A note on subject clitics in Akan

The Cambridge Handbook of Spanish Linguistics

The expression and omission of subject personal pronouns-often exemplified by the 1. Introduction: variable expression of pronominal subjects The variable use of subject personal pronouns is among the most widely studied features of Spanish syntax. Pronominal subjects can be expressed by a subject pronoun placed before the verb (example 1a), after the verb (1b) or left unexpressed (1c). 1a. Y yo creo que eso es sano. 'And I think that it is healthy.' b. No creo yo que mañana tengamos reunión. 'I don't think that we have meeting tomorrow.' c. Pues creo que no lo sabía. 'Well I think that he didn't know it.' (CREA) This property distinguishes Spanish from English and some other Western European languages like German and French that have obligatory pronominal subjects. Languages resembling Spanish are frequently referred to as null subject or pro-drop languages. Both terms originate in the Principles and Parameters version of Generative Grammar (see Chapter 1) where the term pro-drop is used of a cluster of syntactic properties including null subjects and "free" constituent order (Chomsky 1981). These terms are widely used in linguistics, although conceptualizing the lack of independent subject personal pronouns as "dropping" or as "null" arguments has also been criticized as linguistic Anglo-centrism (Dryer 2011). In more functionally oriented studies, the term "variable subject expression" has been used instead to better account for the complex nature of the phenomenon (see e.g. Otheguy and Zentella 2012; Travis and Torres Cacoullos 2012; Carvalho, Orozco and Shin 2015). Spanish subject pronoun expression is a textbook example of variable syntax, and exploring what factors condition subject pronoun expression has become a popular topic in studies using variationist sociolinguistic methodology. The first task in variationist studies is to determine the envelope of variation, i.e. the contexts where variation may occur. For example, syntactically impersonal verbs such as meteorological verbs (e.g. llueve 'it rains') and existential verbs (e.g. hay 'there is/are') are excluded from the envelope of variation, as they do not admit pronominal subjects, with the exception of Dominican Spanish where the neuter personal pronoun ello may be

Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 1995

2004

Abstract: Focus and Topic constructions in Akan have common characteristics of constituent dislocation to the left periphery of an extra-sentential clause and pronoun resumption in canonical base position of the dislocated constituent (Saah 1988; Boadi 1990). However, the structural difference is that, unlike in a topic construction, in a focus construction a clitic morpheme,“na”, referred to as 'focus marker', is also introduced right after the focused constituent.

Revue Roumaine de Linguistique, 2023

The widespread pattern of “noun-less” variants of DPs (e.g. two/these [nP/NumPØ] vs. two/these cars) might lead to the expectation that the definite determiner should be able to head DPs with a null complement. The best candidate for representing the structure [Ddef [nP/NumPØ]] are 3rd person personal pronouns (Elbourne, 2005; a.o), an analysis supported by evidence for NP-ellipsis (or N-anaphora) in pronouns. However, equating pronouns with THE+[nP/NumPØ] faces a number of issues: the different behavior of pronouns and other definite descriptions with respect to binding; the differences in syntactic and semantic features between pronouns and DPs headed by THE (e.g. gender); the one-to-many structure-form relationship between the single structure THE+[nP/NumPØ] and different series of pronominal forms (strong and weak forms); and, a gap in the attested combinations of THE and [NØ]. Our account addresses these issues. We propose that the D used in pronouns, which we label Dpron, has the semantics of THE, but THE and Dpron differ in their formal features. We posit that a null NP complement needs to be licensed by features on the determiner the NP merges with, and that Dpron bears such features. Thus, we capture the fact that typical THE does not surface in cases where there is no overt element in the complement of D (i.e. what we call total emptiness) via the absence of these features on THE. Additionally, to further explore the differences between strong and weak forms in Romanian, we present the results of a corpus study on these forms.

2010

This study originated as a reaction to the proposal that the “illicit” null subjects identified by Montrul (2004)—the pro with an asterisk which appears in (1) – (3) below—evidenced how Heritage Spanish speakers are affected by the vulnerability of the syntax/pragmatics interface. Montrul and Rodriguez-Louro (2006) maintain that these data provide evidence against the unidirectionality of pragmatic deficits (Sorace 2004) according to which overt subjects but not null subjects would be overproduced. In other words, Montrul and Rodriguez-Louro (2006) maintain that null subjects are also overproduced. Since null subjects are not supposed to bear a [+topic shift] feature, in example (1), the change of topic (el lobo, the wolf) should trigger the presence of an overt subject, because otherwise we do not know who filled the wolf’s stomach with stones. However, the overt pronoun ELLOS (they) would not make the sentence less ambiguous because the agreement marker, the “N” of llenaroN is as ...

Atkan Aleut has non-subject pronominals that are attracted to a position just before the verb but do not fuse with it. This behavior, termed UNCLITIC, is modeled using a version of the automodular analysis proposed by Sadock (1991). The unclitic pattern is proposed as the explanation for a set of apparent counterexamples in the puzzling word-order-and-‘definiteness’ paradigms first presented by Bergsland and Dirks (1981:31-33) and commented on by Fortescue (1987), Leer (1988), and Sadock (2009). (Atkan Aleut, clitics, word order, definiteness, Autolexical syntax, multimodular analysis)

In this paper I have used pronominal clitics in Italian in combination with verbs of propositional attitude to shed light on opacity effects due to intrusive pragmatics (at the level of free enrichments/explicatures). Certain problems discussed by Schiffer (2000) disappear completely, when the syntax, semantics and pragmatics of propositional clitics are discussed and such considerations are extended to propositional attitudes in general. In this paper, I add that a proposi-tional clause must be in an appositional relationship (resulting from free enrichment and, thus, not actually present in the syntax) with the that-clause embedded in verbs of propositional attitude. I consider the consequences of this position. One of the most cogent results of this paper is that pronominal clitics generally refer back to full propositions (if they refer to propositions at all) and not to minimal propositions. I take my own considerations on clitics to give support to interesting and important considerations on emergent presuppositions by Kecskes and Zhang (2009).

Syntax, 1998

In this article I discuss pro and its licensing strategies. I argue that the Dfeature postulated by for Tense and v can be realized in a separate head, namely, on a D, which then licenses pro (along the lines of Torrego ( )). Focusing on nominative subjects in certain infinitival clauses of Catalan, Italian, and Spanish, I propose that their nominative subjects are licensed by a D with ''weak'' agreement features in association with Tense. Expletive pro and argumental pro are discussed and it is proposed that the D that licenses the former has no agreement features, whereas the D that licenses the latter has ''rich'' agreement. A parallel is established between the licensing strategy of ''clitic-doubling'' and the licensing of argumental pro in infinitival clauses.

We argue that not all demonstrative pronouns are of type e. Instead, some of them may be of type <e, t>. While <e, t> pronouns are a grammatical realization of elided nP/NP, where nP/NP denotes a maximal nominal projection lacking D’, pronouns of type e may come about via two distinct routes: (i) either they are an overt realization of an elided DP in the sense of Postal (1969), Elbourne (2005), etc. (with the caveat that the actual functional projection may represent a different set of φ-features, see Déchaine and Wiltschko [2002], among others); or (ii) they are a morphological realization of a more complex structure, namely, nP/NP + variable structure introduced by movement.

Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 2002

This paper investigates the syntax of independent pronounsin Halkomelem Salish and argues that thesepronouns are morphosyntactically complex. In particular,the paper shows that independent pronounscontain a syntactically active determiner, and concludesthat they are full DPs with an elliptical NP.Licensing of elliptical NPs is subject to cross-linguisticvariation, and thus not all languages allow fordeterminers to be used pronominally. The analysisof independent pronouns as full DPs is supported bytheir external syntax as well as their bindingproperties. It is shown that independent pronouns behave likeR-expressions in that they are subject toCondition C. On the basis of this observation, it is concluded thatbinding theory must be sensitive to syntacticcategories and, crucially, that regular 'condition B' pronounscannot be analyzed as (intransitive) DPs,contrary to standard assumptions.

Intercultural Pragmatics, 2013

In this paper I have used pronominal clitics in Italian in combination with verbs of propositional attitude to shed light on opacity effects due to intrusive pragmatics (at the level of free enrichments/explicatures). Certain problems discussed by Schiffer (2000) disappear completely, when the syntax, semantics and pragmatics of propositional clitics are discussed and such considerations are extended to propositional attitudes in general. In this paper, I add that a propositional clause must be in an appositional relationship (resulting from free enrichment and, thus, not actually present in the syntax) with the that-clause embedded in verbs of propositional attitude. I consider the consequences of this position. One of the most cogent results of this paper is that pronominal clitics generally refer back to full propositions (if they refer to propositions at all) and not to minimal propositions. I take my own considerations on clitics to give support to interesting and important considerations on emergent presuppositions by Kecskes and Zhang (2009).

The purpose of this paper is to describe the grammatical relations that exist in Akan. 1 Studies on Akan have always appealed to notions like subject, object, and indirect object, but no study, to my knowledge, has offered a systematic description of these relations. The approach adopted in this paper follows in the main Keenan (1975, 1976), Anderson (1976), Comrie (1982), Borg and Comrie (1984) and Hyman and Duranti (1982), contrast ing overt coding properties with behavior-and-control properties (see also Givón 1995, in this volume). The paper is organized as follows: Section 2 presents an overview of the cross-linguistic properties of subjects and ob jects. Sections 3 and 4 discuss properties relevant to Akan. Section 5 focuses on the problem of double objects in bi-transitive constructions. Section 6 is the conclusion. 2. Properties of grammatical subjects and objects Keenan (1975, 1976) groups the formal properties of grammatical subjects and objects into two clusters-overt coding properties and behavioral Grammatical Relations : A functionalist perspective, edited by T.

This article discusses the morphosyntax of accusative subject constructions in Icelandic, from the point of view of the 'dependent case' analysis of accusative. The primary focus is on deriving the Accusative Subject Generalization (ASG), the generalization that accusative subjects are never related thematically to a morphologically intransitive verb. After it is demonstrated that the ASG holds, it is proposed that the ASG follows from the claim that there is no such thing as inherently case-marked accusatives in Icelandic. The accusative subject constructions under scrutiny in fact involve a silent external argument that distributes like a clitic syntactically and is interpreted like a weather pronoun semantically. The account is explanatory insofar as it involves one stipulation—the presence of a silent clitic—from which the ASG and numerous other syntactic, semantic, and morphological properties of accusative subject constructions follow. The explanatory value of the account hinges on a grammatical architecture where morphological idiosyncrasy and semantic idiosyncrasy are computed in distinct components of the grammar, and case marking—even structural case marking—is divorced from DP licensing.