In:Romance Linguistics 2009: Selected papers from the 39th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL), Tucson, Arizona, March 2009
Edited by Sonia Colina, Antxon Olarrea and Ana Maria Carvalho
[Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 315] 2010
► pp. 231–248
Romanian genderless pronouns and parasitic gaps
Published online: 25 November 2010
https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.315.14giu
https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.315.14giu
I argue that the distribution of (overt) object clitics and null objects in Romanian can be explained if we assume that the so-called “neuter pronouns” of Romanian are genderless. I show that Romanian has a null object used as a bound variable with a neuter pronoun antecedent. This item differs from parasitic gaps by the fact that it does not require an A-bar moved antecedent and can only occur with neuter pronouns, while overt clitics are excluded in this context. I propose that this is due to the fact that object clitics are always marked for gender, while neuter pronouns are genderless. I present independent evidence for the proposal that the so-called “neuter pronouns” of Romanian and other Romance languages, definite as well as indefinite and quantificational, lack a value for Gender.
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 6 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
