In:Individual Differences in Anaphora Resolution: Language and cognitive effects
Edited by Georgia Fotiadou and Ianthi Maria Tsimpli
[Language Faculty and Beyond 18] 2023
► pp. 48–67
Clausal types and syntactic subjects
Introducing and resuming discourse referents in Italian and Greek
Published online: 2 November 2023
https://doi.org/10.1075/lfab.18.02di
https://doi.org/10.1075/lfab.18.02di
Abstract
In previous work (Di Domenico,
2020), I have analyzed the narrative productions of a
group of Italian native speakers, in order to investigate whether
the core assumption of the Position of Antecedent Hypothesis,
proposed by Carminati
(2002) for the resolution of intra-sentential pro in Italian, could be extended to the
discourse level despite Carminati’s (2002, p. 306) claim to the contrary. The
data suggested that, while pro was
overwhelmingly the most attested anaphoric device, Discourse
Referents were never introduced pre-verbally; the data, however,
also revealed that Discourse Referents introduced as non-subject
constituents were restated in subject position for subsequent
resumption (through a pseudo-relative, a subject relative or an
Accusative + Infinitive clause). This led to the conclusion that the
core assumption of the Position of Antecedent Hypothesis could be
maintained at the discourse level as well: in Italian pro looks for an antecedent in Spec, IP
also inter – sententially. The present work addresses the same
question in Greek, which is, as Italian, a null-subject language,
and compares the Greek results to the Italian ones of the previous
work. The analysis reveals that things work in part differently in
the two languages, given that the pre-verbal subject position is
frequently employed for the introduction of brand new Discourse
Referents in Greek, contrary to Italian. Restatement in subject
position, however, modulo some differences concerning the clausal
types attested in the two languages, still holds whenever Discourse
Referents are introduced as non-subject constituents, suggesting
that pro looks for an antecedent in
Spec, IP in Greek as well as in Italian.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Background
- 2.1Introducing and resuming discourse referents in Italian narratives
- 2.2On post-verbal subjects of unaccusatives
- 3.Clausal types in Italian and Greek narratives
- 4.Introducing and resuming DRs in Greek
- 5.Extension and conclusions
Notes References
References (34)
Alexiadou, A. & Anagnostopoulou, E.
(2002). Raising
without infinitives and the role of
agreement. In Alexiadou, A., Anagnostopoulou, E., Barbiers, S. & Gärtner, H.M. (Eds), Dimensions of Movement (pp. 17–30). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Angelopoulos, N.
(2015). Explorations
of (Greek)
Pseudorelatives. Master Thesis. University of California at Los Angeles.
(2001). Accessibility
theory: an
overview. In Sanders, J. M., Schilperoord, J. & Spooren, W., (Eds), Text Representation: Linguistic and Psycholinguistic aspects (pp. 29–87). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Belletti, A.
(2001). ‘Inversion’
as
focalization. In Hulk, A. & Pollock, J.-Y. (Eds), Inversion in Romance and the Theory of Universal Grammar, (pp. 60–90). Oxford, Oxford University Press.
(2004). Aspects
of the low IP
area. In Rizzi, L. (Ed.), The Structure of CP and IP. The Cartography of Syntactic Structures vol.2 (pp. 16–51). Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.
(2017). On
the Acquisition of Complex Derivations with Related
Considerations on Poverty of the Stimulus and Frequency.
In Di Domenico, E. (Ed.), Syntactic Complexity from a Language Acquisition Perspective (pp. 28–48). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing,.
Belletti, A. & Bianchi, V.
(2016). Definiteness
effect and unaccusative subjects: an overview and some new
thoughts. In Fischer, S., Kupisch, T. & Rinke, E. (Eds), Definiteness effects: Bilingual, typological and diachronic variation (pp. 14–65). Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Bock, K., Loebell, H. & Morey, R.
(1992). From
Conceptual Roles to Structural Relations: Bridging the
Syntactic
Cleft. Psychological
Review, 99(1), 150–171.
Calabrese, A.
(1986). Pronomina.
In Fukui, N., Rapoport, T. R. & Sagey, E. (Eds), Papers in Theoretical Linguistics (pp. 1–46). Cambridge, MA: MITWPL.
Cardinaletti, A.
(2004). Towards
a Cartography of Subject
Positions. In Rizzi, L. (Ed.) The Structure of CP and IP. The Cartography of Syntactic Structures vol.2 (pp. 115–165). Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.
Carminati, M. N.
(2002). The processing of Italian subject pronouns. Doctoral Dissertation. University of Massachusetts at Amherst.
Chafe, W. L. (Ed.) (1980). The
Pear Stories. Cognitive, Cultural and Linguistic Aspects of
Narrative
Production. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Cinque, G.
(1992). The
pseudo-relative and Accing Construction after Verbs of
Perception. University
of Venice Working Papers in
Linguistics, 2, 1–31.
Creissels, D.
(2014). Existential
predication in typological
perspective. MS, University of Lyon; [URL].
Cruschina, S.
(2012). Focus
in Existential
Sentences. In Bianchi, V. & Chesi, C. (Eds), Enjoy Linguistics! Papers offered to Luigi Rizzi on the occasion of his 60th birthday (pp. 77–107). Siena: CISCL Press.
Di Domenico, E.
(2020). Clausal
types and syntactic subjects in
narratives. In Torregrossa, J. & Bongartz, C. (Eds), What’s in a narrative? Variation in story-telling at the interface between language and literacy. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang Verlag.
Di Domenico, E., & Baroncini, I.
(2017). The
Age of Onset of Exposure factor: On a difference between
Greek-Italian 2L1 and L2 near-natives compared to controls
in the production of null and overt subject pronouns in
Italian. Talk delivered
at GALA 13, Palma de Mallorca, UIB, September
7-9,
2017.
(2019). Age
of Onset and Dominance in the Choice of Subject Anaphoric
Devices: Comparing Natives and Near-Natives of Two
Null-Subject
Languages. Frontiers
in
Psychology, 9, 2729.
Fukumura, K., & van Gompel, R. P. G. (2011). The
effect of animacy on the choice of referring
expression. Language
and Cognitive
Processes, 26 (10), 1472–1504.
Ingria, R.
(2005). Grammatical
formatives in a generative lexical theory. The case of
Modern Greek
και. Journal
of Greek
Linguistics, 6 (1), 61–101.
Margaza, P.
(2018). The
distribution of subjects in L2 Spanish and L2
Greek. Doctoral Dissertation. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona.
Mayol, L.
(2010). Refining
Salience and the Position of Antecedent Hypothesis: a Study
of Catalan
Pronouns. University
of Pennsylvania Working Papers in
Linguistics, 16 (1), 126–136.
Panagiotidis, P. (2000). Demonstrative
determiners and operators: The case of
Greek. Lingua, 110, 717–742. .
Philippaki-Warburton, I., & Catsimali, G.
(1999). On
control in Modern
Greek. In Alexiadou, A., Horrocks, G. & Stavrou, M. (Eds), Studies in Greek syntax (pp. 153–168). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Spyropoulos, V.
(2007). Finiteness
and Control in
Greek. In Davies, W. D. & Dubinsky, S. (Eds), New Horizons in the Analysis of Control and Raising (pp. 159–183). Dordrecht: Springer.
Torregrossa, J., Bongartz, C. & Tsimpli, I. M.
(2015). Testing
accessibility: A cross-linguistic comparison of the syntax
of referring
expressions. In Proceedings
of the 89th Annual Meeting of the Linguistic Society of
America (Portland).