Cover not available

Article published In: Revue Romane
Vol. 57:2 (2022) ► pp.288–310

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload EPUB
authorization required
Articles linguistiques

Anáforas reflexivas y doblado de clíticos en lenguas romances

 | IIF-SADAF-CONICET / University of Buenos Aires

Article language: Spanish

Published online: 9 November 2021
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/rro.20018.ver
Abstract
In this paper I analyze the distribution of the reflexive construction se + a sí mismo in Romance (e.g., ‘Juan se peinó a sí mismo’). I propose that these structures are transitive. Concretely, I argue that in these cases the reflexive anaphor is the internal argument of the predicate, and that the obligatory presence of the clitic se is due to the general phenomenon of clitic doubling with pronominal objects. I show that this approach can account for some asymmetries between these constructions and simple se-reflexives regarding expletive insertion in French, proxy readings, comparative constructions, association with focus, and case distribution in causatives.
Article outline
  • 1.Introducción
  • 2.Se + a sí mismo como doblado de clíticos
    • 2.1Propuesta central
    • 2.2Roles temáticos y caso
  • 3.Ventajas del análisis
    • 3.1Inserción del expletivo il en francés
    • 3.2Lecturas proxy
    • 3.3Comparativas de objeto
    • 3.4Asociación con foco
    • 3.5Causativas y caso
  • 4.La hipótesis inacusativa
    • 4.1Concordancia con el participio
    • 4.2Selección del auxiliar
  • 5.Conclusiones
  • Notas
  • Referencias
References (38)
Referencias
Alboiu, G., M. Barrie y C. Frigeni (2004): SE and the unaccusative-unergative paradox. Antwerp papers in linguistics. Universiteit Antwerp, pp. 109–39.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Benincà, P., M. Parry y D. Pescarini. (2016): The dialects of northern Italian, en: Ledgeway, A., y M. Maiden. (eds.): The Oxford guide to the Romance Languages. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 185–205. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bosque, I. (2018): La reflexividad paso a paso, en: Rangponsumrit, N., D. Gutiérrez Menéndez, A. Aguilella Asensi, J. M. Blanco Pena y E. Moreno Salazar. (eds.): Actas del ix congreso internacional de la asociación asiática de hispanistas, pp. 15–58.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bouchard, D. (1984): On the content of empty categories. Foris, Dordrecht.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Burzio, L. (1994): Weak anaphora, en: Cinque, G., J. Koster, L. Rizzi y R. Zanauttini (eds.): Paths towards universal grammar: Studies in honor of Richard Kayne. Georgetown University Press, Washington DC, pp. 59–84.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Charnavel, I., F. Adani, y N. Hyams. (2009). The online processing of French reflexives: Experimental evidence for an unaccusative analysis, en: Yokio, O.. (ed.): Proceedings of 10th Tokyo Conference on Psycholinguistics. Hitsuji Shobo, Tokio.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1981): Lectures on government and binding. Foris, Dordrecht.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Doron, E. y M. Rappaport Hovav. (2009): A unified approach to reflexivization in Semitic and Romance. Brill’s Journal of Afroasiatic Languages and Linguistics, 1(1), pp. 75–105. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Embick, D. (2004): Unaccusative syntax and verbal alternations, en: Alexiadou, A., E. Anagnostopoulou, y M. Everaert. (eds.): The unaccusativity puzzle: explorations of the syntax-lexicon interface. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 137–158. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Giorgi, A. (2007): On the nature of long-distance anaphors. Linguistic Inquiry 38(2), pp. 321–342. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grimshaw, J. (1990): Argument structure. MIT Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hualde, J. I. (1992): Catalan. Routledge, Londres. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jackendoff, R. (1992): Mme. Tussaud meets the binding theory. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 10(1), pp. 1–31. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jacobson, P. (1999): Towards a variable-free semantics. Linguistics and Philosophy, 221, pp. 117–184. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kaminszczik, S. y A. Saab. (2016): Patrones de reflexivización en oraciones ditransitivas: consecuencias para la teoría temática. Verba: Anuario Galego de Filoloxía, 431, pp. 149–200. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kayne, R. (1975): French syntax: The transformational cycle, vol. 301. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1993): Toward a modular theory of auxiliary selection. Studia linguistica. 47(1), pp. 3–31. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2000): A note on clitic doubling in French, en: Parameters and Universals. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kratzer, A. (1996): Severing the external argument from its verb, en: J. Rooryck y L. Zaring. (eds.): Phrase structure and the lexicon. Springer, Dordrecht, pp. 109–137. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Labelle, M. (2008): The French reflexive and reciprocal se. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 26(4), pp. 833–876. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Legendre, G. (2017): Auxiliaries, en: Dufter, A., y E. Stark. (eds.): Manual of Romance Morphosyntax and Syntax. De Gruyter, Berlín/Boston, pp. 272–298. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Manzini, R. y L. Savoia. (2011): Grammatical categories: Variation in Romance languages. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Marantz, A. (1984): On the nature of grammatical relations. MIT Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Marelj, M. y E. Reuland. (2016): Clitics and reflexives: Reducing the lexicon-syntax parameter, en: Everaert, M., M. Marelj y E. Reuland. (eds.): Concepts, syntax, and their interface: The theta system, pp. 175–252. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ormazabal, J. y J. Romero. (2013): Object clitics, agreement, and dialectal variation. Probus 251, pp. 301–354. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pujalte, M. y A. Saab. (2012): Syncretism as PF-repair: The case of SE-insertion in Spanish, en: M. C. Cuervo y Y. Roberge. (eds.): The end of argument structure?. Brill, Bradford, pp. 229–260. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Reinhart, T. y E. Reuland. (1993): Reflexivity. Linguistic Inquiry, 241, pp. 657–720.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Reinhart, T. y T. Siloni. (2005): The lexicon-syntax parameter: Reflexivization and other arity operations. Linguistic inquiry 36(3), pp. 389–436. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Reuland, E. (2018): Reflexives and reflexivity. Annual Review of Linguistics 4(1), pp. 81–107. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Reuland, E. y Y. Winter. (2009): Binding without identity: Towards a unified semantics for bound and exempt anaphors, en: Devi, S., A. Branco y R. Mitkov. (eds.): Discourse anaphora and anaphor resolution colloquium. Springer, Berlín, pp. 69–79. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rigau, G. (1988): Strong pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry 19(3), pp. 503–511.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rooryck, J. y G. Vanden Wyngaerd. (1999): Simplex and complex reflexives in French and Dutch, en: Coene, M., W. De Mulder, P. Dendale y Y. D’Hulst. (eds.): Traiani augusti vestigia pressa sequamur. studia lingvistica in honorem Lilianae Tasmowski. Unipress, Padua, pp. 617–639.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Saab, A. (2020): Deconstructing Voice. The syntax and semantics of u-syncretrism in Spanish. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics, 5(1), 127. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sportiche, D. (2014): Assessing unaccusativity and reflexivity: using focus alternatives to decide what gets which θ-role. Linguistic Inquiry 45(2), pp. 305–321. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Torrego, E. (1995): On the nature of clitic doubling, en: Campos, H., y P. Kempchinsky. (eds.): Evolution and revolution in linguistic theory. Georgetown University Press, Washington DC, pp. 399–418.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Uriagereka, J. (1995): Some Aspects of the Syntax of Clitic Placement in Western Romance. Linguistic Inquiry, 261, pp. 79–123.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zdrojewski, P. (2008): ¿Por quién doblan los clíticos?. Tesis de maestría inédita, Universidad Nacional del Comahue.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zec, D. (1985): Objects in Serbo-Croatian, en: Niepokuj, M., M. Van Clay, V. Nikiforidou, y D. Feder. (eds.): Annual meeting of the berkeley linguistics society, pp. 358–371.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue