Lingvisticæ Investigationes - Volume 9, Issue 2, 1985

This article shows that important differences between Romanian and Spanish with respect to the clitic doubling phenomenon are not due to a parametric variation in the clitic systems of the two languages, but to a specific mechanism of relative clause formation that we propose for Romanian. Our ana-lysis is further supported by data concerning the clitic doubling of quantified NPs. Another interesting confirmation comes from the Italian Clitic Left Dislocation.

The Vocative Adjectives biaus, dous and chiers in Old French:These three epithets are used with far more frequency than any other adjectives accompanying titles of address in direct discourse. Nevertheless, they are not used in great abundance until the romances of Chrétien de Troyes, who employs them with ever increasing frequency throughout his romance production. The article briefly retraces the attestations of their semantic values and literary applications in rhymed verse narratives of the twelfth and early thirteenth centuries.

Remarks on a subclass of subject-oriented adverbs and their adjectival sources.The author first intends to describe the syntactic properties of subject-oriented sentence adverbs in -ment, as opposed to subject-oriented manner adverbs in -ment. He then discusses the status of two adjectival paraphrases — related to each other — for the sentences comprising a subject-oriented sentence adverb. He finally identifies on a syntactic basis the class of the adjectival sources of this class of adverbs.

Pronouns are commonly considered as linguistic items which supply a way of avoiding redundancy through mere reference to something previously (anaphoric reference) or subsequently (cataphoric reference) expressed in the discourse. In this paper we provide evidence that there are numerous situations where the pronouns refer to linguistic items, having particular syntactic function, holding together an obligatory co-reference relation. Co-referential items occur as arguments of a predicative term = : Vsup N where Vsup is ser or estar (to be), and N a predicative noun. Although the present description mainly concerns Spanish and Portuguese, we believe that it also applies to other Romance languages.

The purpose of this paper is to argue that the facts of interphonology support a division of processes relating sound alternations into two distinct types: those that cannot cause negative transfer and those that can and often do. This distinction has been captured in two ways in recent phonological theory: (i) by proposing an autonomous morphophonology {cf. Hooper 1976) and (ii) by positing levels and strata (cf. Mohanan 1982 and Kiparsky 1982). Both internal and external evidence, such as the phonological behaviour of nonsense words {cf. Gussmann 1980) and the necessity of doing at least some inflection in the lexicon (cf. Lieber 1981), argues against the former model. The latter model succeeds in avoiding autonomous morphophonology, but only at the cost of postulating levels and strata, constructs for which interpho-nology offers no support. The facts of negative transfer or interference, it seems to us, are best accounted for by a theory that accounts for non-global "morphophonology" directly in the morphological component of the grammar (cf. Ford and Singh 1984 and Singh à paraître).

Grosso modo les phonologues ont proposé trois manières pour traiter des données phonotactiques:1. L'approche des conventions marquantes,2. L'approche qui affirme positivement l'occurrence de tel ou tel groupe consonantique dans telle ou telle position,3. L'approche qui exclut l'occurrence de tel ou tel groupe consonantique dans telle ou telle position.Dans le présent texte je ferai un examen critique des deux premières approches.Je tâcherai de démontrer que les inventeurs de conventions marquantes n'ont pas été suffisammant clairs et cohérents quant à la façon dont il faut les utiliser pour comptabiliter les m, ce qui pourtant était leur objectif.Les restrictions phonotactiques positives expliquent moins bien certains faits que les négatives:a. Elle n'expliquent pas pourquoi les séquences consonantiques plus longues ont été construites à partir de séquences plus courtes,b. Elles ne prédisent pas qu'il y a des séquences consonantiques maximales,c. Elles n'expliquent pas pourquoi les séquences consonantiques plus complexes font leur apparition après les séquences plus simples.