In:Pseudo-Coordination and Multiple Agreement Constructions
Edited by Giuliana Giusti, Vincenzo Nicolò Di Caro and Daniel Ross
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 274] 2022
► pp. 149–166
Chapter 6The properties of the ‘(a) lua și X’ (‘take and X’) construction in Romanian
Evidence in favor of a more fine-grained distinction among pseudocoordinative structures
Published online: 16 March 2022
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.274.06ble
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.274.06ble
Abstract
This paper presents a preliminary classification of the verbal structure (a) lua și X (‘(to) take and X’) in Romanian, showing that it represents a special case of pseudocoordination. The structure behaves differently from both coordination structures and other pseudocoordination structures with respect to the tests proposed by de Vos (2005) and Ross (2013) (e.g. the Coordinate Structure Constraint, coordinator substitution, semantic bleaching, VP-deletion, etc.), as shown by an exploratory acceptability judgment task with 52 native speakers of Romanian testing for 16 structural properties. The results suggest that the existing classification of pseudocoordination structures should be revisited in order to accommodate Romanian ‘take’ as an additional type.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Acceptability judgment task: Materials and procedure
- 3.Tests for classification as pseudocoordination
- 3.1Syntactic tests
- 3.1.1The Coordinate Structure Constraint
- 3.1.2XP interrupting the verbal string
- 3.1.3VP-deletion
- 3.1.4Substituting conjunction with disjunction
- 3.1.5Changing the order of the conjuncts
- 3.2Semantic tests
- 3.2.1Compatibility with impersonal subjects
- 3.2.2Semantic bleaching
- 3.2.3Semantic subordination
- 3.2.4Event structure modification
- 3.2.5Wide scope reading of the quantifier
- 3.2.6The absence of counterexpectational readings
- 3.3Morphological and phonological tests
- 3.1Syntactic tests
- 4.Syntactic analysis
- 5.Conclusion
Notes References Appendix
References (23)
Carden, Guy and David Pesetsky. 1977. Double-verb constructions, markedness and a fake coordination. In Papers from the 13th Regional Meeting, Chicago Linguistic Society, Chicago, 82–92. University of Chicago.
Coseriu, Eugeniu. 1966. Tomo y me voy. Ein Problem vergleichender europäischer Syntax. Vox Romanica: Annales Helvetici explorandis linguis Romanicis destinati 25: 13–55
Coseriu, Eugenio. 1977. « Tomo y me voy »: Un problema de sintaxis comparada europea. In Estudios de lingüística románica, 79–151. Madrid: Editorial Gredos.
Croitor, Blanca. 2017. Un tip special de coordonare. In Adina Dragomirescu, Alexandru Nicolae, Camelia Stan & Rodica Zafiu (eds.), Sintaxa ca mod de a fi: omagiu Gabrielei Pană Dindelegan, la aniversare (Colecția Personalități Ale Universității Din București), 149–157. București: Editura Universității din București.
García Sánchez, Jairo Javier. 2004. Tomo y me voy: Entre el influjo bíblico y la gramaticalización obvia. Plurilinguismo, Contatti di Lingue e Cultura 10. 139–150.
Kanchev, Ivan. 2010. Semantika, tipologija i proizxod na konstruktsijata vzemam/vzema če (ta, i) + glagol ot svŭršen vid. Sŭpostavitelno ezikoznanie [Contrastive Linguistics] 35(3). 40–44. [URL]. Last accessed 1 July 2021.
Kiparsky, Valentin. 1971. « Взял и … л ». In Viktora Ivanoviča Borkovskogo (ed.), Problemy istorii i dialektologii slavjanskich jazykov, 134–139. Moscow: Izdatel’stvo “Nauka.”
Larsson, Lars-Gunnar. 1992. « Ta och prata om ringfingret » Om begränsningar i den jämförande språkforskningens möjligheter. Årsbok (Kungl. Humanistiska Vetenskaps-Samfundets i Uppsala) 1991–1992: 87–97.
Merlan, Aurélia. 1999. Sobre as chamadas “perífrases verbais paratácticas” do tipo « PEGAR E+ V2 » nas línguas românicas (com referência especial ao português e romeno). Línguas e Literaturas, Revista da Faculdade de Letras, Universidade do Porto 16. 159–205.
Morreale, Margherita. 1966. «… Fue y le dijo,» «… cogió y se fue.» Observaciones acerca del uso del verbo sin contenido semántico. Annali del Corso di Lingue e Letterature Straniere dell’Università di Bari 8. 76–88.
Ross, Daniel. 2013. Verbal Pseudocoordination in English: A syntactic analysis with reference to diachronic, dialectal and cross-linguistic variation. University of Illinois at Urbana- Champaign. Available at [URL]
. 2016. Between coordination and subordination: typological, structural and diachronic perspectives on pseudocoordination. F. Pratas, S. Pereira, C. Pinto (Eds.), Coordination and Subordination: Form and Meaning – Selected Papers from CSI Lisbon 2014, 209–243. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
. 2017. Pseudocoordinación del tipo tomar y en Eurasia: 50 años después [Pseudocoordination with take and in Eurasia: 50 years later]. Presented August 3, 2017, at Lingüística Coseriana VI, Lima, Peru. Available online at: [URL]
Ross, John. 1967. Constraints on Variables in Syntax. Ph. D. thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Schmerling, Susan. 1975. Asymmetric conjunction and rules of conversation, P. Cole and J. Morgan (eds.), Speech Acts, Volume 3 of Syntax and Semantics, 211–231. New York: Academic Press.
Vannebo, K. I. 2003. Ta og ro deg ned noen hakk:on pseudocoordination with the verb ta ‘take’ in a grammaticalization perspective. Nordic Journal of Linguistics, 26(2): 165–193.
de Vos, Mark Andrew. 2004. Pseudo coordination is not subordination. L. Cornips and J. Doetjes (eds.), Linguistics in the Netherlands 21, Volume 21: 181–192. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Weiss, Daniel. 2008. Voz’mu i ne budu! Zum Inexspektativ im modernen Russischen. In Peter Kosta & Daniel Weiss (eds.), Slavistische Linguistik 2006/2007: Referate des XXXII. Konstanzer Slavistischen Arbeitstreffens, Männedorf bei Zürich, 18. – 20. September 2006, und Referate des XXXIII. Konstanzer Slavistischen Arbeitstreffens, Potsdam, 4. – 6. September 2007; Gerd Freidhof zum 65. Geburtstag gewidmet, 473–504. München: Sagner.