E< her', sa her$'
b$ (la) vC a -arta
/s $344 see$1s2S% E<
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
86/120
De inite inanimates cannot be 3440!o"ble! or ol!er spea ers o DS& b"t they
can or yo"nger spea ers& or hom DE4D patterns as in 2orte+o.
(9O) B lo leC el libro /s
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
87/120
(9R) a$ (la) leimos una revista
/s $344 rea!$1p2S% one magazine
' e rea! a magazine$'
b$ ( las ) leimos 3 algunas / muchas / varias / dos 4
/p $344 rea!$1p2S% some M many M several M t o
revistas
magazines
' e rea! someMmanyMvario"sMt o magazines$'
c$ B la leimos una de las revistas/s $344 rea!$/p2S% one o Det$p magazines
' e rea! one o the magazines$'
!$ B las leimos 3 algunas / muchas / varias / dos 4
/p $344 rea!$1p2S% some M many M several M t o
de las revistas
o Det$s magazines' e rea! someMmanyMseveralMt o o the magazines$'
3s e7pecte!& across generations& only e7pressions patterning accor!ing to
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
88/120
3.2. Intensionality & mood
Ene relevant actor at play ith respect to speci ic rea!ings is intensionality$
,ntensional verbs set "p scope !omains s"ch that complements o intensional
verbs co"nt as intensional conte7ts ith respect to interpreting D2s& an! i the
complement is mo!i ie! by a s"b#"nctive0moo! relative cla"se& it m"st remain
ithin the scope o the intensional verb& an! th"s ithin the 52$ , this is the
case& DE4D sho"l! be !isallo e! in this conte7t& an! DS spea ers evi!ence!
this grammaticality #"!gment$ 4onsi!er the ollo ing.
(98) ( lo) b"sco a un hombre +ue sepa frances
/s
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
89/120
Strong evi!ence or the i!ea that intensional verbs set "p scope !omains in
hich in!e inites may remain ithin the 52 an! ta e non0speci ic interpretation
comes rom verbs hich !o not set "p s"ch scope !omains$ %hese in!s o verbs
(He7tensionalI) cannot ta e complements mo!i ie! by s"b#"nctive0moo! relative
cla"ses& sho n belo in (1@1)$ , an arg"ment mo!i ie! by a relative cla"se m"st
stay ithin the narro (e7istential) scope !omain& an! i e7tensional verbs
pres"ppose the e7istence o their complements& then i!e scope is associate!
ith a pres"ppositional rea!ing$ 4onsi!er the ollo ing.
(1@1) conozco (a un hombre +ue sepa frances
no $1s2= S E< one man 4mpl no $/sS J rench
', no a man ho'! no rench$'
3s ell& consi!er that the sentence becomes grammatical i 'to no ' is instea!
containe! ithin a 42 selecte! by a matri7 intensional verb& hich !oes not
pres"ppose its complement's e7istence (yet the ob#ect mar er becomes
obligatory& interestingly).
(1@?) conozco (a un hombre +ue sabe frances
no $1s2= S E< one man 4mpl no $/s2= S rench
', no a man ho no s rench$'
%his is strong evi!ence or the claim that intensional verbs allo their
complements to remain ithin the 52 an! not be interprete! as pres"ppose!&
hile e7tensional verbs en orce s"ch an interpretation. complements o the latter
m"st evac"ate the 52$
%h"s& , Diesing (199?) is correct in arg"ing that speci ic ob#ects 'evac"ate'
the 52& then in!e inites ten! to ar! a nonspeci ic rea!ing& that is& they ten! to
stay ithin the 52$ %his ties into von -e"singer's (?@@/) notion that hat is 520
internal is ne in ormation& hile hat is 52 e7ternal is pres"ppose!$ 3s ell&
ot has been atteste! in the typological literat"re that clitic systems ten! to begin
89
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
90/120
patterning ith !e inites an! are grammaticalize! !iachronically an! cross0
ling"istically into agreement systems here patterning ith in!e inites becomes
possible ( riagere a 199O. 86)$
hat in!s o ob#ects can e7press a pres"ppose! entityF , have arg"e!
thro"gho"t this paper in the spirit o "anti ie! e7pressions are those hich can be 3440
!o"ble!$ %hose e7pressions hich o"l! pattern li e H ea I >"anti ie!
e7pressions are allo e! by DE4D to pattern li e HstrongI >"anti iers& in that the
3cc2 a or!s a 'lan!ing site' a ter the !o"ble! ob#ect has evac"ate! the 52$
, th"s ass"me an intrinsic relationship bet een DE4D an! e7pressions
that pattern as strong >"anti iers$ DE4D is not possible ith e7pressions
itho"t !eterminers (bare nominals)& an! is only ever possible ith e7pressions
hose !eterminers allo a 520e7ternal scopal rea!ing$ 3n! hile !e inite
!eterminers !o ten! to ar! this rea!ing& this is not al ays the case& as in the
ollo ing& hich sho s that !e inite e7pressions re erring to in!s or concepts
cannot be !o"ble!.
(1@/) ( lo) agra!ezgo el esfuer8o
/s"anti iers are available or DE4D& it is clear that bare pl"rals
m"st al ays stay ithin the 52 to ta e non0speci ic interpretation& since they can
never be 3440!o"ble!.
9@
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
91/120
(1@*) (las ) vimos a ni+as cantan!o en el par>"e
/p $344 see$1p2S% a girls sing$/2=G in Det$s< par
' e sa girls singing in the par $'
%h"s , arg"e bare pl"rals are never speci ic$ ,n light o my claims regar!ing 520
e7ternal scope en orcing a speci ic rea!ing& consi!er the ollo ing
grammaticality #"!gments rom my DS spea ers$
(1@O) sho s that in situ !o"ble! bare in!e inites cannot ta e i!e scope
over s"b#ects& as in the ollo ing$ %he in!e inite uno is a pronominal anaphor
hose !isco"rse0lin e! antece!ent& here& is cigarillo 'cigarette$'
(1@O) a$ ca!a est"!iante "mQ "no
each st"!ent smo e$/s2S% one
' ach st"!ent smo e! one$'
1$ very W one (each st"!ent smo e! a !i erent one)
?$ Ene W every (one as split among each st"!ent)
%he only rea!ing available here is one here each st"!ent has her o n cigaretteN
uno can never ta e 520e7ternal scope& that is& it can never scope over each student,
in!icating that& as it is nonspeci ic& it m"st remain ithin the 52$ En the other
han!& consi!er the ollo ing& hich sho s that in the case o an 344 clitic
e7pressing the !irect ob#ect arg"ment relation& in hichh the only available
rea!ing is a speci ic one$ "t a scopal ambig"ity is present ith a non0!o"ble!
in!e inite !irect ob#ect.
(1@6) a$ ca!a est"!iante lo "mQ
each st"!ent /s
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
92/120
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
93/120
scopal !omain set "p by the verb$
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
94/120
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
95/120
others may not$ , mo!i y this to arg"e that the 344 clitic's Speci ier position
must be ille!$ %his 220li e eat"re is not present or D3% clitics$
%his seems to in!icate that 344 clitics can only enter into agreementrelations ith material that& at & is 520e7ternal$ hat this means is that , m"st
ass"me the ollo ing. in non0!o"ble! clitic constr"ctions& the empty category in
complement0to0verb position raises to lan! in the Spec o the 344 clitic's
"nctional pro#ection$
%he phonological realization o the 344 "nctional hea! is !etermine! by
a parameter hich is sensitive to prominence hierarchies s"ch as GivQn's (198*)&sho n in the previo"s chapter$ %his parameter is something li e the ollo ing.
(11@) The PF pa amete
, a "nctional pro#ection's hea! an! Speci ier position are both ille! at &map the "nctional hea! at 2 only i it is$$$
[ :strong prono"n; in Stan!ar! Spanish
[ :animate; in =ioplatense
%his ilter is th"s not active or 2orte+o an! yo"nger DS spea ers$ "rther&
speci icity is not liste! in this parameter beca"se& as , have trie! to sho & speci ic
interpretations arise beca"se an 220li e eat"re on the 344 clitic probe
motivates the goal to move to the Speci ier position o the 3cc2$
, arg"e that the t o in!s o "nctional pro#ections hea!e! by clitics arethose that have an 220li e eat"re hich motivates movement& an! those that
!o not$ Enly /344 clitics hea! the irst in! o pro#ection& as , have sho n
only these in!s o clitics are restricte! s"ch that they may only !o"ble speci ic
arg"ments$ =ecall that irstMsecon!0person clitics are phonologically i!entical in
both case roles& as in the ollo ing.9O
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
96/120
(111) a$ nos man!aron algo
1pD3% sen!$/p2S% something
'%hey sent "s something$'
b$ nos man!aron a 2ortlan!
1p344 sen!$/p2S% to 2ortlan!
'%hey sent "s to 2ortlan!$'
Since , am arg"ing that irstMsecon!0person clitics& hich are phonologically0
i!entical in both case roles& hea! the same in!s o "nctional pro#ections that
thir!0person !atives !o& this entails that irstMsecon!0person clitics sho"l! be able
to appear ith nonspeci ic arg"ments& hich they can& as in the ollo ing$ 3n
acc"sative interpretation is available in this conte7t "n!er a partitive rea!ing& as
in (11?b)$ ven i the partitive 22 is e7cl"!e!& the sentence may only ta e a
partitive rea!ing$ , sho in (11?a) that the !e a"lt rea!ing o the irstMsecon!0
person clitic hen it !o"bles a nonspeci ic is a bene active one.
(11?) a$ nos mataron a alg"nos
1pD3% ill$/p2S% E< some
'%hey ille! some or "s$'
b$ nos mataron a alg"nos ( de nosotros)
1pD3% ill$/p2S% E< some o "s
'%hey ille! some o "s$'
Since , have arg"e! that covert an! overt partitive constr"ctions s"ch as in (11?b)
are not tr"e cases o clitic !o"bling& since the clitic is associate! ith a partitive
22 a!#oine! to the tree in a non0complement position& (11?) above seems li e
"rther evi!ence that irstMsecon!0person clitics hea! the in! o "nctional
pro#ection that /D3% clitics hea!& as oppose! to the in! that /344 clitics hea!$
96
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
97/120
,n DS& the 2 2arameter is more active or ol!er spea ers than yo"nger
spea ers$ hat lea!s to !i erent settings o s"ch a parameter& both across
generations o DS spea ers an! cross0!ialectally in the -ispanophone orl!F ,
arg"e that this parameter is simply c"lt"rally0con!itione!. across the boar!&
/344 "nctional hea!s serve the same p"rpose licensing 520evac"ation or
speci ic arg"ments& as ell as see ing to ill their Spec position ith a
>"anti icational phrase to scope over it& given that DE4D is never possible ith
bare nominals an! their phonological realization is con!itione! by stigma$
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
98/120
or some other restriction& ren!ers the variable phonological realization o the
"nctional hea! across !ialects$
, leave open the >"estion o hether speci icity is a ormal eat"re o thesynta7$ eonetti (?@@/) arg"es against s"ch a proposal& an! my analysis is more
in line ith his claims he says it is not the case that& say& clitics enco!e
speci icity& or !eterminers b"t instea!& a speci ic interpretation is the res"lt o
movement processes motivate! by chec ing o more abstract eat"res$
ven as my proposal ta es !i erent ass"mptions than his& riagere a
(199O) "ltimately ants to ma e arg"ments along similar lines to Diesing (199?)an! eonetti (?@@/)$ -e posits that only an! all material assigne! 520e7ternal
scope is interprete! as speci ic at & s"ch that speci ic syntactic elements al ays
move o"t o the 52$ "rther motivation or s"ch an arg"ment can be seen rom
the act that uno cannot be clitic0le t !islocate!$
%he i!ea here is that movement o"t o the 52 can be phonologically covert
that is& a ter Spell0o"t& s"ch as in cases o speci ic arg"ments hich at 2 arestill or!ere! a ter the verb or scoping o"t o the 52 can happen be ore Spell0
o"t& an! be overt& as in the ollo ing& hich sho s that uno cannot move o"t the
52& signaling that it is nonspeci ic$ ven as !islocate! arg"ments originate in
!i erent positions than !o"ble! ones& (11/) belo sho s that /344 clitics may
nevertheless only enter into agreement relations ith !islocate! arg"ments that
have been establishe! as speci ic$ %h"s& in (11/b)& a partitive conte7t ma es the
sentence grammatical$ %his lea!s me to pres"me (11/b) is not a case o gen"ine
clitic !o"bling& b"t o the clitic entering into an agreement relation ith an overt
or covert partitive 22 a!#"nct$ =ecall that Z signals intonational brea $
as /las gentes/ for la gente) in which an Output-Output correspondence relation in the constraint hierarchycompares speakers' outputs to normative Spanish outputs. A similar constraint at the syntax-phonologyinterface could be in effect with respect to DOCD, which renders the null realization of the functional headinto whose specifier specific double objects raise.
98
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
99/120
(11/) a$ a 2e!ro M a m"chos M F a "n hombre M a "no T Z
E< 2e!ro M a many M a one man M a one
lo(s) vio
/s(p)
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
100/120
(11O) a ni+as&las vimos
E< girls Det$p see$1p2S%
'Girls& e sa them$'
%his in!icates that at 2 is it "ngrammatical or a bare pl"ral to be 520e7ternal$
3n! the act that bare pl"rals can never be 344 !o"ble! seems to in!icate that
at & it is also "ngrammatical or a bare pl"ral to be 520e7ternal$ 4onsi!er the
ollo ing& hich sho s that even i it is clear the bare pl"ral is re erential (act"al
girls ere singing in an act"al par )& a speci ic or 520e7ternal interpretation is
not available.
(116) (las) vimos a ni+as cantan!o en el par>"e
/p $344 see$1p2S% E< girls sing$2=G in Det$s< par
' e sa girls singing in the par $'
%he generalization here is that henever an e7pression o"l! normally pattern
as a ea >"anti ie! e7pression& the presence o the /344 clitic may license a
speci ic rea!ing i these e7pression is o the in! that can be pres"ppositional& or
that can hea! a partitive constr"ction$ ,t seems that bare pl"rals can never be
pres"ppositional. m"ch li e nonre erential arg"ments& they m"st stay ithin
verbal scopal !omains$ 3ss"ming the 2 2arameter to be tr"e& , believe that my
analysis o DE4D may be e7ten!e! rom DS to acco"nt or the cross0!ialectal
variation o DE4D behavior in Spanish$
3cross all Spanish !ialects& it seems that henever DE4D is possible& it is
only possible ith arg"ments that ta e a speci ic interpretation$ %he availability
in a given !ialect o overt /344 clitics as !isambig"ators regar!ing the
pres"ppositionality o an e7pression increases as the strictness o that !ialect's
2 0parametric settings !ecreases$ %he parameter seems to ollo an animacy
hierarchy$ %his hierarchy is or!ere! s"ch that the arther le t along it an
arg"ment o"l! be classi ie!& the more li ely the DE4D o that arg"ment is
1@@
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
101/120
grammatical. at the le tmost& Hmost animateI e!ge& all !ialects obligatorily 3440
!o"ble$
AnimateStrong pronoun Proper name Human Non-insect animals
Fig. 4. Animacy hierarchy.
4ross0!ialectal DE4D behaviors map onto this animacy hierarchy in the
ollo ing ay.
Strong
pronoun
Proper
name
Human Non-insect
animals
Inanimate
Obligatoryfor all
dialects
OK in mostdialects
OK in Rioplatense-like dialects
OK in Porte +o0li e an! DS0li e !ialects
Fig 5. Cross-dialectal DOCD as regards the animacy hierarchy.
%his seems to imply that i one ass"mes a "ni ie! synta7 o DE4D across all
Spanish !ialects& my analysis can e7tent to acco"nt or these !ata$ Aevertheless&
this is not the only available analysis& since instea! o a le7ical parameter li e the
2 2arameter& one co"l! arg"e that both !iachronically an! cross0!ialectally&
Spanish /344 clitics have "n!ergone a grammaticalization process& going rom
phrasal hea!s (as in Kayne's analysis) to in lections (as in orer's analysis)$ %his
in! o grammatical parametrization is not appealing to me& since it o"l! nee!
e7traneo"s ass"mptions to acco"nt orthe "ni ormity o speci icity e ects in
DE4D across !ialects$ 3 "ni ication analysis capt"res this "ni ormity more
elegantly$
,n concl"sion& , have sho n that my analysis& accor!ing to hich clitics
hea! "nctional pro#ections an! /344 clitics m"st have an "ninterpretable
eat"re val"e! against a D2 that raises !"e to this eat"re's 220li e properties&
acco"nts or the DS !ata$ , a 2 2arameter hich operates accor!ing to an
1@1
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
102/120
animacy hierarchy is ass"me!& my analysis may also posit "ni orm syntactic
stat"s or /344 clitics across !ialects& hile also acco"nting or cross0!ialectal
DE4D variation in Spanish. the !erivation constr"cts the 3cc2 an' time an
arg"ment ta es speci ic interpretation& b"t hether the "nctional hea! has a
correspon!ing 2 realization is !etermine! by the 2 2arameter$ "t , conce!e!
that this as not the only available analysis& an! that a grammatical
parametrization as oppose! to a le7ical one co"l! be p"rs"e!$
3.4. Summary
Dominican Spanish is "n!ergoing a change in progress ith respect to the
grammaticality o the overt realization o /344 clitics$ El!er spea ers employ
DE4D li e =ioplatense spea ers& an! abi!e by Kayne's Generalization& b"t
yo"nger spea ers violate Kayne's Generalization$ "il!ing on S"+er's (1988) !ata
regar!ing speci icity e ects in DE4D& an! or ing ithin her HcaselessI
approach accor!ing to hich clitics !o not assign case& , mo!i ie! a proposal by
Sportiche (199/) to arg"e that clitics hea! "nctional pro#ections o t o in!s. one
hose "ninterpretable eat"re nee!s to be val"e! against a eat"re0matching D2
it c0comman!s& an! another ith no s"ch re>"irement$
/344 clitics& hich may only !o"ble speci ic arg"ments& are o the irst
in!$ , sho e! that this hol!s tr"e in DS or both generations. or ol!er spea ers&
only speci ic animates co"l! be 3440!o"ble!& an! or yo"nger spea ers only
speci ics co"l! be 3440!o"ble! (regar!less o animacy)$
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
103/120
Spello"t an! overt& as oppose! to post0Spello"t an! covert)& hile in ormation
ithin the 52 is novel$ %h"s speci ic arg"ments are available goals to be probe!
by the "nctional hea! (the clitic)$ Strong evi!ence that a speci ic rea!ing is a 520
e7ternal one comes rom the "ngrammaticality o DE4D ith bare pl"rals an!
intensional0verb complements mo!i ie! by relative cla"ses$
, arg"e! that the generational !i erence in DS can be capt"re! ith a 2
parameter accor!ing to hich only /344 clitics hich ere in agreement
relations ith animates co"l! have correspon!ing 2 material or ol!er spea ers$
%his parameter is inactive or yo"nger spea ers$ "rther& this parameter allo s
or my analysis to acco"nt or the cross0!ialectal Spanish DE4D variation& since
the strictness o the parameter's settings increases along an animacy hierarchy
s"ch that ith strong prono"ns& hich are inherently speci ic (S"+er 1999)&
DE4D is obligatory in all !ialects o Spanish$
1@/
-
8/10/2019 Accusative Clitic Doubling in Dominican Spanish, 2014
104/120
!. "onclusion
,n this chapter ,