1887
Volume 19, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2211-6834
  • E-ISSN: 2211-6842
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

In this article I will show that there is not a single diachronic path that leads to the loss of the verb second property so that different languages can have different ways towards a non V2 grammar. I will also show that the progressive loss of subject inversion contexts is not the only factor that played a role in the change, because there are V2 languages in which nominal subject inversion was never attested but they are still V2, i.e. they have I to C movement. I will identify various factors which may play a role and are related to the type of verb second found in different languages. I will consider various types of factors and show that they can play a role or not in the loss of V2 depending on the type of V2 that the language displays. I will also identify an additional factor that has not been considered in the literature namely the type of complementizer system: a change in this area can contribute to destabilizing the V2 grammar.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/lv.16001.pol
2019-09-24
2019-10-14
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Adams, Marianne
    1987 ‘From Old French to the Theory of pro-drop’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory5: 1–32. 10.1007/BF00161866
    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00161866 [Google Scholar]
  2. Alber, Birgit
    1994 Indizi per l’esistenza di uno split-CP nelle lingue germaniche. In: G. Borgato (ed.), Teoria del linguaggio e analisi linguistica. XX Incontro di grammatica generativa, 3–23. Padova: Unipress.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Anderssen, Merete & Westergaard, Marit
    2010 Frequency and Economy in the Acquisition of Variable Word Order. Lingua: 2569–2588. 10.1016/j.lingua.2010.06.006
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2010.06.006 [Google Scholar]
  4. Axel, Kathrin
    2007Studies on Old High German Syntax. Left Sentence Periphery, Verb Placement and Verb Second. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/la.112
    https://doi.org/10.1075/la.112 [Google Scholar]
  5. Belletti, Adriana
    2004 ‘Aspects of the low IP area’, InLuigi Rizzi (ed.), The Structure of CP and IP: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, 16–51. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. 2008 The CP of clefts. Rivista di Grammatica Generativa33. 191–204.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. 2013 Revisiting the CP of Clefts. InGünther Grewendorf & Thomas Ede Zimmermann: Discourse and Grammar. From Sentence Types to Lexical Categories, 91–114. Berlin: de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Benincà, Paola
    2006 A detailed map of the left periphery of Medieval Romance. InRaffaella Zanuttini (ed.), Crosslinguistic research in syntax and semantics: Negation, tense and clausal architecture, 53–86. Georgetown: Georgetown University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Benincà, Paola and Cecilia Poletto
    2004 Topic, Focus and V2: defining the CP sublayers. InLuigi Rizzi (ed.), The Structure of CP and IP: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, 52–75. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Bocci, Giuliano & Cecilia Poletto
    2016 Syntactic and Prosodic Effects of Information Structure in Romance. InCaroline Féry and Shinichiro Ishihara (eds), inHandout of Information structure, 642–662. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Bidese, Ermenegildo
    2008Die diachronische Syntax des Zimbrischen. Tuebingen: Günter Narr Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Bidese, Ermenegildo & Alessandra Tomaselli
    2007 The loss of V2 phenomena in Cimbrian. Linguistische Berichte210. 209–228.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Bidese, Ermenegildo, Andrea Padovan & Alessandra Tomaselli
    2013Linguistische Berichte. Sonderheft 19.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. 2012 A binary system of complementizers in Cimbrian relative clauses. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax90. 1–21.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Bosco, Ilaria
    1999 Christlike unt korze dottrina. Un’analisi sintattica della lingua cimbra del XVII secolo. Padova: Padova University dissertation.
  16. Cecchetto, Carlo
    2001 Proper Binding Condition Effects are Phase Impenetrability Condition Effects. In: Kim Minjoo &Uri Strauss, Proceedings of NELS 31, GLSA, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Cocchi, G., and C. Poletto
    2007 Complementizer deletion and complementizer doubling, inC. Picchi and A. Pona (eds.), Proceedings of the XXXII Incontro di Grammatica generativa, Quaderni del Dipartimento di Linguistica – Università di Firenze, 49–62. Alessandria: Ed. dell’Ors.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Costa, João
    2001 The Emergence of Unmarked Word Order. InGeraldine Legendre, Jane Grimshaw, and Sten Vikner (eds), Optimality- Theoretic Syntax, 171–203. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Cruschina, Silvio
    2011Discourse-Related Features and Functional Projections. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Fuss, Eric
    2003 On the historical core of V2 in Germanic. Nordic Journal of Linguistics26. 195–231. 10.1017/S0332586503001082
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0332586503001082 [Google Scholar]
  21. 2008Word order and language change. On the interface between syntax and morphology. Habilitationsschrift, Universität Frankfurt.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Giorgi, Alessandra & Fabio Pianesi
    1997Tense and aspect: from semantics to morphosyntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Grewendorf, Günther & Cecilia Poletto
    2011 Hidden verb second: The case of Cimbrian. InMichael T. Putnam (ed.), Studies on German-Language islands, 301–46. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.123.12gre
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.123.12gre [Google Scholar]
  24. Grewendorf, Günther
    2008 The Left Clausal Periphery: Clitic Left Dislocation in Italian and Left Dislocation in German. InBenjamin Shaer, Philippa Cook, Werner Frey, and Claudia Maienborn (eds), Dislocated Elements in Discourse: Syntactic, Semantic, and Pragmatic Perspectives, 49–94. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Haegeman, Liliane
    1997 Negative inversion and the structure of CP. Paper presented at theLinguistic Colloquium, University of Wuppertal.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Hoekstra, Eric
    1993 Dialectal variation inside CP as parametric variation, Linguistische Berichte5.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Kaiser, Georg A.
    2002Verbstellung und Verbstellungswandel in den romanischen Sprachen. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag. 10.1515/9783110911640
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110911640 [Google Scholar]
  28. van Kampen, Jacqueline
    2010 Typological Guidance in the Acquisition of V2 Dutch. Lingua120 (2): 264–83. 10.1016/j.lingua.2008.07.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2008.07.005 [Google Scholar]
  29. Kemenade, Ans van
    1987Syntactic case and morphological case in the history of English. Dordrecht: Foris. 10.1515/9783110882308
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110882308 [Google Scholar]
  30. Jacobs, Joachim
    2015 Was für ein Hauptsatzphänomen ist V2? Talk delivered at the V2 Workshop Wuppertal24.07.2015.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Ledgeway, Adam
    2003 ‘Il sistema completivo dei dialetti meridionali. La doppia serie di complementatori’, Rivista Italiana di Dialettologia27: 89–147.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. 2007 Old Neapolitan Word Order: Some Initial Observations. InA. L. Lepschy, A. Tosi (eds), Languages of Italy: Histories and dictionaries, Ravena, Longo, 119–146.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. 2008 Satisfying V2 in early romance: Merge vs. move. Journal of Linguistics44. 437–470. 10.1017/S0022226708005173
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226708005173 [Google Scholar]
  34. Lightfoot, David
    1995 Why UG Needs a Learning Theory: Triggering Verb Movement. InAdrian Battye and Ian Roberts (eds), Clause Structure and Language Change, 31–52. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. 1999The Development of language: Acquisition, change, and evolution. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. 2006How New Languages Emerge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511616204
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511616204 [Google Scholar]
  37. Lightfoot, David & Marit Westergaard
    2007 Language Acquisition and Language Change: Interrelationships. InLanguage and Linguistics Compass1 (5): 396–416. 10.1111/j.1749‑818X.2007.00023.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-818X.2007.00023.x [Google Scholar]
  38. Lohnstein, Horst
    . In press. The grammatical basis of verb second – the case of German. InRebecca Woods, Sam Wolfe & Theresa Biberauer, Rethinking Verb Second. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Manzini, Maria Rita & Leonardo Savoia
    2005I dialetti italiani e romanci: morfosintassi generativa, vol.3. Alessandria: Edizioni Dell’Orso.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Oniga, Renato
    2014Latin. A linguistic introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Paoli, Sandra
    2007 The fine structure of the left periphery: COMPs and subjects: Evidence from Romance. Lingua117. 1057–1079. 10.1016/j.lingua.2006.05.007
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2006.05.007 [Google Scholar]
  42. Petrova, Svetlana
    2015 Free word order in Germanic: Insights from object order in Middle Low German. Linguistische Berichte244, 355–382.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Poeppel, David & Kenneth Wexler
    1993 The Full Competence Hypothesis of Clause Structure in Early German. Language69: 1–33. 10.2307/416414
    https://doi.org/10.2307/416414 [Google Scholar]
  44. Poletto, Cecilia
    2000The Higher Functional Field: Evidence from Northern Italian Dialects. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. 2001 Complementizer deletion and verb movement in standard Italian. In: Guglielmo Cinque & Giampaolo Salvi (eds.), Current Studies in Italian Syntax. Essays Offered to Lorenzo Renzi, 265–286. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. 2002 The left-periphery of V2-Rhaetoromance dialects: A new view on V2 and V3. InSief Barbiers, Leonie Cornips & Susanne van der Kleij (eds.), Syntactic microvariation, 214–42. Amsterdam: Meertens Institute.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. 2006 Parallel phases: A study of the high and low periphery of Old Italian. InMara Frascarelli (ed.), Phases of interpretation, 261–95. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110197723.4.261
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197723.4.261 [Google Scholar]
  48. 2014Word order in Old Italian. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199660247.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199660247.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  49. Poletto, C.
    2015 ‘Word order in the Old Italian DP’, inU. Shlonsky (ed.), The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, 109–127. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Poletto, Cecilia
    2016 Which clues for which V2. InErmenegildo Bidese, Federica Cognola & Manuela Caterina Moroni (eds.), Theoretical approaches to linguistic variation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/la.234.09pol
    https://doi.org/10.1075/la.234.09pol [Google Scholar]
  51. Poletto, Cecilia & Alessandra Tomaselli
    2002 La sintassi del soggetto nullo nelle isole tedescofone del Veneto: Cimbro e sappadino a confronto. InGianna Marcato (ed.), La dialettologia oltre il 2001. Atti del convegno di Sappada/Plodn (Belluno) 1–5 Luglio 2001, 237–252. Padova: Padova Unipress.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Reis, Marga
    2016 Consecutive so … V2-clauses in German. InIngo Reich und Augustin Speyer (eds), Co- and subordination in German and other languages, 285–318. Hamburg: Buske Verlag.
  53. Renzi, Lorenzo & Giampaolo Salvi
    2010Grammatica dell’Italiano Antico. Bologna: Il Mulino.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Rinke, Esther
    2007Syntaktische Variation aus synchronischer und diachronischer Perspektive. Frankfurt am Main: Vervuert. 10.31819/9783964561930
    https://doi.org/10.31819/9783964561930 [Google Scholar]
  55. Rizzi, Luigi
    1996 Residual Verb Second and the Wh-criterion. InAdriana Belletti and Luigi Rizzi (eds.), Parameters and Functional Heads. Essays in Comparative Syntax, 63–90. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  56. 1997 The fine structure of the left periphery. InLiliane Haegeman (ed.), Elements of grammar: Handbook of generative grammar, 281–338. Dordrecht: Kluwer. 10.1007/978‑94‑011‑5420‑8_7
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-5420-8_7 [Google Scholar]
  57. Roberts, Ian
    1993Verbs and diachronic syntax: A comparative history of English and French. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Roberts, I.
    2004 The C-system in Brythonnic Celtic languages, V2, and the EPP. InLuigi Rizzi (ed.), The Structure of CP and IP: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, 297–328. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Schreiber, Nina
    2010 Zur historischen Entwicklung des Komplementierers dass im Germanischen. PhD Thesis University of Frankfurt.
  60. Schwartz Bonnie, D. & Sten Vikner
    1989 All Verb Second Clauses are CPs. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax43, 27–49.
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Sitaridou, Ioanna
    2005 A corpus-based study of null subjects in Old French and Old Occitan. InClaus D. Putsch, Johannes Kabatek & Wolfgang Raible (eds.), Corpora and Diachronic Linguistics, 359–74. Tübingen: Narr.
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Vance, B.
    1989 Null Subjects and Syntactic Change in Medieval French. Ph.D. Thesis, Cornell University.
  63. Vanelli, L.
    1998I dialetti italiani settentrionali nel panorama romanzo. Studi di sintassi e morfologia. Roma: Bulzoni.
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Vikner, Sten
    1995Verb Movement and Expletive Subjects in the Germanic Languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Wanner, Dieter
    1995 Les subordonnées à double complémentateur en roman medieval. InGiovanni Ruffino (ed.), Atti del XXI Congresso Internazionale di Linguistica e Filologia Romanza, Section 1., 421–433.
    [Google Scholar]
  66. Westergaard, Marit
    2008 Acquisition and Change: On the Robustness of the Triggering Experience for Word Order Cues. Lingua. vol.118 (12). 10.1016/j.lingua.2008.05.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2008.05.003 [Google Scholar]
  67. 2009 Microvariation as diachrony: A view from acquisition. Journal of Comparative. Germanic Linguistics12. 49–79. 10.1007/s10828‑009‑9025‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10828-009-9025-9 [Google Scholar]
  68. 2016 Word order and finiteness in acquisition: A study of English and Norwegian wh-questions. InKristin Melum Eide (ed.) Finiteness Matters: On finiteness-related phenomena in natural languages, p.255–286. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/la.231.09wes
    https://doi.org/10.1075/la.231.09wes [Google Scholar]
  69. Wolfe, Sam
    2015 Microvariation in Medieval Romance syntax: A comparative approach. Cambridge: University of Cambridge dissertation.
  70. Yang, Charles
    2000 Knowledge and Learning in Natural Language. Massachusetts: Massachusetts Institute of Technology dissertation.
  71. Zanuttini, Raffaella
    (1997): Negation and Clausal Structure: A Comparative Study of Romance Languages. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/lv.16001.pol
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): null subjects , null topics , Old Romance , split left periphery and verb second
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error