Arbeitspapier Nr. 128 Proceedings of the VII Nereus International Workshop: “Clitic Doubling and other issues of the syntax/semantic interface in Romance DPs” Susann Fischer & Mario Navarro (eds.) Konstanzer Online-Publikations-System (KOPS) URL: http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bsz:352-0-372560 Fachbereich Sprachwissenschaft der Universität Konstanz Arbeitspapier Nr. 128 Proceedings of the VII NEREUS INTERNATIONAL WORKSHOP: CLITIC DOUBLING AND OTHER ISSUES OF THE SYNTAX/SEMANTIC INTERFACE IN ROMANCE DPS SUSANN FISCHER & MARIO NAVARRO (EDS.) Fachbereich Sprachwissenschaft Universität Konstanz FACH 185 D-78457 Konstanz Germany Konstanz November 2016 Schutzgebühr € 3,50 Fachbereich Sprachwissenschaft der Universität Konstanz Sekretariat des Fachbereichs Sprachwissenschaft, Frau Tania Simeoni, Fach 185, D – 78457 Konstanz, Tel. 07531/88-2465 Table of Contents Susann Fischer & Mario Navarro Preface Artemis Alexiadou DP internal (clitic) Doubling .............................................................................................. 1 Elena Anagnostopoulou Clitic Doubling and Object Agreement ............................................................................... 11 Klaus von Heusinger, Diego Romero & Georg A. Kaiser Differential Object Marking in Spanish ditransitive constructions. An empirical approach ........................................................................................................ 43 Mihaela Marchis Moreno & Carolina Petersen On locality effects in Romance: the role of clitic doubling ................................................. 65 Mario Navarro & Mareike Neuhaus Clitic Doubling restrictions in Leísta Spanish .................................................................... 79 Teresa Parodi Formal features and vulnerable domains in L2 acquisition and an outlook on language contact ............................................................................................................ 91 Natascha Pomino On the clitic status of the plural marker in phonic French.................................................. 105 Elisabeth Stark Nominal morphology and semantics – Where’s gender (and ‘partitive articles’) in Gallo-Romance? .................................................................................................................. 131 Preface The phenomenon of clitic doubling is known to be especially interesting with respect to the Romance languages. As its name suggest, clitic doubling involves the doubling of a verbal argument by a clitic pronoun inside the same propositional structure. From a generative perspective it was initially investigated focusing on its properties as exhibited in those Romance languages where it is attested. Thus Jaeggli (1982) who was the first to notice its theoretical importance, describes it for River Plate Spanish (spoken in Argentina, Uruguay, and Paraguay). Over the years, different factors that make clitic doubling possible, likely or even obligatory have been studied. Grammatical factors such as e.g. pronominal vs. non- pronominal, accusative vs. dative, the occurrence vs. non-occurrence of different object marking together with semantic and pragmatic factors such as e.g. animacy, specificity or definiteness have been held responsible for the occurrence and distribution. This volume is a collection of papers given at the workshop “Clitic Doubling and other issues of the syntax/semantic interface in Romance DPs” held at the University of Hamburg in November 2014. https://www.slm.uni-hamburg.de/romanistik/personen/fischer/downloads/clitic-doubling.pdf The workshop was a joint event organized by NEREUS (Research Network for Referential Categories in Spanish and other Romance languages” and the DFG-project “Clitic Doubling across Romance”. The papers of this volume deal with different aspects of the clitic doubling construction and related issues, such as its semantic, pragmatic and morphosyntactic properties across the Romance languages and beyond, thereby contributing to the understanding of the nature of the cross-linguistic variation, as well as the micro-variation observed within. We would like to thank all contributors and participants of the workshop for their interest and committed engagement. The quality of the papers and the passionate discussions made the workshop a very inspiring event. We would like to acknowledge DFG grant (FI 875/3-1) and the University of Hamburg for financial support of this workshop. Special thanks go to Sarah Jobus for preparing the manuscript and to Georg Kaiser for his generous help with all editorial and technical matters. Hamburg, September 2016 Susann Fischer Mario Navarro In: Fischer, Susann & Mario Navarro (eds.), Proceedings of the VII Nereus International Workshop: “Clitic Doubling and other issues of the syntax/semantic interface in Romance DPs”. Arbeitspapier 128. Fachbereich Sprachwissenschaft, Universität Konstanz 2016, 1-10. DP internal (clitic) Doubling Artemis Alexiadou [email protected] 1. Introduction* While (clitic) doubling phenomena are relatively well described and (perhaps) well understood in the clausal domain, they remain rather understudied in the nominal domain. In this short paper, I focus on the properties of possessor (clitic) doubling from a comparative perspective by looking at French, Greek, Mauritian Creole (MC), and German. The types of possesor doubling I am interested in here are illustrated in the examples (1-4). In French, (1), as well as in Greek, (2), a postnominal possessive strong pronoun can be doubled: (1) son amie à lui French his friend to him (Cardinaletti 1998) (2) To vivlio mu emena den pulithike katholu. Greek the book CL.1SG me.GEN.STR not sold at all ‘My book was not sold at all.’ (Giusti & Stavrou 2008) Neither Standard French nor Greek allows for clitic doubling of full possessor DPs in the nominal domain. As we will see in the next sections, the languages differ as far as their verbal doubling patterns are concerned: Greek, but not French, allows clitic doubling of full DPs. By contrast, Mauritian Creole (henceforth MC) (3a) and dialects of German (4) allow possessor doubling with a prenominal DP possessor. This is not possible in French, the lexifier language for MC, as we see in (3b): (3) (a) Za so liv John his book ‘John’s book’ (Syea 2007) (b) *Jean son livre Jean his book (4) dem Hans sein Haus the Hans.DAT his house As in the case of doubling in the verbal domain, the first question is how one can distinguish between true doubling and instances of dislocation. As we will see, all the above are instances of true doubling. The next question concerns the difference between Greek and French. While clitic doubling in the French DP has identical properties to clitic doubling in the French verbal domain, this is not the case in Greek. Specifically, full DP possessor doubling is excluded. Nevertheless, the pronominal doubling illustrated above has identical properties to its verbal counterpart. The final question relates to the cross-linguistic distribution of doubling: what are the properties that characterize its distribution and how can we account for the cross-linguistic differences observed? As can be seen from the data in (1)-(4), the doubling patterns differ: we have full DP * I would like to thank Elena Anagnostopoulou, Susann Fischer, Terje Lohndal, Mario Navarro, and the participants of the Nereus workshop on clitic doubling in Hamburg in November 2014 for their comments. DP internal (clitic) doubling 2 possessors in MC and German preceding the possessor-clitic, while we have post-nominal possessors following the clitic in French and Greek. I will argue that two ingredients seem to be relevant to understand doubling patterns: (i) a clitic possessor should be able to realize D°, and (ii) a full possessor DP should be able to occupy Spec,DP which has A-properties. When both conditions are met as in e.g. German or MC the two co-occur in the DP layer. Moreover, in languages such as French, MC or German the possessor clitic realizes D°, but this is not the case in Greek where the possessor clitic is an en-clitic to an XP. Furthermore, Greek Spec, DP is an A’-position, making thus the Greek DP parallel to CP, and the MC/German DP parallel to TP. The paper is structured as follows: in sections 2 to 4, I will show that the examples in (1-4) are indeed instances of doubling. In section 5, I will turn to an analysis of properties that regulate the crosslinguistic of doubling. These relate to the properties of Spec,DP across languages and the types of possessor clitics available in a language. 2. Possessor doubling in French Cardinaletti (1998) discusses in detail the properties of the French pattern in (1). On the basis of several criteria, she convincingly concludes that French does indeed have possessor doubling involving strong possessive pronouns, that is the same type of doubling observed in the verbal domain. Let me briefly summarize her arguments here. All French data here are from Cardinaletti’s (op.cit.) paper. A first piece of evidence comes from the observation that the restrictions on possessive doubling are the same as those on personal pronouns: the doubled element can only be a pronoun, exactly as in the verbal domain, which disallows doubling of DPs. This is shown in the data in (5) and (6): (5) (a) son livre à lui (b) *son livre à Jean his book to him / Jean (6) (a) Il m'a vu moi. he me has seen me (b) *Il l'a vu Jean. he him has seen Jean Second, on a par with clitic pronouns, French possessives license floating