languages Article AArticle Usage-Based Perspective on Spanish Variable CliticA Usage-Based Placement Perspective on Spanish Variable Clitic Placement Pablo E. Requena

PabloDepartment E. Requena of Modern Languages and Literatures, University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX 78249,Department USA; [email protected] of Modern Languages and Literatures, University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX 78249, USA; [email protected] Received: 31 July 2020; Accepted: 2 September 2020; Published: 6 September 2020



 Abstract:Received: 31This July study 2020; provides Accepted: a 2 usage-based September 2020; analysis Published: of Spanish 7 September Variable 2020 Clitic Placement (VCP). A variationist analysis of VCP in spoken Argentine Spanish indicates that VCP grammar is Abstract: This study provides a usage-based analysis of Spanish Variable Clitic Placement (VCP). A constrained by lexical (finite verb), semantic (animacy), and discourse factors (topic persistence). variationist analysis of VCP in spoken Argentine Spanish indicates that VCP grammar is constrained Considering the finite effect, the study focuses on usage-based accounts for the gradience attested by lexical (finite verb) and semantic (animacy) factors. Considering the finite effect, the study focuses across finite verb constructions. Grammaticalized meaning and increased frequency tend to account on usage-based accounts for the gradience attested across finite verb constructions. Grammaticalized for VCP in general. However, one [tener que + infinitive] construction is found exceptional in that it meaning and increased frequency tend to account for VCP in general. However, one [tener que + favors enclisis despite its grammaticalized meaning of obligation and its high frequency of use. Data infinitive] construction is found exceptional in that it favors enclisis despite its grammaticalized from a larger corpus indicate that the [tener que + infinitive] construction lacks unithood and allows meaning of obligation and its high frequency of use. Data from a larger corpus indicate that the [tener intervening material, signaling great analyzability of its component elements. Through an exemplar que + infinitive] construction lacks unithood, signaling great analyzability of its component elements. analysis, the [haber que ‘must’ + infinitive] construction that categorically takes enclisis and which is Through an exemplar analysis, the [haber que ‘must’ + infinitive] construction that categorically strongly linked to [tener que + infinitive] diachronically, semantically, and structurally emerges as a takes enclisis and which is strongly linked to [tener que + infinitive] diachronically, semantically, likely analogical model for VCP with tener que, pushing tener que towards enclisis. This study not and structurally emerges as a likely analogical model for VCP with tener que, pushing tener que only illustrates how usage-based linguistics can capture VCP more generally, but also how this towards enclisis. This study not only illustrates how usage-based linguistics can capture VCP more framework provides powerful tools to discover the constraints on VCP in naturalistic use in order generally, but also how this framework provides powerful tools to discover the constraints on VCP in to account for individual construction behavior. naturalistic use in order to account for individual construction behavior. Keywords: usage-based linguistics; corpus; variationist sociolinguistics; clitics; Spanish; clitic Keywords: usage-based linguistics; corpus; variationist sociolinguistics; clitics; Spanish; clitic climbing; clitic placement; finite verb; animacy; discourse topicality climbing; clitic placement; finite verb; animacy

1.1. Introduction Introduction HowHow do usage-based approaches toto languagelanguage accountaccount forfor gradiencegradienceand andvariation? variation? InIn thisthis study,study, I Iprovide provide a a usage-based usage-basedperspective perspective onon aa phenomenonphenomenon that has attracted linguists’ attention attention for for years, years, namelynamely Spanish Spanish Variable Variable Clitic Placement (VCP) in [f [finiteinite verb + non-finitenon-finite verb] verb] constructions, constructions, as as in in (1).(1). In In modern modern Spanish, Spanish, clitics clitics may may follow follow the the non-fini non-finitete verb verb (enclisis, (enclisis, as as in in (1 (1a))a)) or or precede precede the the finite finite verb (proclisis, as in (1b)) in a number of these [finite[finite verb + non-finitenon-finite verb] contexts.

(1) a. Quiero comprar = lo (Enclisis) want-prs.1sg buy-inf = it-acc-m3sg ‘I want to buy it’ b. Lo quiero comprar (Proclisis) it-acc-m3sg want-prs.1sg buy-inf ‘I want to buy it’

Usage-basedUsage-based linguistics linguistics considers considers language language a a comp complexlex adaptive adaptive system system that that exhibits gradience andand variation variation and and whose whose structure structure emerges emerges from from us usee (Bybee (Bybee 2010;2010; GivónGivón 1979;1979; DuBoisDuBois 1985;1985; HopperHopper 1987).1987). The The present present study study exemplifie exemplifiess how how usage-based usage-based linguistics linguistics accounts accounts for forVCP, VCP, also also drawing drawing on on corpus linguistics and variationist sociolinguistics, which provide powerful tools to discover the constraints on VCP in naturalistic use (Tagliamonte 2006). Languages 2020, 5, x; doi: FOR PEER REVIEW www.mdpi.com/journal/languages

Languages 2020, 5, 33; doi:10.3390/languages5030033 www.mdpi.com/journal/languages Languages 2020, 5, 33 2 of 26

Previous corpus studies of VCP across dialects of Spanish have identified the finite verb heading the variable construction as the main constraint on the variation (e.g., Myhill 1989; Davies 1995). Other significant factors are of a semantic (animacy of clitic referent) and discourse (referent accessibility, topic persistence)1 nature (e.g., Aijón Oliva and Nieto 2013; Schwenter and Torres Cacoullos 2014). The first goal of the present study is to extend this literature by presenting the results of a variationist study of VCP in Argentine Spanish, a dialect for which no variationist study exists up to this point. VCP in Argentine Spanish is shown to be constrained by finite verb construction as well as by the animacy of clitic referent. The results indicate that certain finite verb constructions favor enclisis, as do clitics with inanimate referents. An interesting pattern about the behavior of particular finite verbs with respect to VCP was noted thirty years ago. Myhill(1989) pointed out that verbs whose meanings are aspectual, modal, or auxiliary-like favor proclisis, but verbs with more lexical meanings favor enclisis. His analysis of verbs considered one natural process of language evolution: grammaticalization, understood as the process by which a lexical form takes on grammatical functions in specific contexts of use (Bybee and Pagliuca 1987; Givón 1971; Heine and Reh 1984; Hopper and Traugott 2003). Through grammaticalization, for example, a lexical verb (e.g., a verb of motion, such as ir ‘go’) may acquire functional meaning (e.g., as a marker of futurity, as in ir a ‘go to + infinitive’), becoming more like an auxiliary, modal, or aspectual marker. This process coincides with increased frequency (due to greater productivity of ‘go’ as future marker) as well as an increase in the degree of unithood with the following infinitive ([ir a ‘go to’ + infinitive]) through a process known as chunking (Bybee 2010, p. 7)2. As a result of the process described above, constructions of the type [finite verb + non-finite verb] that are headed by grammaticalized verbs are assumed to be represented in memory as single units (Goldberg 1995, 2006). During categorization, the process by which “words and phrases and their component parts are recognized and matched to stored representations” (Bybee 2010, p. 7), these variable constructions with grammaticalized verbs, now forming a unit that resembles an auxiliary followed by a main verb, may be mapped onto a related clitic construction where a clitic is used with a single finite verb [clitic + finite verb]. This should result in increased proclisis, since the model construction ([clitic + finite verb]) takes proclisis categorically in contemporary Spanish. Synchronic patterns of VCP with different verbs have, therefore, been assumed to result from an ongoing process of grammaticalization (Myhill 1988, 1989; Schwenter and Torres Cacoullos 2014; Torres Cacoullos 1999). While the data in the corpus study of Argentine Spanish support the grammaticalization account that predicts increased proclisis with grammaticalized and frequent [finite verb + non-finite verb] constructions, one such construction ([tener que ‘have to’ + infinitive]) does not behave as predicted. Despite being a frequent construction headed by a verb of possession that has grammaticalized into obligation, [tener que ‘have to’ + infinitive] clearly favors enclisis. How can usage-based perspectives account for the apparently ‘exceptional’ behavior of the [tener que + infinitive] construction, which favors enclisis in naturalistic use? The second goal of this study is to show how grammaticalization, unithood, and links with other constructions can account for the VCP behavior of [tener que + infinitive]. First, I show that, as a relatively recent case of grammaticalization and unlike the other frequent grammaticalized verbs used with VCP, tener exhibits weak unithood with infinitives, rendering greater activation of representations of its component parts (tener, que) as used outside of the variable construction (a property known as analyzability (Langacker 1987, p. 292; Bybee 2010, p. 45; Brown and Rivas 2012)). Second, drawing on Bybee’s (1985) Network Model of relations between exemplar representations, I show how [tener que + infinitive] keeps very strong diachronic, semantic, and structural ties with another construction ([haber que ‘there be to’ + infinitive + clitic]), which constitutes the analogical model pulling [tener que + infinitive] towards enclisis.

1 For some indication of extra-linguistic factors, see Gudmestad(2006). 2 In this study, I will also use “strength of association” to refer to “degree of unithood”. LanguagesLanguages 20202020, ,55, ,x 33 FOR PEER REVIEW 33 of of 26 26

While preliminary in nature, this study exemplifies how usage-based linguistics is able to While preliminary in nature, this study exemplifies how usage-based linguistics is able to account account for gradience and variation in VCP in general, as well as to capture the behavior of one lexical for gradience and variation in VCP in general, as well as to capture the behavior of one lexical construction that, under other perspectives in the study of language, would be deemed ‘exceptional’. construction that, under other perspectives in the study of language, would be deemed ‘exceptional’. 2. VCP and Grammaticalization 2. VCP and Grammaticalization The phenomenon under investigation is Spanish direct object (accusative, ACC) clitics. I will The phenomenon under investigation is Spanish direct object (accusative, acc) clitics. I will define define these clitics as phonologically and morphologically dependent elements located at a these clitics as phonologically and morphologically dependent elements located at a transitional stage transitional stage toward affixation, which are used not only to point at a referent that is active in toward affixation, which are used not only to point at a referent that is active in discourse, but also to discourse, but also to signal its relative importance or topicality, mainly as a result of animacy signal its relative importance or topicality, mainly as a result of animacy considerations. Spanish direct considerations. Spanish direct object clitics (me, te, lo/la, nos, and los/las, in the non-leísta variety of object clitics (me, te, lo/la, nos, and los/las, in the non-leísta variety of Argentine speakers examined here) Argentine speakers examined here) occur before a single finite verb (2) or after a non-finite verb (e.g., occur before a single finite verb (2) or after a non-finite verb (e.g., infinitive or gerund) (3)3. However, infinitive or gerund) (3)3. However, in a number of complex verb constructions consisting of a [finite in a number of complex verb constructions consisting of a [finite verb + a non-finite verb], there are verb + a non-finite verb], there are two positions available. Clitics may follow the non-finite verb two positions available. Clitics may follow the non-finite verb (enclisis) or precede the finite verb (enclisis) or precede the finite verb (proclisis), as in (1a and b) above, which I duplicate below as (proclisis), as in (1a and b) above, which I duplicate below as examples (4a) and (4b) for convenience. I examples (4a) and (4b) for convenience. I refer to this phenomenon as Variable Clitic Placement refer to this phenomenon as Variable Clitic Placement (VCP), a term that I propose should be used to (VCP), a term that I propose should be used to name the phenomenon, instead of other names that name the phenomenon, instead of other names that point to theory-specific proposals, such as ‘Clitic point to theory-specific proposals, such as ‘Clitic Climbing’ (CC). Climbing’ (CC). (2) Lo compré. it-ACC- buy-PST.1SG M3SG ‘I bought it’

(3) Para comprar = lo to buy-INF = it-ACC-M3SG ‘To buy it’

(4) a. Quiero comprar = lo (Enclisis) want-PRS.1SG buy-INF = it-ACC-M3SG ‘I want to buy it’ b. Lo quiero comprar (Proclisis) it-ACC-M3SG want-PRS.1SG buy-INF ‘I want to buy it’

FromFrom early early on, on, studies studies of of VCP VCP in in Romance Romance languages languages have have highlighted highlighted the the relationship relationship between between cliticclitic placement placement and and properties properties of of the the finite finite verb verb (‘matrix (‘matrix verb’) verb’) in in these these two two-verb-verb constructions constructions or or periphrasesperiphrases (Stroze (Strozerr 19761976))4.4 Whereas. Whereas in in Romanian Romanian,, proclisis proclisis is is obligatory obligatory with with modal modal verbs verbs (Gerlac (Gerlachh 20022002, ,p. p. 200) 200)55, ,Spanish Spanish (among (among other other Romance Romance languages, suchsuch asas Italian)Italian) displays displays di differentfferent degrees degrees of ofwhat what has has been been described described as optionality as optionalitydepending depending on the on finite the verb. finite Early verb. studies Early of studies clitic placement of clitic placementelicited grammaticality elicited grammaticality judgments judgments to find out to which find out contexts which allow contexts both all cliticow positionsboth clitic andpositions which andcontexts which allow contexts enclisis allow only. enclisis These only. studies These resulted studies in lists resulted of finite in verbslists of that finite allow verbs both that clitic allow positions, both cliticsuch positions, as querer ‘want’, such astratar querer‘try’, ‘want’, and solertratar‘be ‘try’, in the and habit soler of’, ‘be and in thosethe habit that of’, only and allow those enclisis, that only such allowas insistir enclisis,‘insist’, suchsoñar as insistir‘dream’, ‘insist’, and soñarparecer ‘dream’,‘seem’ and (Aissen parecer and ‘seem’ Perlmutter (Aisse 1976n and). PRizzierlmutte(1976r ,1976 1978).) Rizziposited (1976, that 1978) the verbs posited used that in proclisis the verbs tend used to have in proclisis meanings tend similar to have to those meanings meanings similar that languagesto those meaningstend to express that languages grammatically, tend namely to express modals, grammatically, aspectuals, and namely motion modals, verbs. aspectuals, Attention to and the motion context

3 With imperatives, they occur before negative imperatives (No lo toques ‘Do not touch it’), but after affirmative 3 imperativesWith imperatives, (Tocalo they ‘Touch occur beforeit’). I do negative not consider imperatives such (No a lo contex toques t‘Do to notbe a touch variable it’), but context after a ffisimilarrmative to imperatives (1a) and (1b).(Tocalo ‘Touch it’). I do not consider such a context to be a variable context similar to (1a) and (1b). 4 I will use constructions and periphrases to refer to [finite verb+non-finite verb] units here, but I acknowledge that within 4 I formalwill use linguistics, constructions only some and ofperiphrases these sequences to refer pass to certain [finite tests verb+non to show-finite their consolidationverb] units here, as periphrases. but I acknowledge 5 thatFor otherwithin languages formal linguistics (or dialects), inonly which some CC of seems these obligatory, sequences see pass (Cinque certain 2006 ,tests p. 32, to fn. show 47). their consolidation as periphrases. 5 For other languages (or dialects) in which CC seems obligatory, see (Cinque 2006, p. 32, fn. 47). LanguagesLanguages 20202020, ,55, ,x 33 FOR PEER REVIEW 4 4of of 26 26 of verbs […] can account for the fact that CC [proclisis] is appropriate with a given verb in one context, of a sentence prompted Napoli’s (1981) criticism that “no simple list of verbs [ ... ] can account for the but not in another for the same speaker” (p. 878) even within these categories of verbs. fact that CC [proclisis] is appropriate with a given verb in one context, but not in another for the same It became clear to some linguists that the position of the finite verb along a continuum from speaker” (p. 878) even within these categories of verbs. lexical to functional forms was key to understanding clitic placement. Grammaticalization was It became clear to some linguists that the position of the finite verb along a continuum from lexical therefore the process by which linguistic elements move along this continuum towards functional to functional forms was key to understanding clitic placement. Grammaticalization was therefore the forms (Bybee and Pagliuca 1987; Givón 1971; see also Hopper and Traugott 2003). Myhill (1988) process by which linguistic elements move along this continuum towards functional forms (Bybee linked patterns of VCP (likelihood of proclisis, in particular) with the grammaticalization of and Pagliuca 1987; Givón 1971; see also Hopper and Traugott 2003). Myhill(1988) linked patterns of particular verbs by paying attention to changes in meaning, a process known as desemanticization, VCP (likelihood of proclisis, in particular) with the grammaticalization of particular verbs by paying semantic depletion, or bleaching (e.g., Weinreich [1963] 1966, p. 180f). Along the lines of the observation attention to changes in meaning, a process known as desemanticization, semantic depletion, or bleaching by Rizzi that resulted in classes of verbs, Myhill found that particular finite verbs heading [finite verb (e.g., Weinreich [1963] 1966, p. 180f). Along the lines of the observation by Rizzi that resulted in classes + non-finite verb] constructions that allow both clitic positions appeared in proclisis more frequently of verbs, Myhill found that particular finite verbs heading [finite verb + non-finite verb] constructions if they corresponded to meanings that Bybee (1985) had reported as likely to be represented that allow both clitic positions appeared in proclisis more frequently if they corresponded to meanings inflectionally in the world’s languages, such as progressive or future meanings as well as epistemic that Bybee(1985) had reported as likely to be represented inflectionally in the world’s languages, modality. Among the many instances of grammaticalization processes in world languages, of such as progressive or future meanings as well as epistemic modality. Among the many instances of particular interest for VCP was how a finite lexical verb acquires aspectual or modal meaning, leading grammaticalization processes in world languages, of particular interest for VCP was how a finite lexical to a semantic bonding between a semantically weak auxiliary-like finite verb and the non-finite form verb acquires aspectual or modal meaning, leading to a semantic bonding between a semantically governing the clitic. Most of the frequent verbs used in VCP contexts have undergone processes of weak auxiliary-like finite verb and the non-finite form governing the clitic. Most of the frequent verbs grammaticalization to a greater or lesser extent, resulting in novel uses with more functional used in VCP contexts have undergone processes of grammaticalization to a greater or lesser extent, meanings (e.g., ir a from motion to future). Hence, Spanish VCP has been referred to as “…a syntactic– resulting in novel uses with more functional meanings (e.g., ir a from motion to future). Hence, Spanish semantic change in progress, which involves the gradual grammaticalization of a number of verbs” VCP has been referred to as “ ... a syntactic–semantic change in progress, which involves the gradual (Silva-Corvalán 1994, p. 128). Myhill (1989) considered VCP as a phenomenon that could shed light grammaticalization of a number of verbs” (Silva-Corvalán 1994, p. 128). Myhill(1989) considered on synchronic grammaticalization processes in progress, so his quantitative analysis of VCP with VCP as a phenomenon that could shed light on synchronic grammaticalization processes in progress, frequent finite verbs emphasized the existence of degrees of grammaticalization, as attested in so his quantitative analysis of VCP with frequent finite verbs emphasized the existence of degrees meaning differences that emerge as finite verbs heading VCP constructions behave more auxiliary- of grammaticalization, as attested in meaning differences that emerge as finite verbs heading VCP like (auxiliarization) and less like main verbs. constructions behave more auxiliary-like (auxiliarization) and less like main verbs. The result of the ‘auxiliarization’ of the finite verb in VCP constructions, according to Myhill’s The result of the ‘auxiliarization’ of the finite verb in VCP constructions, according to Myhill’s view, should be greater use of proclisis because clitic behavior in the construction headed by a view, should be greater use of proclisis because clitic behavior in the construction headed by a grammaticalized finite verb should be analogous to clitic behavior with single finite verbs, which, in grammaticalized finite verb should be analogous to clitic behavior with single finite verbs, which, Modern Spanish, categorically take proclisis ([clitic + finite verb]). An illustration of this would be the in Modern Spanish, categorically take proclisis ([clitic + finite verb]). An illustration of this would case of [ir a ‘go to’ + infinitive] in sentences where ir ‘go’ marks futurity (a grammaticalized meaning), be the case of [ir a ‘go to’ + infinitive] in sentences where ir ‘go’ marks futurity (a grammaticalized as in (5a), whereas [esperar ‘hope’] + [infinitive] would not be functioning as an established meaning), as in (5a), whereas [esperar ‘hope’] + [infinitive] would not be functioning as an established periphrasis, therefore constituting neither a semantic nor a syntactical unit (5b). Evidence for this has periphrasis, therefore constituting neither a semantic nor a syntactical unit (5b). Evidence for this has been provided by Davies (1998, p. 257) when he reports that, in the Habla Culta corpus, auxiliary-like been provided by Davies(1998, p. 257) when he reports that, in the Habla Culta corpus, auxiliary-like verbs such as ir a show 86% of proclisis, whereas non-auxiliary verbs, such as esperar ‘hope’, occur verbs such as ir a show 86% of proclisis, whereas non-auxiliary verbs, such as esperar ‘hope’, occur with with proclisis in 0% of the cases (for more evidence, see also (Davies 1995, p. 375)). proclisis in 0% of the cases (for more evidence, see also (Davies 1995, p. 375)). (5) a. Lo [voy a conocer] mañana ‘I [am going to meet] him tomorrow’ b. ??Lo [espero] [hacer] mañana. ‘I [hope] [to do] it tomorrow’

SchwenterSchwenter andand Torres Torres Cacoullos Cacoullos(2014 ) also(2014) o ff eralso evidence offer of evidence the link between of the grammaticalization link between grammaticalizationand verb meaning and and its verb effect meaning on clitic placement.and its effect The authorson clitic compare placement. constructions The authors that havecompare more constructionsgrammaticalized that meanings,have more such gram asmaticalized [poder ‘can’ meanings,+ infinitive] such (which as [poder can mean ‘can’ not + infinitive] only ‘ability’, (which but can also mean‘root’ ornot non-epistemic only ‘ability’, possibility), but also ‘root’ with or constructions non-epistemic with possibility), less grammaticalized with constructions uses, such with as [querer less grammaticalized‘want’ + infinitive]. uses, The such reported as [querer rates ‘want’ of enclisis + infinitive]. in the MexicanThe reported data rates are 13% of enclisis and 37%, in the respectively. Mexican dataFurthermore, are 13% and an important37%, respectively. piece of evidenceFurthermore, provided an important in that work piece shows of evidence that two provided uses of ir in a ‘go that to’ workdisplay shows different that two clitic uses placement of ir a ‘go patterns. to’ display When differentir a ‘go to’ clitic is used placement to convey patterns. motion When (e.g., ir I ama ‘go going to’ isto used visit to you convey there andmotion then (e.g., come I am back), going it occurs to visi witht you enclisis there and much then more come often back), (32%) it thanoccurs when with it enclisisbears the much more more grammaticalized often (32%) than meaning when of it futurity bears the (e.g., more I am grammaticalized going to visit you meaning tomorrow) of futurity (7%). (e.g., I am going to visit you tomorrow) (7%). Highly frequent lexical elements are particularly susceptible to developing grammatical uses through repetition (Miller and van Gelderen 2017). Therefore, the process of grammaticalization also Languages 2020, 5, 33 5 of 26

Highly frequent lexical elements are particularly susceptible to developing grammatical uses through repetition (Miller and van Gelderen 2017). Therefore, the process of grammaticalization also correlates with increased frequency of the grammaticalized form or sequence of forms as productivity increases (Bybee and Thompson 1997, p. 66; Hopper and Traugott 2003, pp. 126ff., 232). Therefore, the constructions that favor proclisis have very high frequency (e.g., poder, ir, as mentioned earlier). When high-frequency lexical items or sequences grammaticalize, they acquire new functions as the result of conventionalization. This has been the case, for example, of [be + going + to + infinitive] in English, which, through frequency, has consolidated into a construction (unit) used to express future meaning (Bybee 2003). A process within usage-based grammar that can account for these changes that occur through frequent co-occurrence is that of chunking (Bybee 2010). Increased unithood is assumed to emerge from frequent co-occurrence of two forms. Bybee(2010) refers to this process as the “chunking of sequential experiences that occurs with repetition”, described, among other things, as “the primary mechanism leading to the formation of constructions and constituent structure” (p. 34). So, another way of observing grammaticalization in progress through VCP is to examine the relative frequency of use of a particular finite verb in the [finite verb + non-finite verb] variable construction as indicative of unithood between the two elements in the construction. Torres Cacoullos(1999) operationalizes the degree of grammaticalization of a form by tracking token and type frequencies (Hopper and Traugott 2003, p. 127). She reports that “[a]s estar + -ndo emerges as a unit in and of itself, the clitic is increasingly preposed to estar, as is categorically the case with finite verb forms in present-day Spanish” (p. 153). Similarly, Schwenter and Torres Cacoullos(2014) report that verbs with high token frequency 6 (like ir a ‘go to’, poder ‘can’, querer ‘want’, or tener que ‘have to’ + infinitive, and estar ‘be’ + gerund) favor proclisis, which the authors explain in terms of greater grammaticalizaction into tense–aspect–mood forms. In contrast, verbs with low token frequency (like andar ‘go/be’, ir ‘go’ + gerund, deber (de) ‘must’, haber de ‘have to’, saber ‘know’, tratar de ‘try’, venir a ‘come to’, and volver a ‘go back to’ + infinitive) favor enclisis. Their results not only suggest gradual spread of proclisis from one construction to another as forms grammaticalize, but also that “[d]ifferences between particular constructions are tied to token and relative frequency as measures of unithood (e.g., infinitive constructions with poder vs. querer)” (p. 533). If grammaticalization accounts are on the right track, grammaticalized meaning (Myhill 1989) and increase in unithood (Torres Cacoullos 1999; Schwenter and Torres Cacoullos 2014) should lead frequent [finite verb + non-finite verb] variable constructions away from enclisis and closer to proclisis. While this seems to be the case for most constructions meeting those criteria of grammaticalized meaning and increased unithood, one VCP construction seems exceptional. I refer here to [tener que ‘have to’ + infinitive], which is not only headed by a verb that has grammaticalized from possession to obligation, but which is also among the most frequent periphrases in corpus studies of VCP (Davies 1995). Despite this, [tener que ‘have to’ + infinitive] favors enclisis. Davies(1995) was the first large-scale corpus study of clitic placement variation in verbal periphrases such as in (4) in a set of twelve spoken and written corpora (from ten different Spanish-speaking countries). It reported a continuum-like distribution of the 32 verbs analyzed. Table1 shows the distribution on enclisis with the most frequent verbs in spoken Spanish corpora he examined7. The three verbs marked with stars (*) on Table1 accounted for 70% of all tokens found by Davies in his aggregated corpus of spoken Spanish across dialects. These three verbs have grammaticalized meanings (ir > future, poder > ability/permission, tener > obligation). The prediction

6 The authors operationalize high frequency based on observed distribution. This results in verb types that account for >8% of all the extracted tokens in the corpora being considered to be frequent. Under this assumption, tener que ‘have to’ is among the most frequent verbs. 7 Each of these verbs accounted for at least 3% (a minimum of 318 tokens) of all the tokens found in the spoken data (N = 10,626). Languages 2020, 5, 33 6 of 26 from grammaticalization accounts would therefore be that these three verbs should disfavor enclisis. However, for tener que, this is not the case, since it is used in enclisis 62% of the time.

Table 1. Distribution of enclisis in the most frequent constructions in spoken corpora (Davies 1995, p. 374).

Construction % Enclisis ir + a ‘go to’ * 14 poder ‘can/may’ * 40 querer ‘want’ 53 tener + que ‘have to’ * 62 deber ‘must’ 68 haber + que ‘must’ 100

Table1 includes the categorical results for the haber que ‘must’ even though this construction falls outside of the envelope of variation given that it categorically selects enclisis. The reason for bringing it to the readers’ attention here is twofold. First, this construction is noted by Davies(1995) as a puzzling case where, despite its grammaticalized meaning as a deontic modal, haber que exhibits categorical enclisis (pp. 373–74). Second, in Section4, I will argue that this construction’s categorical behavior plays a critical role in the apparently exceptional behavior of tener que. Lack of one-to-one correspondence between grammaticalization predictions and particular construction behavior with respect to VCP has been noted in studies of diachronic language change. Torres Cacoullos(1999) proposed that “diachronic increases in CC [proclisis] do not reflect a direct correspondence between the occurrence of CC [proclisis] and the meaning of the periphrastic expression (grammatical vs. lexical) in any given example, but rather indicate the conventionalization of auxiliary + gerund sequences as units whose components are increasingly fused” (p. 147). Therefore, VCP seems to be impacted by the degree to which these two-verb constructions are conventionalized through frequency of use. To exemplify how usage-based linguistics is able to uncover the constraints that impact VCP, in the next section, I provide a variationist study of VCP in spoken Argentine Spanish, a dialect for which such analysis has not been offered yet. The results indicate which factors, headed by the finite verb construction, constrain clitic placement in this dialect. In addition, this small-scale study provides further evidence of the apparently exceptional VCP behavior of tener que, which I will seek to account for in Section4.

3. Variationist Study of VCP In his study of 543 tokens of clitics in variable contexts from written texts, (Myhill 1988, p. 360) observed that proclisis was more frequent with some verbs with more grammaticalized meanings, as well as whenever the clitic outranked the subject in the Animacy Hierarchy8 than in the opposite scenario. The prediction with respect to animacy has been that inanimate referents do not tend to be topicalized as much as animate referents; therefore, the former would favor enclisis and the latter, proclisis. Apart from the effect of the finite verb discussed earlier, the large-scale corpus study of VCP by Davies(1995) also reported a semantic e ffect of animacy, where clitics with animate referents prefer preverbal position, providing evidence for Myhill’s earlier proposal9.

8 “A proposed hierarchical ordering of noun phrases etc. ranging from personal pronouns, such as I, as maximally ‘animate’ to forms referring to lifeless objects as minimally ‘animate’ ... ”(Matthews 2007). 9 Other effects found by Davies(1995) include that proclisis was greater with multiple clitics or reflexives than with single clitics and non-reflexives as well as after the subordinating conjunction que ‘that’ compared with coordinating conjunction y ‘and’. Languages 2020, 5, 33 7 of 26

More recent studies provided evidence for those effects and uncovered other variable constraints operating on VCP. These studies focused mainly on particular dialects10. The dialects examined in later studies include those of Madrid and Bogotá (Sinnott and Smith 2007), Caracas (Gudmestad 2006; Zabalegui 2008), Gran Canaria (Troya Déniz and Pérez Martín 2011), Salamanca (Aijón Oliva and Nieto 2013), Asturias in Nothern Spain (González López 2008, 2013), and Mexico (Schwenter and Torres Cacoullos 2014). Despite their methodological differences, some patterns of VCP use emerge among these studies. In particular, four constraints on VCP are reported as significant: register, finite verb, animacy, and discourse topicality. Specifically, corpus studies indicate that enclisis is favored in written language by certain verbs (discussed below), by inanimate or propositional referents, and by non-persistent referents. In this section, I add to this literature by reporting on the results of a variationist study of VCP in spoken Argentine Spanish. This study seeks to find out whether the same constraints that impact clitic placement in other dialects (verb, animacy, and topicality) do so in Argentine Spanish as well. In addition, this study seeks to test the apparently exceptional behavior of tener que.

3.1. Corpus and Data Extraction All clear occurrences of third-person singular direct object (3sg DO) clitics (lo.MSG, los.MPL, la.FSG, las.FPL) that were adjacent to a verb were manually extracted from the Habla Culta de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires corpus (Barrenechea 1987), which consists of 33 transcribed free conversations ranging from 17–55 min in length, each between two and four participants (~260,400 words). The speakers are N = 59 male and female professionals ranging between 26 and 70 years of age, all born in Buenos Aires, so the sample represents educated spontaneous speech or upper-middle socioeconomic level. Even though the interviews for this corpus were conducted in the 1980s and VCP has already been explored in similar Habla Culta corpora from other dialects since then, VCP has never been looked at in the Habla Culta de Buenos Aires corpus. While this corpus documents educated speech, it was selected because it provided a comparable baseline adult language measure for a larger study on the acquisition of morphosyntactic variation by Argentine children (Requena 2015). It is noteworthy, however, that Schwenter and Torres Cacoullos(2014) found no di fference in rates of enclisis between Habla Culta ‘educated speech’ and Habla Popular ‘popular speech’ corpora within the same dialect, namely Mexican Spanish (p. 519). I restricted my study to 3sg DO clitics in an attempt to avoid conflating other persons and syntactic roles (such as reflexives and indirect object clitics). The reason behind this decision is the fact that animacy is a critical factor in variable clitic placement, and I wanted to exclude those clitics that tend to be animate most of the time (i.e., reflexives and indirect object clitics), since this could interfere with the results. All contexts where clitic placement is categorical in modern Spanish (e.g., [clitic + finite verb] and [non-finite verb + clitic]) were identified. There was a higher frequency of clitics followed by a single finite verb (N = 1262), i.e., [clitic + finite verb], than clitics following infinitives or gerunds (N = 165), i.e., [non-finite verb + clitic]. I, therefore, assume the existence of a [clitic + finite verb] construction in speakers’ representation of single finite verbs, which could serve as an analogical model to variable contexts (i.e., [finite verb + non-finite verb]) where the finite verb has grammaticalized into an auxiliary, modal, or aspectual marker, rendering a structure that could be categorized (and stored) as a single verb construction. Given that clitics precede single finite verbs categorically, this analogical link could play an important role in the overall bias toward proclisis that seems to spread gradually from construction to construction in variable contexts (Schwenter and Torres Cacoullos 2014, p. 533). Contexts with categorical clitic placement were excluded from the analysis, as were other contexts with finite verbs that were not sufficiently represented with both clitic positions in the corpus (see

10 With the exception of Déniz (2003) in Troya Déniz and Pérez Martín(2011, p. 15), who examined over twelve dialects included in the Macrocorpus de la norma lingüistica de las principales ciudades del mundo hispánico reporting 74% proclisis. Languages 2020, 5, 33 8 of 26

AppendixA for a complete list of exclusions). As the result of data cleaning, I was left with a total of 252 cases of VCP11.

3.2. Coding of Variable Constraints The dependent variable (Clitic Placement) was coded categorically as either proclisis or enclisis. Of all the variable cases, 163 (65%) display proclisis, whereas 89 (35%) display enclisis. The prevalence of proclisis overall is a pattern that has been already attested in Modern Spanish regardless of the continuum-like distribution of verbs according to their preference for proclisis (Davies 1995)12. However, as shown by previous variationist studies, there are other constraints that are expected to impact VCP in spoken Argentine Spanish as well, namely, the finite verb, the animacy status of the clitic referent, and the accessibility and topicality. In the next section, I address how these independent variables (constraints) were coded, as well as the predictions made for each one. Given that proclisis is pervasive in Modern Spanish, the predictions and results are stated from the perspective of enclisis thereon.

3.2.1. The Finite Verb The finite verb has been identified as the most influential constraint on VCP (e.g., Davies 1995; Schwenter and Torres Cacoullos 2014). In the present study, I coded for the finite verb heading VCP contexts. The 252 variable contexts found were distributed in constructions headed by nine different finite verbs. Figure1 shows the number of variable clitic placement contexts found for each verb. The three most frequent finite verb constructions in the Buenos Aires data were poder ‘can’ (6) and ir a ‘go to’ (7); next is tener que ‘have to’ (8). These three verbs have been identified as the most frequent infinitival periphrases (for references, see (Fernández Ulloa 2001, p. 29) cf. (Gómez Manzano 1992)). Accordingly, and following the grammaticalization predictions, I hypothesized that more frequent and grammaticalized verb constructions should disfavor enclisis. This should be the case of poder and ir a (future meaning), for example. With respect to less grammaticalized verb constructions (e.g., empezar a ‘begin to’), as well as less grammaticalized uses of certain constructions (e.g., ir a with motion meaning), I expect greater enclisis. Even though tener que is a frequent and grammaticalized construction, in line with previous studies (Davies 1995), I expected it to favor enclisis, replicating the ‘exceptional’ behavior by this construction reported elsewhere.

11 Even though this is quite a small data set, the results of this study replicate some previous findings with larger corpora and add to the description of this phenomenon in different dialects, which could be used to establish comparisons across varieties of Spanish, as mentioned by (Gudmestad 2006, pp. 13–14). In addition, in the current manuscript, the corpus study mainly serves the purposes of (a) replicating the effects of the main constraints on VCP in a dialect for which no variationist study has examined this phenomenon, and (b) illustrating the exceptional behavior of tener que ‘have to’ to motivate the theoretical analysis. While a larger dataset would be required for a study that offers proof of a novel effects or where the corpus study is the main focus, I think that the small-scale study contributes to the purposes of the present study (“a” and “b” above). 12 Formal approaches have also noted how clitic climbing (CC) is possible with some types of verbs. Verbs have, for example, been classified into those that trigger structure simplification and those that do not. Structure simplification would then make the finite and non-finite elements of these periphrases belong to the same clause, thus allowing preverbal clitics. Aissen and Perlmutter(1976) identify “trigger” verbs (such as querer ‘want’, tratar ‘try’, and soler ‘be in the habit of’) and “non-trigger” verbs (like insistir ‘insist’, soñar ‘dream’, and parecer ‘seem’). The authors support the Clause Union hypothesis (rendering structure simplification) and discard the existence of a specific rule that would account for preverbal clitics. Rizzi (1976), on the other hand, relates proclisis to the verb by proposing a lexically governed rule called ‘Restructuring’, which allows clitics to appear preverbally. Both Rizzi (for Italian) and Suñer(1980) (for Spanish) agree that modals, aspectuals, and motion verbs allow proclisis in addition to enclisis. Languages 2020, 5, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 26 Languages 2020, 5, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 26

Languages1002020, 5, 33 9 of 26 Languages 2020, 5, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 26 10090 90 77 80 77 80 68 70 100 68 6070 90 77 60 80 50 68 39 50 70 corpus 40 39

corpus 3040 60 30 18 17 20 50 39 18 17 13 10 20 13 10 6 4 10corpus 40 6 4 # of VCP contexts found in 100 30 18 17 # of VCP contexts found in 0 20 poder ir a tener que querer estar + Ger deber13 empezar10 a seguir + venir a 6 4 10 poder ir a tener que querer estar + Ger deber empezar a seguirGer + venir a

# of VCP contexts found in 0 Ger Finite verb poder ir a tener que quererFinite estar verb + Ger deber empezar a seguir + venir a Ger

Figure 1. Distribution of all (N = 252) variable clitic placementFinite verb tokens according to the finite verb in theFigure corpus 1. Distribution of Argentine of allSpanish. (N = 252) Note: variable In all cliticthese pl variableacement constructions, tokens according the finiteto the verbfinite listed verb inis

followedthe corpusFigure by 1.of an DistributionArgentine infinitive, Spanish.except of all (N in =Note:the252) two In variable cases all these si cliticgnaled variable placement with constructions, “+ tokensGer” where according the the finitenon-finite to the verb finite verblisted verb is is ina the gerund.followedFigurecorpus by 1. of an Distribution Argentine infinitive, Spanish. exceptof all (N in Note: =the 252) two In variable all cases these si cliticgnaled variable pl acementwith constructions, “+ Ger” tokens where theaccording finite the non-finite verb to the listed finite verb is followed verbis a in gerund.theby ancorpus infinitive, of Argentine except in Spanish. the two casesNote:signaled In all these with variable “+ Ger” constructions, where the non-finite the finite verb verb is a gerund.listed is (6) followed Variable by anuse infinitive, with poder except ‘can’: in the two cases signaled with “+ Ger” where the non-finite verb is a (6) gerund.Proclisis: Variable use with poder ‘can’: a. únicamenteProclisis: lo puedo hacer en castellano (XXIV, 185:13)13 a. (6) únicamente Variable uselo with poder ‘can’:puedo hacer en castellano (XXIV, 185:13)13 only it-ACC.M.SG can-PRS.1SG do in Spanish Proclisis: ‘Ionly can only do itit- inACC Spanish’.M.SG can-PRS.1SG do in Spanish a. únicamente lo puedo hacer en castellano (XXIV, 185:13)13 ‘I can only do it in Spanish’ only it-ACC.M.SG can-PRS.1SG do in Spanish Enclisis: ‘I can only do it in Spanish’ b. noEnclisis: podés hacer = lo dando vuelta los esquís (IV, 73:3) b. no podés hacer = lo dando vuelta los esquís (IV, 73:3) NEG can-PRS.2SG do = it-ACC.M.SG turn-GER around the skis Enclisis: ‘YouNEG cannotcan- doPRS it.2 turningSG do the = it- skisACC around.’.M.SG turn-GER around the skis b. no podés hacer = lo dando vuelta los esquís (IV, 73:3) ‘You cannot do it turning the skis around.’ NEG can-PRS.2SG do = it-ACC.M.SG turn-GER around the skis (7) Variable use with ir (a) ‘go to’: ‘You cannot do it turning the skis around.’ (7) Proclisis: Variable use with ir (a) ‘go to’:

a. laProclisis: vamos a destruir (XXIV, 212:5) a. (7) la Variable usevamos with ir (a) ‘goa to’: destruir (XXIV, 212:5) it-ACC.F.SG go-PRS.1PL to destroy Proclisis: ‘Weit-ACC are.F .goingSG togo- destroyPRS.1PL it’ to destroy a. la vamos a destruir (XXIV, 212:5) ‘We are going to destroy it’ it-ACC.F.SG go-PRS.1PL to destroy Enclisis: ‘We are going to destroy it’ b. vamosEnclisis: a acortar = la un poquito (X, 160:3) b. vamos a acortar = la un poquito (X, 160:3) go-PRS.1PL to shorten = it-ACC.F.SG a bit Enclisis: ‘Wego-PRS are.1 goingPL toto shortenshorten it a = bit’ it-ACC .F.SG a bit b. vamos a acortar = la un poquito (X, 160:3) ‘We are going to shorten it a bit’ go-PRS.1PL to shorten = it-ACC.F.SG a bit (8) Variable use with tener que ‘have to’: ‘We are going to shorten it a bit’ (8) Proclisis: Variable use with tener que ‘have to’:

Proclisis: (XXVI, a. (8) Lo Variable usetengo with tener que ‘haveque to’:conversar casualmente (XXVI, a. Lo tengo que conversar casualmente 289:28) Proclisis: 289:28) it-ACC.M.SG have-PRS.1SG to discuss by the way it-ACC.M.SG have-PRS.1SG to discuss by the way (XXVI, a. ‘I haveLo to discuss ittengo, by the way’ que conversar casualmente 289:28) ‘I have to discuss it, by the way’ Languages 2020, 5,it- x ACCFOR .PEERM.SG REVIEW have- PRS.1SG to discuss by the way 10 of 26 Enclisis: Enclisis:‘I have to discuss it, by the way’ b. todo eso tengo que cuidar = lo plenamente (X, 160:3) all that have-PRS.1SG to take care of = it-ACC.M.SG completely 13 Examples from Enclisis: the corpus are followe d by references to the source in the format: sample number (in Roman 13 ‘All that, I have to take care of [it] completely’ numerals), Examples from page the number:line corpus are number. followe d by references to the source in the format: sample number (in Roman numerals), page number:line number. 3.2.2.13 Animacy Examples offrom Clitic the corpusReferent are followed by references to the source in the format: sample number (in Roman Thisnumerals), factor pagegroup number:line was included number. in order to explore Myhill's (1988) hypothesis that inanimate referents would favor enclisis, as they do not tend to be as topical as animate referents. In his characterization of human referents (as well as the more prominent referents in general), Aijón Oliva (2011, p. 28) includes the high frequency of preverbal placement of clitics in variable structures mirroring the subject position in prototypical SVO syntactic order. I coded for animate referents (9), inanimate referents (10), and propositional referents (those clitics whose referent is a whole proposition) (11). I predicted that clitics with inanimate and propositional referents should favor enclisis (Davies 1995; Myhill 1988; Sinnott and Smith 2007).

(9) Animate Referent: (lo ‘him’ = a man) lo iba a matar (XXII, p. 99, 10) it-ACC.M.SG go-PST.IPFV.3SG to kill ‘(he) was going to kill him’

(10) Inanimate Referent: (lo ‘it’ = a book) Voy a mirar = lo. (XXIV, p. 166, 19) go-PRS.1SG to look = it.ACC.M.SG ‘I’m going to look at it’

(11) Propositional Referent: (lo ‘it’ = the fact that when a player has certain cards s/he should double the bet) ahora que me dijiste lo voy now that-REL me-DAT tell-PST.PRF.2SG it-ACC.M.SG go-PRS.1SG

a tener presente. (XXV, p. 225, 29) to have in mind ‘now that you told me, I will have it in mind’

3.2.3. Referent Accessibility Considering the last time that a referent was mentioned (Givón 1995) can provide a measure of how topical the referent is. The hypothesis is that ‘the more recently it has been mentioned, the more topical it is’ (Myhill 2005, p. 473). I thus coded for whether the referent was immediately accessible (same clause, previous clause) (12), or not immediately accessible (meaning that it was mentioned earlier in discourse, but not in the same or immediately previous clause) (13) (Schwenter and Torres Cacoullos 2014)14. I predicted that enclisis should be favored by referents that are not immediately accessible.

(12) Immediately Accessible Referent15: Bueno, lo llama- - - y el lunes lo fui a ver. (XXIV, p. 202, 18)

Translation: Well, he calls him- - - and on Monday I went to see him-ACC.3SG

14 I also coded for the syntactic function of cases of immediate mention, such as Subject, Object, and Other. This was not significant, so the final analysis collapsed all syntactic functions. 15 The translations corresponding to the examples for each of the discourse factors are provided immediately after the Spanish in more idiomatic form only. Languages 2020, 5, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 26

b. todo eso tengo que cuidar = lo plenamente (X, 160:3) all that have-PRS.1SG to take care of = it-ACC.M.SG completely Languages 2020, 5, 33 10 of 26 ‘All that, I have to take care of [it] completely’

3.2.2.3.2.2. Animacy Animacy of of Clitic Clitic Referent Referent ThisThis factor factor group group was was included included in in order order to to explore explore Myhill'sMyhill’s (1988) (1988 )hypothesis hypothesis that that inanimate inanimate referentsreferents would would favor favor enclisis, enclisis, as as they they do do not not tend tend to to be be as as topical topical as as animate referents. In In his his characterizationcharacterization of of human human referents referents (as (as well well as as the the more more prominent prominent referents referents in in general), general), Aijón Aijón Oliva Oliva (2011,(2011 ,p. p. 28) 28) includes includes the the high high frequency frequency of of prev preverbalerbal placement placement of of clitics clitics in in variable variable structures structures mirroringmirroring the the subject subject position position in in prototypical prototypical SVO SVO syntactic syntactic order. order. I Icoded coded for for animate animate referents referents (9), (9), inanimateinanimate referentsreferents (10),(10), and and propositional propositional referents refere (thosents (those clitics whoseclitics referentwhose isreferent a whole is proposition) a whole proposition)(11). I predicted (11). thatI predicted clitics with that inanimate clitics with and inanimate propositional and referentspropositional should referents favor enclisis should ( Daviesfavor enclisis1995; Myhill (Davies 1988 1995;; Sinnott Myhill and 1988; Smith Sinnott 2007 ).and Smith 2007).

(9) Animate Referent: (lo ‘him’ = a man) lo iba a matar (XXII, p. 99, 10) it-ACC.M.SG go-PST.IPFV.3SG to kill ‘(he) was going to kill him’

(10) Inanimate Referent: (lo ‘it’ = a book) Voy a mirar = lo. (XXIV, p. 166, 19) go-PRS.1SG to look = it.ACC.M.SG ‘I’m going to look at it’

(11) Propositional Referent: (lo ‘it’ = the fact that when a player has certain cards s/he should double the bet) ahora que me dijiste lo voy now that-REL me-DAT tell-PST.PRF.2SG it-ACC.M.SG go-PRS.1SG

a tener presente. (XXV, p. 225, 29) to have in mind ‘now that you told me, I will have it in mind’

3.2.3. Referent Accessibility 3.2.3. Referent Accessibility Considering the last time that a referent was mentioned (Givón 1995) can provide a measure of Considering the last time that a referent was mentioned (Givón 1995) can provide a measure how topical the referent is. The hypothesis is that ‘the more recently it has been mentioned, the more of how topical the referent is. The hypothesis is that ‘the more recently it has been mentioned, the topical it is’ (Myhill 2005, p. 473). I thus coded for whether the referent was immediately accessible more topical it is’ (Myhill 2005, p. 473). I thus coded for whether the referent was immediately (same clause, previous clause) (12), or not immediately accessible (meaning that it was mentioned accessible (same clause, previous clause) (12), or not immediately accessible (meaning that it was earlier in discourse, but not in the same or immediately previous clause) (13) (Schwenter and Torres mentioned earlier in discourse, but not in the same or immediately previous clause) (13) (Schwenter Cacoullos 2014)14. I predicted that enclisis should be favored by referents that are not immediately and Torres Cacoullos 2014)14. I predicted that enclisis should be favored by referents that are not accessible. immediately accessible. (12) Immediately Accessible Referent15: Bueno, lo llama- - - y el lunes lo fui a ver. (XXIV, p. 202, 18) 13 Examples from the corpus are followed by references to the source in the format: sample number (in Roman numerals), page number:line number. 14Translation:I also coded for the syntactic function of cases of immediate mention, such as Subject, Object, and Other. This was not significant,Well, sohe the calls final him- analysis - - and collapsed on Monday all syntactic I went functions. to see him-ACC.3SG

14 I also coded for the syntactic function of cases of immediate mention, such as Subject, Object, and Other. This was not significant, so the final analysis collapsed all syntactic functions. 15 The translations corresponding to the examples for each of the discourse factors are provided immediately after the Spanish in more idiomatic form only. Languages 2020, 5, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 26

b. todo eso tengo que cuidar = lo plenamente (X, 160:3) all that have-PRS.1SG to take care of = it-ACC.M.SG completely ‘All that, I have to take care of [it] completely’

3.2.2. Animacy of Clitic Referent This factor group was included in order to explore Myhill's (1988) hypothesis that inanimate referents would favor enclisis, as they do not tend to be as topical as animate referents. In his characterization of human referents (as well as the more prominent referents in general), Aijón Oliva (2011, p. 28) includes the high frequency of preverbal placement of clitics in variable structures mirroring the subject position in prototypical SVO syntactic order. I coded for animate referents (9), inanimate referents (10), and propositional referents (those clitics whose referent is a whole proposition) (11). I predicted that clitics with inanimate and propositional referents should favor enclisis (Davies 1995; Myhill 1988; Sinnott and Smith 2007).

(9) Animate Referent: (lo ‘him’ = a man) lo iba a matar (XXII, p. 99, 10) it-ACC.M.SG go-PST.IPFV.3SG to kill ‘(he) was going to kill him’

(10) Inanimate Referent: (lo ‘it’ = a book) Voy a mirar = lo. (XXIV, p. 166, 19) go-PRS.1SG to look = it.ACC.M.SG ‘I’m going to look at it’

(11) Propositional Referent: (lo ‘it’ = the fact that when a player has certain cards s/he should double the bet) ahora que me dijiste lo voy now that-REL me-DAT tell-PST.PRF.2SG it-ACC.M.SG go-PRS.1SG

a tener presente. (XXV, p. 225, 29) to have in mind ‘now that you told me, I will have it in mind’

3.2.3. Referent Accessibility Considering the last time that a referent was mentioned (Givón 1995) can provide a measure of how topical the referent is. The hypothesis is that ‘the more recently it has been mentioned, the more topical it is’ (Myhill 2005, p. 473). I thus coded for whether the referent was immediately accessible (same clause, previous clause) (12), or not immediately accessible (meaning that it was mentioned earlier in discourse, but not in the same or immediately previous clause) (13) (Schwenter and Torres 14 CacoullosLanguages 2020 2014), 5, 33. I predicted that enclisis should be favored by referents that are not immediately11 of 26 accessible.

(12) Immediately Accessible Referent15: Bueno, lo llama- - - y el lunes lo fui a ver. (XXIV, p. 202, 18)

LanguagesTranslation: 2020, 5 , x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 26 Well, he calls him- - - and on Monday I went to see him-ACC.3SG

(13) Not Immediately Accessible Referent: 14 I also Inf.coded A. for--- Sí...the syntactic esté... yo function creo que of sí. cases Yo he of visto imme pasardiate pormention, acá todos such los as colectivosSubject, Object, [....] en and la Other.línea. This was not Inf. significant, B. ---Bueno so, perothe final [....] analysis de la línea collapsed hasta que all syntacticoscurezca. functions. Después ya no va a haber más. 15 The translations Inf. A. ---Pero corresponding después empiezan to the examples a retirar-los for eachporque of tienenthe discou miedorse quefactors pase are alguna provided cosa. immediately(XXVII, p. after the319, Spanish 11–13) in more idiomatic form only.

Translation: Inf. A. ---Yes… I believe that yes. I have seen all the buses [….] of the line go through here. Inf. B. ---Well, but […] of the line until the evening. After that, there will be none. Inf. A. ---But then they start removing them-ACC.3PL because they are afraid that something might happen.

3.2.4. Topic Persistence 3.2.4. Topic Persistence Topic Persistence counts how many times the clitic referent is mentioned in upcoming discourse as a cataphoricTopic Persistence indicator counts of topicality how many (Givón times 1983, the cliticpp. 14–15; referent 1992). is mentioned This could in be upcoming related to discourse the way Lewisas a cataphoric (1979) conceptualizes indicator of topicality‘salience’ within (Givón refere1983,ntial pp. 14–15;semantics 1992 as). Thisthe most could salient be related entity to “…in the waythe domainLewis(1979 of discourse,) conceptualizes according ‘salience’ to some within contextu referentialally determined semantics assalience the most ranking” salient entity(p. 348). “ ... Thein authorthe domain draws of on discourse, (and critiques) according the more to some philosophical contextually proposal determined (Russell salience 1905) ranking” according (p. to 348). which The a prominent-objectsauthor draws on coordinate (and critiques) for denoted the more elements philosophical is “…determined proposal (Russell on a given 1905 )occasion according of toutterance which a prominent-objects coordinate of a sentence by mental factorsfor denoted such as elementsthe speaker’s is “ ... expectationsdetermined regarding on a given the occasion things ofhe utterance is likely to of bringa sentence to the byattention mental of factors his audience” such as the(Lewis speaker’s 1970, p. expectations 63) [emphasis regarding is mine]. the things he is likely to bringIn to an the attempt attention to of tap his audience”into the (speaker’sLewis 1970 expectations, p. 63) [emphasis about is the mine]. ranking of comparative prominenceIn an attempt or salience to tap given into the to speaker’sthe clitic expectationsreferent, I analyzed about the the ranking following of comparative ten clauses prominence after each tokenor salience and coded given for to the the number clitic referent, of timesI that analyzed the clitic the reference following was ten mentioned clauses after (once each vs. more token than and once)coded and for thethe numbersyntactic of function times that of theeach clitic of thos referencee subsequent was mentioned mentions (once (expressed vs. more or than unexpressed once) and subject,the syntactic DO, ‘other’, function and of in each more of than those one subsequent syntactic mentionsfunction)16 (expressed. Syntactic function or unexpressed was not subject, selected DO, as 16 significant,‘other’, and so in all more uses than were one collapsed syntactic into function) Persistent. Syntactic uses (mentioned function wasmore not than selected once asin significant,upcoming discourse)so all uses (14) were and collapsed Non-Persistent into Persistent uses (either uses abse (mentionednt or mentioned more than just onceonce in upcoming discourse) discourse) (15).(14) andIn line Non-Persistent with the results uses of (either Schwenter absent and or mentioned Torres Cacoullos just once (2014), in upcoming I predicted discourse) enclisis (15). to be In favoredline with by the non-persistent results of Schwenter referents. and Torres Cacoullos(2014), I predicted enclisis to be favored by non-persistent referents. (14) Persistent Referent: No, pero vos los podés preparar bien. Los podés preparar bien y los podés preparar mal. Yo los preparé 15 The translationsmal. ¡Qué correspondingle vas a hacer! to the[risas] examples (XXI, for p. each 17,of 12) the discourse factors are provided immediately after the Spanish in more idiomatic form only. 16 Unlike Schwenter and Torres Cacoullos(2014), here, I included interlocutor tokens as well as quotative and other Translation:discourse formulas. No, but you can prepare them-ACC.3PL well. You can prepare them well and you can prepare them badly. I prepared them badly. What are you going to do! [laugh]

(15) Not Persistent Referent: Inf. C. ---...un curso de la Cultura es Lingüística, que puedo dictar = lo sin preparar. Inf. A. ---No, no, no; porque salís o... o porque... Inf. B. ---Y porque tiene cursos [...... ] Inf. C. ---Y el otro es drama que... que... que me interesa, me gusta y lo agarré, ¡qué voy a hacer!, que me exige cuatro o cinco horas de estudio por semana en casa, sábado y domingo. (XXI, p. 19, 19–22)

Translation:

16 Unlike Schwenter and Torres Cacoullos (2014), here, I included interlocutor tokens as well as quotative and other discourse formulas. Languages 2020, 5, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 26

(13) Not Immediately Accessible Referent: Inf. A. ---Sí... esté... yo creo que sí. Yo he visto pasar por acá todos los colectivos [....] en la línea. Inf. B. ---Bueno, pero [....] de la línea hasta que oscurezca. Después ya no va a haber más. Inf. A. ---Pero después empiezan a retirar-los porque tienen miedo que pase alguna cosa. (XXVII, p. 319, 11–13)

Translation: Inf. A. ---Yes… I believe that yes. I have seen all the buses [….] of the line go through here. Inf. B. ---Well, but […] of the line until the evening. After that, there will be none. Inf. A. ---But then they start removing them-ACC.3PL because they are afraid that something might happen.

3.2.4. Topic Persistence Topic Persistence counts how many times the clitic referent is mentioned in upcoming discourse as a cataphoric indicator of topicality (Givón 1983, pp. 14–15; 1992). This could be related to the way Lewis (1979) conceptualizes ‘salience’ within referential semantics as the most salient entity “…in the domain of discourse, according to some contextually determined salience ranking” (p. 348). The author draws on (and critiques) the more philosophical proposal (Russell 1905) according to which a prominent-objects coordinate for denoted elements is “…determined on a given occasion of utterance of a sentence by mental factors such as the speaker’s expectations regarding the things he is likely to bring to the attention of his audience” (Lewis 1970, p. 63) [emphasis is mine]. In an attempt to tap into the speaker’s expectations about the ranking of comparative prominence or salience given to the clitic referent, I analyzed the following ten clauses after each token and coded for the number of times that the clitic reference was mentioned (once vs. more than once) and the syntactic function of each of those subsequent mentions (expressed or unexpressed subject, DO, ‘other’, and in more than one syntactic function)16. Syntactic function was not selected as significant, so all uses were collapsed into Persistent uses (mentioned more than once in upcoming discourse) (14) and Non-Persistent uses (either absent or mentioned just once in upcoming discourse)

(15).Languages In line2020 ,with5, 33 the results of Schwenter and Torres Cacoullos (2014), I predicted enclisis 12to ofbe 26 favored by non-persistent referents.

(14) Persistent Referent: No, pero vos los podés preparar bien. Los podés preparar bien y los podés preparar mal. Yo los preparé mal. ¡Qué le vas a hacer! [risas] (XXI, p. 17, 12)

Translation: No, but you can prepare them-ACC.3PL well. You can prepare them well and you can prepare them badly. I prepared them badly. What are you going to do! [laugh]

(15) Not Persistent Referent: Inf. C. ---...un curso de la Cultura es Lingüística, que puedo dictar = lo sin preparar. Inf. A. ---No, no, no; porque salís o... o porque... Inf. B. ---Y porque tiene cursos [...... ] Inf. C. ---Y el otro es drama que... que... que me interesa, me gusta y lo agarré, ¡qué voy a hacer!, que me exige cuatro o cinco horas de estudio por semana en casa, sábado y domingo. (XXI, p. 19, 19–22)

Languages 2020, 5, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 26 Translation: Inf. C. ---...a class at the Cultura is Linguistics, which I can teach it-ACC.3SG without preparing.

Inf. A. ---No, no, no; because you go out or… or because… 16 Unlike Schwenter and Torres Cacoullos (2014), here, I included interlocutor tokens as well as quotative and Inf. B. ---And because it has courses [………] other discourse formulas. Inf. C. ---And the other one is Drama that… that… that interests me, I like it and I took it, what am I going to do!, it demands four or five study hours per week at home, on Saturday and Sunday. I conducted a multiple logistic regression analysis on the data using Rbrul (Johnson 2009) within I conducted a multiple logistic regression analysis on the data using Rbrul (Johnson 2009) within the R programming environment (R Core Team 2014). This type of analysis allows us to identify the the R programming environment (R Core Team 2014). This type of analysis allows us to identify the factors (or variables) that, when taken together, affect the application of the selected dependent value factors (or variables) that, when taken together, affect the application of the selected dependent value (in our case, enclisis) simultaneously. In addition, it enables us to rank the variables according to (in our case, enclisis) simultaneously. In addition, it enables us to rank the variables according to their their relative magnitude of the effect of each variable or factor group (known as ‘Range’). In addition, relative magnitude of the effect of each variable or factor group (known as ‘Range’). In addition, speaker was added to the model as a random effect. speaker was added to the model as a random effect. 3.3. Multivariate Results 3.3. Multivariate Results Table2 shows the results of the multivariate analysis by variable (e.g., Finite Verb, etc.) and levels of aTable variable 2 shows (e.g., tener the queresults+ infinitive, of the multivariatedeber + infinitive, analysis etc.) by17 .variable The first (e.g., column Finite includes Verb, the etc.) Weight, and 17 levelswhich of indicates a variable the (e.g., probability tener que that + infinitive, each factor deber contributes + infinitive, to theetc.) application. The firstvalue, column namely includes enclisis. the Weight,The closer which it is indicates to 1, the morethe probability likely enclisis that is.each Taking factor> contributes0.5 as a cut-point, to the application the levels with value, probability namely enclisis.weights The over closer 0.5 favor it is enclisis.to 1, the Themore other likely columns enclisis contain is. Taking enclisis > 0.5 tokens as a cut-point, out of all tokensthe levels in a with level, probabilitypercentage weights of enclisis over in 0.5 a level, favor and enclisis. percentage The other of all columns the data contain that a levelenclisis represents, tokens out respectively. of all tokens in a level, percentage of enclisis in a level, and percentage of all the data that a level represents, respectively.

17 Two finite verbs (seguir and venir) did not reach a minimum of 10 tokens each and were initially collapsed into an “Other” category.Table 2. This,Variable however, rule resultedanalysis: in Factors an interaction contributing between to finite speakers’ verb and choice animacy of enclitic that not position. only lacked Note: theoretical motivationFactors with in the data present in square study, butbrackets also worsened were not the selected model fit as as significant. measured by the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC). So, we removed the “Other” category from the final model. Application Value: Enclisis Weight n % % of all Data Finite Verb (p. < 4.34e−08) tener que + Infinitive 0.83 28/39 72 15 empezar a + Infinitive 0.76 6/10 60 4 deber + Infinitive 0.66 7/13 54 5 querer + Infinitive 0.60 8/18 44 7 poder + Infinitive 0.42 24/77 31 31 ir a + Infinitive (movement) 0.39 3/13 23 5 estar + Gerund 0.21 3/17 18 7 ir a + Infinitive (future) 0.14 5/55 9 22 Range 69 Animacy of Referent (p. < 0.05) Propositional 0.62 17/38 45 16 Inanimate 0.60 57/142 40 59 Animate 0.29 10/62 16 26 Range 33 Referent Accessibility (n.s.) Immediately Accessible [0.52] 49/126 39 52 Not immediately accessible [0.48] 35/116 30 48 Topic Persistence (10 clauses) (n.s.) Not persistent [0.54] 71/196 36 81

17 Two finite verbs (seguir and venir) did not reach a minimum of 10 tokens each and were initially collapsed into an “Other” category. This, however, resulted in an interaction between finite verb and animacy that not only lacked theoretical motivation in the present study, but also worsened the model fit as measured by the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC). So, we removed the “Other” category from the final model. Languages 2020, 5, 33 13 of 26

Table 2. Variable rule analysis: Factors contributing to speakers’ choice of enclitic position. Note: Factors with data in square brackets were not selected as significant.

Application Value: Enclisis Weight n % % of all Data Finite Verb (p. < 4.34 10 8) × − tener que + Infinitive 0.83 28/39 72 15 empezar a + Infinitive 0.76 6/10 60 4 deber + Infinitive 0.66 7/13 54 5 querer + Infinitive 0.60 8/18 44 7 poder + Infinitive 0.42 24/77 31 31 ir a + Infinitive (movement) 0.39 3/13 23 5 estar + Gerund 0.21 3/17 18 7 ir a + Infinitive (future) 0.14 5/55 9 22 Range 69 Animacy of Referent (p. < 0.05) Propositional 0.62 17/38 45 16 Inanimate 0.60 57/142 40 59 Animate 0.29 10/62 16 26 Range 33 Referent Accessibility (n.s.) Immediately Accessible [0.52] 49/126 39 52 Not immediately accessible [0.48] 35/116 30 48 Topic Persistence (10 clauses) (n.s.) Not persistent [0.54] 71/196 36 81 Persistent [0.46] 13/46 28 19 N = 242, Input Probability = 0.33 (Average rate of enclisis: 35%)

Here, I will briefly discuss the factors that were significant in the multivariate analysis, since, for the most part, they replicate previous studies. As Table2 shows, Finite Verb was the most significant predictor, as particular finite verbs favor enclisis more than others (cf. Davies 1995, p. 374). I predicted that the more grammaticalized verb constructions, such as ir a (future) and poder, would disfavor enclisis. Indeed, the data confirm this. With respect to both uses of ir a, the results indicate that, while both uses of ir a disfavor enclisis, the more grammaticalized use (i.e., future) exhibits significantly less enclisis (9%) than the less grammaticalized use (i.e., motion) (23%). These rates are similar to those reported by Schwenter and Torres Cacoullos(2014) for Mexican Spanish (7% and 32%, respectively). As shown by tener que, there is not a one-to-one correspondence between more grammaticalized verb constructions and VCP. Whereas two of the most frequent and grammaticalized verbs (poder and ir a (future)) disfavor enclisis, tener que is a frequent grammaticalized verb construction that favors enclisis (71% enclisis). This rate of enclisis with tener que falls between the ones reported for this verb in previous studies of written registers (e.g., 85% (Myhill 1989); 87% (Davies 1995)) and spoken registers (e.g., 62% (Davies 1995); 44% (Troya Déniz and Pérez Martín 2011); 30% (Schwenter and Torres Cacoullos 2014)). I believe that the high rate of enclisis with tener que in the present dataset is a function of the speakers the corpus represents, namely educated speakers18. In any case, the behavior of tener que with respect to VCP calls for further exploration, as it goes contrary to the general pattern towards proclisis that grammaticalization accounts predict for modern Spanish. Bauman(2013) has shown that, since its emergence as a construction in the 12th century until the 20th century, tener que has developed from possession to obligation in a process analogous to the one attested for the English ‘have to’ (Heine and Kuteva 2002). Another interesting finding of Bauman’s study is the fact that this gradual (and late, compared to other modal verbs) process of grammaticalization appears to have developed even further in the 20th century through cases of tener que used for probability. In the Argentine data, only one token of tener que ‘have to’ used with epistemic meaning of probability was found (see example (16) below). Counter to what the view on grammaticalization followed here would predict, this token appears with enclisis, and was included in

18 In Davies(1995), the only dialect that included data from popular (lower socioeconomic status) speakers showed the lowest overall rate of enclisis compared to all the other dialects in that study, for which data came from Habla Culta corpora, which contain interviews with educated speakers only. Similarly, Schwenter and Torres Cacoullos(2014) showed lower rates of enclisis in Mexican corpora of Habla Popular as well as youth speech than in Habla Culta (educated speech). Languages 2020, 5, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 26

Persistent [0.46] 13/46 28 19 N = 242, Input Probability = 0.33 (Average rate of enclisis: 35%)

Here, I will briefly discuss the factors that were significant in the multivariate analysis, since, for the most part, they replicate previous studies. As Table 2 shows, Finite Verb was the most significant predictor, as particular finite verbs favor enclisis more than others (cf. Davies 1995, p. 374). I predicted that the more grammaticalized verb constructions, such as ir a (future) and poder, would disfavor enclisis. Indeed, the data confirm this. With respect to both uses of ir a, the results indicate that, while both uses of ir a disfavor enclisis, the more grammaticalized use (i.e., future) exhibits significantly less enclisis (9%) than the less grammaticalized use (i.e., motion) (23%). These rates are similar to those reported by Schwenter and Torres Cacoullos (2014) for Mexican Spanish (7% and 32%, respectively). As shown by tener que, there is not a one-to-one correspondence between more grammaticalized verb constructions and VCP. Whereas two of the most frequent and grammaticalized verbs (poder and ir a (future)) disfavor enclisis, tener que is a frequent grammaticalized verb construction that favors enclisis (71% enclisis). This rate of enclisis with tener que falls between the ones reported for this verb in previous studies of written registers (e.g., 85% (Myhill 1989); 87% (Davies 1995)) and spoken registers (e.g., 62% (Davies 1995); 44% (Déniz and Pérez Martín 2011); 30% (Schwenter and Torres Cacoullos 2014)). I believe that the high rate of enclisis with tener que in the present dataset is a function of the speakers the corpus represents, namely educated speakers 18 . In any case, the behavior of tener que with respect to VCP calls for further exploration, as it goes contrary to the general pattern towards proclisis that grammaticalization accounts predict for modern Spanish. Bauman (2013) has shown that, since its emergence as a construction in the 12th century until the 20th century, tener que has developed from possession to obligation in a process analogous to the one attested for the English ‘have to’ (Heine and Kuteva 2002). Another interesting finding of Bauman’s study is the fact that this gradual (and late, compared to other modal verbs) process of grammaticalization appears to have developed even further in the 20th century through cases of tener que used for probability. In the Argentine data, only one token of tener que ‘have to’ used with epistemicLanguages 2020 meaning, 5, 33 of probability was found (see example (16) below). Counter to what the view14 ofon 26 grammaticalization followed here would predict, this token appears with enclisis, and was included in a residual category (‘Other’) for the multivariate analysis. The distribution of enclisis in the rest of a residual category (‘Other’) for the multivariate analysis. The distribution of enclisis in the rest of the the cases of tener que ‘have to’ (n = 38), where this construction conveys the idea of obligation, is 73%, cases of tener que ‘have to’, where this construction conveys the idea of obligation, is 72%, thus strongly thus strongly favoring enclisis. Tener que, therefore, constitutes a very intriguing case, since my study favoring enclisis. Tener que, therefore, constitutes a very intriguing case, since my study has shown has shown once more its strong preference for enclisis despite its high frequency and its once more its strong preference for enclisis despite its high frequency and its grammaticalized use grammaticalized use of obligation. of obligation.

(16) El “pues” tenés que haber = lo dicho mucho (XXIV, p. 164, 24) the “so” have-prs.2sg to have = it-ACC.M.SG said a lot ‘You must have said “so” a lot’

WithWith respect respect to to Referent Referent Animacy, Animacy, the the results results in in Table Table 2 confirmconfirm my prediction by showing how propositionalpropositional and and inanimate inanimate referents referents favor favor enclisis, enclisis, while while referents referents that that rank rank higher higher in in the the animacy animacy scalescale appear appear more more often often in in proclisis. proclisis. The The present present data data clearly clearly show show a a significant significant semantic semantic effect effect of of animacyanimacy in in the the expected expected direction direction based based on on MyhillMyhill (19881988).). It is important to note that all the animate referentsreferents in in the the data data set set were were human, human, as as in in SchwSchwenterenter and and Torres Torres Cacoullos ((2014).2014). Whereas in the presentpresent data, cliticsclitics withwith inanimate inanimate and and propositional propositional referents referents occur occur in enclisisin enclisis twice twice as often as often as clitics as cliticswith animatewith animate (human) (human) referents, referents, this was this not was the not case the in case their in study.their study. The rates The ofrates enclisis of enclisis in that in study that showed only an eight-percentage-point difference between inanimate (21%) and human (29%) referents,

which was puzzling based on grammaticalization predictions by Myhill(1988). The authors explain 18 In Davies (1995), the only dialect that included data from popular (lower socioeconomic status) speakers those results as an interaction between animacy and topicality. showed the lowest overall rate of enclisis compared to all the other dialects in that study, for which data Referent accessibility and topic persistence did not reach significance in this model. came from Habla Culta corpora, which contain interviews with educated speakers only. Similarly, Schwenter 3.4.and Discussion Torres Cacoullos of Corpus (2014) Study showed lower rates of enclisis in Mexican corpora of Habla Popular as well as youth speech than in Habla Culta (educated speech). The small-scale study presented in this section examined VCP in a corpus of educated Spanish from Buenos Aires, Argentina from a variationist perspective and showed that:

1. As in previous studies, clitic placement in this variety of Argentine Spanish is constrained by Referent Animacy Clitics since human referents tend to appear preverbally (proclisis). 2. The nature of the finite verb construction emerged as the main factor conditioning clitic position. This result not only extends this known fact to a new dialect of Spanish, but it also provides evidence for the grammaticalization account that predicts a move away from enclisis for frequent periphrases where the finite verb has grammaticalized meaning. In the present study, we find this to be the case between more grammaticalized verbs that disfavor enclisis (e.g., ir a (future) and poder) as well as with more grammaticalized uses of a verb (e.g., ir a (future)) compared to more basic uses (e.g., ir a (movement) (see Schwenter and Torres Cacoullos 2014)). 3. Tenerque constitutes an intriguing case as a frequent grammaticalized verb that favors enclisis. This lack of one-to-one correspondence between grammaticalized verbs and VCP seems exceptional.

In the next section, I show how grammaticalization, unithood, and links with other constructions can account for VCP behavior of [tener que + infinitive].

4. Motivating Construction Behavior

4.1. Unithood of [Tener Que + Infinitive] The usage-based perspective on language followed here posits that language is made up of form–meaning pairings with a sequential structure called constructions (Goldberg 1995, 2006). Constructions are assumed to emerge from generalized patterns of use attested in actual utterances and stored via rich memory. When two elements are experienced together with sufficient frequency, they emerge as a unit thanks to processes of chunking and categorization. For example, we have assumed that [clitic + finite verb] must be part of speakers’ mental representation, since proclisis occurs categorically with single finite verbs in contemporary Spanish. Following grammaticalization accounts, the proposal has been that the [clitic + finite verb] construction behaves as an analogical model for Languages 2020, 5, 33 15 of 26

VCP in cases where the finite verb and non-finite verb behave like a unit (thus resembling a single verb construction). That may account for the gradual spread of proclisis from construction to construction, as mentioned by Schwenter and Torres Cacoullos(2014, p. 533). We also saw how one way of looking at the strength of the association between two elements in language is to look at the relative frequency of use together. Schwenter and Torres Cacoullos(2014, p. 527) provide a small-scale analysis that points to an association between finite verb and infinitival continuation that was stronger with poder than with querer, relative to other uses of these verbs. In what follows, I take the three most frequent verbs in the corpus study of Argentine Spanish (poder, ir a, Languagesand tener 2020) and, 5, x examine FOR PEER their REVIEW contexts of use in a larger corpus of Spanish (Corpus del Español15 (CDE), of 26 (Davies 2002). I will look at the first-person singular present form19 across these verbs and establish establishtheir relative their frequencyrelative frequency in the infinitival in the infinitival contexts contexts of [~ + infinitive]of [~ + infinitive]20, [~ +20direct, [~ + direct object] object]21, and21, and [~ + [~other + other continuations continuations (e.g., (e.g., pause)] pause)]22.22 I. willI will also also look look at at the the strength strength of of thethe associationassociation between these these verbsverbs and any type of preverbal cliticclitic [clitic[clitic ++ ~]2323. .The The analysis analysis was was made made on on N N == 14201420 tokens tokens of of puedopuedo, , NN == 10591059 tokens tokens of of voyvoy,, and and N N == 15111511 tokens tokens of of tengotengo, ,and and the the results results are are shown shown in in Figure Figure 22.. The ratesrates forfor [~ [~ ++ infinitive],infinitive], [~ [~ + lexical+ lexical direct direct object], object], and and [~ + [~other]+ other] should should add up add to up100%. to 100%. The rates The for rates [clitic for +[clitic ~] were+ ~] calculated were calculated independently independently out of 100% out of of 100% tokens of tokensfor each for verb, each are verb, but are included but included in the insame the figure.same figure.

100% 8% 26% 18% 90% 0.30%

80% 0% 70% 91% 66% 60% 74% [~ + other] 50% [~ + direct object] 40% [~ + infinitive] 30% [clitic + ~] 20% 16% Relative frequency of contexts use Relative frequency 10%

0% puedo 'I can' voy 'I go' tengo 'I have' Finite verb

Figure 2. Relative frequency of the 1SG present tense form of each verb followed by an infinitive in FigureCorpus 2. del Relative Español frequency (Davies 2002of the). 1SG present tense form of each verb followed by an infinitive in Corpus del Español (Davies 2002). When we consider [~ + infinitive], [~ + lexical direct object], and [~ + other], it is evident how poderWhenhas the we strongest consider association [~ + infinitive], with infinitives, [~ + lexical followed direct object], by ir a. and This [~ association + other], it is is very evident weak how with poder has the strongest association with infinitives, followed by ir a. This association is very weak with tener (only 16% of cases, which is similar to the rate of use of this verb with “other” continuations).19 I selected 1sg forms Therefore, because theyas measur are the seconded by most relative frequent frequency singular forms of use, after tener 3SG. For does example, not have in the strong oral Corpus links del to infinitivesEspañol (Genre that/Historical) would suggest the frequencies a high are: degreeva ‘he/she of /unithood.it goes’, N = 7096;In contrast,voy ‘I go’, tener N = 2661; is used and vastransitively‘you go’, N 66%= 862. The advantage of 1SG over 3SG is that the subject is constant and known in the former. With the latter, the subjects can vary of thein animacy, time, a specificity, continuation and can not even possible be propositional. with poder So, for or simplicity, ir. In Iaddition, selected 1SG the forms link for between this section. tener and a preverbal20 An example clitic of [~(measured+ infinitive] independently is No te puedo dar una from opini theón ‘I ot cannother measures give you an opinion’of continuation), (CDE:19-OR, as Habla a measure Culta: Lima). of 21 Here, “direct object” refers to a direct object noun phrase or clause that follows the particular verb under consideration. An associationexample of of [~ tener+ direct with object] theis [clitic tengo un + amigofinite que verb] es el directorconstruction de la revista, is. ‘Ialso have much a friend weaker that is the (6%) director than of thewith journal’ the other(CDE:19-OR, two verbs Habla (33% Culta with Buenos poder Aires). and 43% with ir). These patterns of use predict that, unlike the 22 variable[~ + other constructions continuation headed (e.g., pause)] by includedpoder or continuations ir, which display that consisted great of unithood prepositional and phrases, conventionalization, subordinate clauses, adverbials, and pauses. An example of this is si yo voy a un país ‘if I go to a country’ (CDE:19-OR, Habla Culta: Bogotá). the23 Here,[tener [Cl que+V] + refers infinitive] to all clitics construction regardless of casemust and display person/number strong (e.g., analyzabilityme, te, se, lo/s, andla/s, le ties/s) that to precede other theuses particular of its componentsverb under consideration.outside of the variable context.

20 An example of [~ + infinitive] is No te puedo dar una opinión ‘I cannot give you an opinion’ (CDE:19-OR, Habla Culta: Lima). 21 Here, “direct object” refers to a direct object noun phrase or clause that follows the particular verb under consideration. An example of [~ + direct object] is tengo un amigo que es el director de la revista. ‘I have a friend that is the director of the journal’ (CDE:19-OR, Habla Culta Buenos Aires). 22 [~ + other continuation (e.g., pause)] included continuations that consisted of prepositional phrases, subordinate clauses, adverbials, and pauses. An example of this is si yo voy a un país ‘if I go to a country’ (CDE:19-OR, Habla Culta: Bogotá). 23 Here, [Cl+V] refers to all clitics regardless of case and person/number (e.g., me, te, se, lo/s, la/s, le/s) that precede the particular verb under consideration. Languages 2020, 5, 33 16 of 26 tener (only 16% of cases, which is similar to the rate of use of this verb with “other” continuations). Therefore, as measured by relative frequency of use, tener does not have strong links to infinitives that would suggest a high degree of unithood. In contrast, tener is used transitively 66% of the time, a continuation not possible with poder or ir. In addition, the link between tener and a preverbal clitic (measured independently from the other measures of continuation), as a measure of association of tener with the [clitic + finite verb] construction, is also much weaker (6%) than with the other two verbs (33% with poder and 43% with ir). These patterns of use predict that, unlike the variable constructions headed by poder or ir, which display great unithood and conventionalization, the [tener que + infinitive] Languagesconstruction 2020, 5 must, x FOR display PEER REVIEW strong analyzability and ties to other uses of its components outside16 of of the26 variable context. InIn contrast contrast to to the the very very well-established well-established grammaticalized grammaticalized use use of of irir a awithwith future future meaning meaning or or poderpoder, , wherewhere clitics clitics tend tend to to occur occur preverbally preverbally as as a a result result of of chunking chunking due due to to freque frequentnt repetition repetition (Schwenter (Schwenter andand Torres Torres Cacoullos Cacoullos 2014),2014), tenertener que que usedused for for obligation obligation constitutes constitutes a a relatively relatively recent recent innovation, innovation, whichwhich could could explain explain the the more more conservative conservative bias bias towa towardrd enclisis enclisis (Blas (Blas Arroyo Arroyo 2018; 2018 ;Blas Blas Arroyo Arroyo and and SchulteSchulte 20172017).). TheThe use use of tenerof tener que toque convey to convey obligation obligation comes fromcomes a quasi-modal from a quasi-modal relative construction relative constructionof old Spanish of thatold Spanish was mainly that usedwas mainly with verbs used of with possession. verbs of Ofpossession. those verbs, Of tenerthose que verbs,was tener the most que wasobvious the candidatemost obvious to replace candidate modal constructionsto replace modal with haber constructions de, which was with disappearing haber de, (Olbertzwhich was1998 , disappearingp. 250ff.). Bauman (Olbertz(2013 1998,) examined p. 250ff.). a numberBauman of(2013) written examined corpora a fromnumber the of 18th written and 19th corpora centuries, from theas well18th asand written 19th centuries, and spoken as well 20th as century written corpora. and spoken His results 20th century showed corpora. that tener His que resultshas increased showed thatits absolutetener quefrequency has increased since its the absolute 18th century frequency (see since Figure th3e), 18th taking century over not(see onlyFigure contexts 3), taking that over had notpreviously only contexts belonged that tohad other previously expressions belonged of obligation to other (suchexpressions as deber of (de) obligationand haber (such de, foras deber example), (de) andbut haber probably de, for taking example), up some but featuresprobably of taking their preferences up some features of use asof their well. preferences of use as well.

100% 3% 90% 29% 27% 80%

70% 61% 60% 16% haber de 50% 41% deber (de)

Percentage 40% haber que 30% 25% 8% 53% tener que 20%

10% 6% 22% 8% 0% 18th 19th 20th Century

Figure 3. Increase in frequency of tener que among modal constructions from the 18th to the 20th Figurecentury 3. (adaptedIncrease fromin frequency (Bauman of 2013 tener, p. que 147)). among modal constructions from the 18th to the 20th century (adapted from (Bauman 2013, p. 147)). The degree of unithood in emerging periphrases or constructions can be tracked by looking at the possibilityThe degree of insertion of unithood of intervening in emerging material. periphrases Olbertz or(1998 constructions) notes a pattern can be that tracked became by commonlooking at in thethe possibility use of tener queof insertionin sentences of likeinterveningTenemos panmaterial. que comer Olbertz‘We have (1998) bread notes to eat’. a pattern The antecedent that became of the commoninfinitival in clause the use [que of comer tener] que (i.e., inpan sentences‘bread’) startedlike Tenemos to be implicitpan que mostcomer of ‘We the time,have andbread this to resulted eat’. The in antecedentque following of the the infinitival finite verb clause and preceding [que comer the] (i.e., infinitive pan ‘bread’) (i.e., tenemos started øto que be comerimplicit), just most as prepositionsof the time, anddo inthis other resulted periphrases in que following (p. 252). the Despite finite this verb conventionalization and preceding the infinitive of tener que (i.e.,as tenemos a modal ø periphrasis,que comer), just as prepositions do in other periphrases (p. 252). Despite this conventionalization of tener que as a modal periphrasis, Olbertz acknowledges that tener que retains a homonymous non-periphrastic lexical construction. The distinction is clearly seen in (17) below:

(17) a. No tengo que decir nada. (Modal obligation periphrastic construction) I don’t have to say anything. b. No tengo nada (que decir). (Lexical construction) I don’t have anything (to say).

In connection to the observation that both English deontic have and Spanish tener ‘have’ allow both alternative uses shown for Spanish in (17), Giammatteo and Marcovecchio (2009) add: “Que el auxiliado no sea obligatoriamente adyacente al auxiliary evidencia la no consolidación plena de la perífrasis”/”The fact that the verb accompanying the auxiliary does not have to be adjacent to it Languages 2020, 5, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 26

In contrast to the very well-established grammaticalized use of ir a with future meaning or poder, where clitics tend to occur preverbally as a result of chunking due to frequent repetition (Schwenter and Torres Cacoullos 2014), tener que used for obligation constitutes a relatively recent innovation, which could explain the more conservative bias toward enclisis (Blas Arroyo 2018; Blas Arroyo and Schulte 2017). The use of tener que to convey obligation comes from a quasi-modal relative construction of old Spanish that was mainly used with verbs of possession. Of those verbs, tener que was the most obvious candidate to replace modal constructions with haber de, which was disappearing (Olbertz 1998, p. 250ff.). Bauman (2013) examined a number of written corpora from the 18th and 19th centuries, as well as written and spoken 20th century corpora. His results showed that tener que has increased its absolute frequency since the 18th century (see Figure 3), taking over not only contexts that had previously belonged to other expressions of obligation (such as deber (de) and haber de, for example), but probably taking up some features of their preferences of use as well.

100% 3% 90% 29% 27% 80%

70% 61% 60% 16% haber de 50% 41% deber (de)

Percentage 40% haber que 30% 25% 8% 53% tener que 20%

10% 6% 22% 8% 0% 18th 19th 20th Century

Figure 3. Increase in frequency of tener que among modal constructions from the 18th to the 20th century (adapted from (Bauman 2013, p. 147)).

The degree of unithood in emerging periphrases or constructions can be tracked by looking at the possibility of insertion of intervening material. Olbertz (1998) notes a pattern that became common in the use of tener que in sentences like Tenemos pan que comer ‘We have bread to eat’. The antecedent of the infinitival clause [que comer] (i.e., pan ‘bread’) started to be implicit most of the time, Languages 5 and this resulted2020, , 33 in que following the finite verb and preceding the infinitive (i.e., tenemos ø que comer17 of), 26 just as prepositions do in other periphrases (p. 252). Despite this conventionalization of tener que as a modalOlbertz periphrasis, acknowledges Olbertz that teneracknowledges que retains athat homonymous tener que retains non-periphrastic a homonymous lexical non-periphrastic construction. The lexicaldistinction construction. is clearly The seen distinction in (17) below: is clearly seen in (17) below:

(17) a. No tengo que decir nada. (Modal obligation periphrastic construction) I don’t have to say anything. b. No tengo nada (que decir). (Lexical construction) I don’t have anything (to say).

InIn connection connection to to the observationobservation that that both both English English deontic deontichave haveand and Spanish Spanishtener tener‘have’ ‘have’ allow allow both bothalternative alternative uses uses shown shown for Spanish for Spanish in (17), in Giammatteo (17), Giammatteo and Marcovecchio and Marcovecchio(2009) add: (2009)“Que add: el auxiliado“Que el auxiliadono sea obligatoriamente no sea obligatoriamente adyacente al ad auxiliaryyacente evidenciaal auxiliary la no evidencia consolidaci laón no plena consolidación de la perífrasis” plena/”The de factla perífrasis”that the verb/”The accompanying fact that the verb the auxiliaryaccompanying does notthe haveauxiliary to be does adjacent not tohave it evidencesto be adjacent the lack to it of periphrastic consolidation” (p. 34). This lack of consolidation, probably as a result of the relatively recent grammaticalization of the construction, will be assumed here to have implications in speakers’ cognitive representations (see Torres Cacoullos 1999) for this proposal with respect to clitic placement in [finite verb + gerund] constructions). I have tried to show that tener holds weak ties to infinitival continuations in relative frequency of use and alternates as a lexical construction (as in 17b). Thus, [tener que + infinitive] displays weak unithood and retains a high degree of analyzability. However, this does not seem to be everything that is drawing tener towards enclisis. In the next section, I propose that the greater analyzability of [tener que + infinitive] results in strong diachronic, semantic, and structural ties with another construction, which, crucially, only allows enclisis. This construction is [haber que ‘must’ + infinitive + clitic], which may compete (and win) as an analogical model against the conventional model for grammaticalized verbs (namely, [clitic + finite verb]).

4.2. [Haber Que + Infinitive + Clitic] as an Analogical Model for [Tener Que + Infinitive] Garachana and Hernández(2017) give evidence of how, as the verb haber (possessive) became impersonal around the 16th century24,[haber que + infinitive] also changed its meaning towards impersonal obligation25. The researchers assume, then, that it was this evolution of [haber que + infinitive] towards impersonality that opened the door for another construction to fill the gap in the expression of personal deontic obligation, namely [tener que + infinitive]. Therefore, as the expression of obligation was split among very few forms, the authors suggest that “puede aventurarse que [ ... ] la perífrasis tener que + infinitivo se creó por analogía a partir de haber que + infinitivo que funcionó como construcción de apoyo.”/”It can be assumed that [ ... ] the tener que + infinitive periphrasis was created by analogy with haber que + infinitive, which functioned as a grounding construction” (p. 137). They conclude that, since the 18th and 19th centuries, [tener que + infinitive] has consolidated as a periphrasis of general obligation in complementary distribution with [haber que + infinitive] for impersonal obligation (see Garachana 2017). This would suggest that tener and haber not only have common origin as verbs of possession, but both also have grammaticalized into obligation, taking over the expression of different types of obligation (Martínez Díaz 2003). Therefore, diachronically and semantically, [tener que + infinitive] is very closely linked to [haber que + infinitive]. These constructions are also linked in other ways that make it evident that tener que finds in haber que a very likely analogical model for VCP. In this section, I would like to propose how, under the assumption that the components of a construction can keep ties to their use outside of the construction (Brown and Rivas 2012), the subordinating conjunction que can also lead to the conclusion that [haber

24 Third-person singular jumped from 50% in the 15th century to 90% in the 19th century, and reached 100% in the 18th century (Garachana and Hernández 2017, p. 133). 25 [haber que + infinitive] was used with personal value 100% until the 15th century and went to 90% impersonal in the 16th century. Languages 2020, 5, x FOR PEER REVIEW 18 of 26

Languages 2020, 5, 33 18 of 26

que + infinitive] constitutes an analogical model for the tener que construction when it comes to VCP. As before, I will draw onFigure frequency 4. Sub-units data fromof the [ thetengo Corpus que] ‘have del to’ Españolconstruction. (Davies 2002) and on graphic representations of exemplar models (Bybee 1985, 1988, 2001) in order to show how the internal structure of the tenerFrom que Nconstruction = 2000 tokens canof data be analyzableof que (as both into a subordinating component sub-unitsconjunction (see and Figure a relative4 below) pronoun) that still in the 1900s of the Corpus del Español (Davies 2002-), I extracted all but 11 tokens that actually hold tight bonds with their occurrence in other constructions. Below, I add some data to that which corresponded to the interrogative pronoun qué, which was misspelled without the accent in the has already been presented about tengo to show how speakers’ previous experience with que as used in transcription. Six tokens that introduced direct quotations were also excluded, given the intertextual Languages 2020, 5, x FOR PEER REVIEW 26 18 of 26 othernature constructions of quotations can that also makes lead tothe an clause enclisis introduced bias . by que special. Table 3 shows the results for the items following que. We observe that only 6% of the N = 1983 tokens are followed by an infinitive (18). The rest of the time, que was followed by a finite verb (19), or by another element (NPs, PPs, etc.) (20). This result points to how restricted the use of que followed by an infinitive in Spanish is.

Table 3. The three main linguistic items following que (N = 1983).

Occurrences Following Item Number % que + (Adv) V 1310 66% que + NP/nominal clause/Adv/PP 551 28% Figure 4. tengo que Figure 4. Sub-unitsque + Infinitive of the [tengo que]] ‘have‘have 122 to’to’ construction.construction. 6%

(18) Fromque + InfinitiveN = 2000 tokens of data of que (as both a subordinating conjunction and a relative pronoun) in theLos 1900s poetas of thetienen Corpus quedel Españolescribir (Davies lo 2002-),máximo I extracted posible all(CDE: but 19-OR: 11 tokens Entrevista that (ABC))actually corresponded the poets to have- the PRSinterrogative.3PL to pronoun write qué the, which maximum was misspelled possible without the accent in the ‘Poets have to write as much as possible’ transcription. Six tokens that introduced direct quotations were also excluded, given the intertextual

nature of quotations that makes the clause introduced by que special. Table 3 shows the results for (19) que + (Adv) + V the itemsSin embargo following, la que . Wegrabación observe thatque onlyprefiero 6% of the N = 1983en tokensla actualidad are followed es by anla infinitive (18). Thehowever, rest of the thetime, que recording was followed that by prefer- a finitePRS verb.1SG (19), in or theby another present element is (NPs, the PPs, etc.) (20). This result points to how restricted the use of que followed by an infinitive in Spanish is. “Misa en Si menor” de Bach (Entrevista (ABC) CDE: 19-OR) “Misa en Si menor”Table 3.by The Bachthree main linguistic items following que (N = 1983). “However, the recording that I prefer at present is the ‘…’ by Bach” Occurrences (20) que + NP/nominal clause/Adv/PPFollowing Item Number % ¿Cuándo descubrió que usted+ (Adv) que V el piano 1310 lo 66%era when discover-PSTque.PRET + NP/nominal.2SG you clause/Adv/PP that the piano 551 it 28% be- PST.IPFV.3SG que + Infinitive 122 6% todo en su vida? (Entrevista (ABC) CDE: 19-OR) everything in your life (18) que + Infinitive ‘When did you discover that the piano was everything for you in life?’ Los poetas tienen que escribir lo máximo posible (CDE: 19-OR: Entrevista (ABC)) the poetsA closer have- examinationPRS.3PL to of the N write= 122 instances the of que maximum + infinitive possible shows that only two elements ‘Poetsalmost have exclusively to writeTable precede as much 3. The this as three constr possible’ mainuction linguistic (Table items4). They following are the queverbs(N tener= 1983). (21) and haber (22). This constitutes clear evidence of a very strong connection between que + infinitive and only these Occurrences (19) quetwo + (Adv)verbs. + V Sin embargo, la grabaciónFollowing Itemque prefiero Numberen la %actualidad es la however, the recordingque + (Adv) thatV prefer-PRS.1 1310SG in the 66% present is the que + NP/nominal clause/Adv/PP 551 28% “Misa en Si menor” deque + InfinitiveBach (Entrevista (ABC) CDE: 122 19-OR) 6% “Misa en Si menor” by Bach “However, the recording that I prefer at present is the ‘…’ by Bach” 26 One variable that Davies introduced to the study of Contemporary Spanish was the nature of the preceding material. He (20) quereplicated + NP/nominal what was true clause/Adv/PP for older stages of Spanish, namely that constructions preceded by the subordinating conjunction que ‘that’ appear in proclitic position more often than with the coordinating conjunction y ‘and’. ¿Cuándo descubrió usted que el piano lo era when discover-PST.PRET.2SG you that the piano it be-PST.IPFV.3SG

todo en su vida? (Entrevista (ABC) CDE: 19-OR) everything in your life ‘When did you discover that the piano was everything for you in life?’

A closer examination of the N = 122 instances of que + infinitive shows that only two elements almost exclusively precede this construction (Table 4). They are the verbs tener (21) and haber (22). This constitutes clear evidence of a very strong connection between que + infinitive and only these two verbs.

Languages 2020, 5, x FOR PEER REVIEW 19 of 26

Table 4. Verbs preceding que + infinitive (N = 122). Languages 2020, 5, 33 19 of 26 Occurrences Preceding Verb Number % A closer examinationtener ‘have’ of the N = 122 instances of77que + infinitive shows63% that only two elements almost exclusivelyhaber precede ‘there this be’ construction (Table4). 42 They are the verbs 34%tener (21) and haber (22). This constitutes clearOther evidence27 of a very strong connection3 between que + infinitive3% and only these two verbs.

(21) tener + que + Infinitive …sólo tengo que tapar las cuatro cuerdas con la only have-PRS.1SG to cover the four strings with the

mano. (Entrevista (ABC) CDE: 19-OR) hand ‘I only have to press the four strings with the hand’

(22) haber + que + Infinitive hay que tener paciencia (Entrevista (ABC) CDE: 19-OR) there be-PRS.3SG to have patience ‘one has to have patience’

In a way that would approximate Bybee’s Network Model as extended to grammaticalizing constructions (Bybee 1998, 2010),Table Figu 4. Verbsre 5 precedingbelow displaysque + infinitive the data (N offered= 122). so far. As noted in the upper section of the figure, tengo shows a very weak associationOccurrences with infinitival continuation, which suggests a low degree of unithood between tener and infinitives (as shown earlier). When we now Preceding Verb Number % add data on the uses of que elsewhere, we note that que is usually followed by a finite verb (V) (66%), but in the rare instances when an infinitivetener ‘have’ follows que (only 77 6% of the 63%tokens in the present dataset), haber ‘there be’ 42 34% the finite verb preceding que is only oneOther of27 two: tener or haber3. Crucially, 3% haber, the one I am arguing here functions as the analogical model for VCP with tener que, only allows enclisis. So, by looking at the associations that the components of the [tener que + infinitive] construction hold with other constructions,In a way it becomes that would clear approximate why enclisis Bybee’s is the preferred Network position Model for as extendedclitics. to grammaticalizing constructions (Bybee 1998, 2010), Figure5 below displays the data o ffered so far. As noted in the upper section of the figure, tengo shows a very weak association with infinitival continuation, which suggests a low degree of unithood between tener and infinitives (as shown earlier). When we now add data on the uses of que elsewhere, we note that que is usually followed by a finite verb (V) (66%), but in the rare instances when an infinitive follows que (only 6% of the tokens in the present dataset), the finite verb preceding que is only one of two: tener or haber. Crucially, haber, the one I am arguing here functions as the analogical model for VCP with tener que, only allows enclisis. So, by looking at the associations that the components of the [tener que + infinitive] construction hold with other constructions, it becomes clear why enclisis is the preferred position for clitics.

27 Other cases include: resulta que + infinitive (CDE:19-OR, Entrevista (ABC)), Pensaba yo que + infinitive (CDE:19-OR, Entrevista (ABC)), ... cajón de sastre del que + infinitive (CDE:19-OR, Entrevista (ABC)).

27 Other cases include: resulta que + infinitive (CDE:19-OR, Entrevista (ABC)), Pensaba yo que + infinitive

(CDE:19-OR, Entrevista (ABC)), …cajón de sastre del que + infinitive (CDE:19-OR, Entrevista (ABC)). Languages 2020, 5, x FOR PEER REVIEW 20 of 26 Languages 2020, 5, 33 20 of 26

Figure 5. Diagram of links between construction components with their use in their constructions.

FigureIn 5. this Diagram section, of Ilinks hope between to have construction shown how componen [tener quets with+ infinitive] their use in is their diachronically, constructions. semantically, and structurally linked to [haber que + infinitive]. I argue that the strength of these links together with In this section, I hope to have shown how [tener que + infinitive] is diachronically, semantically, the fact that haber que selects enclisis categorically (Davies 1995) makes [haber que + infinitive + clitic] and structurally linked to [haber que + infinitive]. I argue that the strength of these links together with an analogical model for [tener que + infinitive], pulling the latter away from the growing tendency the fact that haber que selects enclisis categorically (Davies 1995) makes [haber que + infinitive + clitic] towards proclisis. an analogical model for [tener que + infinitive], pulling the latter away from the growing tendency towards5. Conclusions proclisis.

5. ConclusionsVariable Clitic Placement (VCP) has been a hot topic within linguistics for years. Here, I have shown how usage-based perspectives of language can account for this phenomenon as speakers Variableexperience Clitic it in Placement naturalistic (VCP) language has use.been Thisa hot study topic contributed within linguistics a variationist for years. analysis Here, of I VCPhave in the shownvariety how ofusage-based Spanish spoken perspectives by educated of language speakers incan Buenos account Aires, for Argentina.this phenomenon The results as speakers indicated that experienceVCP grammar it in naturalistic is constrained language by use. lexical This (finite study verb) contributed and semantic a variationist (animacy) analysis factors. of ConsideringVCP in the the varietyfinite of Spanish verb construction spoken by as educated the main speakers constraint in onBuenos VCP, Aires, the study Argentina. focused The on usage-basedresults indicated accounts that VCPof the grammar gradience is constrained attested across by lexical finite verb(finite constructions. verb) and semantic Grammaticalized (animacy) factors. meaning Considering and increased the finitefrequency verb construction tend to account as the for main VCP constraint in general. on However,VCP, the study the [tener focused que +oninfinitive] usage-based construction accounts was of thefound gradience exceptional attested in across that it finite favors verb enclisis cons despitetructions. its grammaticalizedGrammaticalized meaningmeaning of and obligation increased and its frequencyhigh frequencytend to account of use. for Using VCP data in general. from a largerHowever, corpus, the I[tener then que showed + infinitive] that the construction [tener que + infinitive] was foundconstruction exceptional seemsin that toit favors be at anenclisis earlier despite stage its of grammaticalized grammaticalization meaning than ir of a obligationand poder .and Its its lack of high unithoodfrequency of oftener use.with Using infinitives data from and a larger the possibility corpus, ofI then intervening showed material that the signaled[tener que great + infinitive] analyzability constructionof [tener seems que + infinitive].to be at an Finally, earlier anotherstage of construction grammaticalization that categorically than ir a takesand poder enclisis. Its andlack which of is unithoodstrongly of linkedtener with to [tener infinitives que + infinitive] and the diachronically, possibility of semantically, intervening andmaterial structurally signaled was great suggested analyzabilityas a likely of analogical[tener que + model infinitive]. for VCP Finally, with anothertener que construction. In this way, that I have categorically illustrated takes how usage-basedenclisis and whichlinguistics is strongly can capture linked this to instance[tener que of + morphosyntacticinfinitive] diachronically, variation. semantically, and structurally was suggestedThis studyas a likely poses analogical new questions model for about VCP VCP. with For tener example, que. In this it is way, not I clear haveon illustrated the basis how of what usage-basedaspects speakerslinguistics establish can capture their this initial instance links betweenof morphosyntactic a lexical construction variation. and the analogical model. ThisFor example,study poses in the new case questions of [tener about que + infinitive],VCP. For ex I triedample, to showit is not that clear diachronic on the informationbasis of what stored aspectsin constructions,speakers establish verb their meaning, initial links and constructionbetween a lexical structure construction seem to and converge the analogical to make model. [haber que + For example,infinitive] in athe likely case analogical of [tener que model. + infinitive], Does all I tried this informationto show that workdiachronic in parallel information to map stored exemplars in constructions,together during verb categorization? meaning, and construc Or do speakerstion structure go by someseem typeto converge of construction to make information[haber que + first? infinitive]How woulda likely one analogical test the existencemodel. Does and strengthall this information of these links work between in parallel constructions to map experimentally?exemplars togetherHow during do children categorization? acquire these Or do relations speakers between go by exemplars some type in of order construction to arrive information at adult-like first? grammar? How would one test the existence and strength of these links between constructions experimentally? Languages 2020,, 5,, xx FORFOR PEERPEER REVIEWREVIEW 21 of 26 Languages 2020, 5, x FOR PEER REVIEW 21 of 26 Languages 2020, 5, x FOR PEER REVIEW 21 of 26 HowLanguages do 2020children, 5, x FOR acquire PEER REVIEWthese relations between exemplars in order to arrive at adult-like grammar?21 of 26 How do children acquire these relations between exemplars in order to arrive at adult-like grammar? These and other questions would not only expand our understanding of VCP, but also that of the TheseHow doand children other questions acquire these would relations not only between expand exem ourplars understanding in order to arriveof VCP, at adult-likebut also that grammar? of the natureHow do of children language acquire itself. Here,these Irelations hope to betweenhave shown exem howplars usage-based in order to linguisticsarrive at adult-like provides grammar? powerful natureThese ofand language other questions itself. Here, would I hope not to only have expand shown howour understanding usage-based linguistics of VCP, providesbut also thatpowerful of the toolsTheseLanguages to and approach2020 other, 5, 33 questionsthese important would questions.not only expand our understanding of VCP, but also that of21 ofthe 26 toolsnature to ofapproach language these itself. important Here, I hope questions. to have shown how usage-based linguistics provides powerful naturetools to of approach language these itself. important Here, I hope questions. to have shown how usage-based linguistics provides powerful Funding:tools to approach This research these received important no external questions. funding. Funding:These and This other research questions received would no external not onlyfunding. expand our understanding of VCP, but also that of the Acknowledgments:Funding:nature of This language research TheThe itself. received authorauthor Here, isis no gratefulgrateful I external hope toto funding.EsthEsth haveer shownL. Brown how and usage-based Javier Rivas for linguistics their role providesin the editorship powerful of Acknowledgments:Funding: This research The received author is no grateful external to funding.Esther L. Brown and Javier Rivas for their role in the editorship of this paper and the special issue to which it is being submitted.itted. SpecialSpecial thanksthanks alsoalso toto threethree anonymousanonymous reviewersreviewers thisAcknowledgments:tools paper to approachand the special theseThe issueauthor important to is which grateful questions. it is to being Esth submer L. Brownitted. Special and Javier thanks Rivas also for to theirthree roleanonymous in the editorship reviewers of forAcknowledgments: insightful comments, The author to Rena is gratefulTorres Cacoullos,to Esther L. Karen Brown Miller, and Javier and RivasDora forLaCasse their role for intheir the editorshipfeedback on of forthis insightful paper and comments, the special toissue Rena to whichTorres it Cacoullos,is being subm Karenitted. Miller, Special and thanks Dora also LaCasse to three for anonymous their feedback reviewers on previousthisFunding: paper versions andThis the research ofspecial this receivedmanuscript, issue to nowhich external as wellit is being funding.as to thesubm audiencesitted. Special at the thanks 43rd Newalso to Ways three of anonymous Analyzing reviewersVariation previousfor insightful versions comments, of this manuscript, to Rena Torres as well Cacoullos, as to the audiencesKaren Miller, at the and 43rd Dora New LaCasse Ways of for Analyzing their feedback Variation on conference.for insightful comments, to Rena Torres Cacoullos, Karen Miller, and Dora LaCasse for their feedback on conference.previousAcknowledgments: versions of Thethis authormanuscript, is grateful as well to as Esther to the L. audiences Brown and atJavier the 43rd Rivas New for Ways their roleof Analyzing in the editorship Variation of previous versions of this manuscript, as well as to the audiences at the 43rd New Ways of Analyzing Variation Conflictsconference.this paper of and Interest: the special The author issue to declares which it no is conflict being submitted. of interest. Special thanks also to three anonymous reviewers Conflictsconference.for insightful of Interest: comments, The toauthor Rena declares Torres Cacoullos, no conflict Karen of interest. Miller, and Dora LaCasse for their feedback on previous Conflictsversions of of this Interest: manuscript, The author as well declares as to the no audienceconflict of at interest. the 43rd New Ways of Analyzing Variation conference. AppendixConflicts of A. Interest: Exclusions The author as Part declares of Data no Cleaningconflict of interest.in Corpus Study AppendixConflicts of A. Interest: ExclusionsThe author as Part declares of Data no Cleaning conflict of interest.in Corpus Study Appendix A. Exclusions as Part of Data Cleaning in Corpus Study (a) Tokens with (DAT + ACCACC) clitic clusters such as me,, tete,, sese,, or nosnos followedfollowed byby lo,, loslos,, lala,, andand laslas ((A1)((A1) (a)Appendix Tokens withA. Exclusions (DAT + ACC as) cliticPart ofclusters Data Cleaningsuch as me in, te Corpus, se, or nosStudy followed by lo, los, la, and las ((A1) andAppendix (A2)) (N A. = Exclusions198). as Part of Data Cleaning in Corpus Study and(a) Tokens(A2)) (N with = 198). (DAT + ACC) clitic clusters such as me, te, se, or nos followed by lo, los, la, and las ((A1) (a) Tokens with (DAT + ACC) clitic clusters such as me, te, se, or nos followed by lo, los, la, and las ((A1) and (A2))(a) Tokens (N = 198). with (dat + acc) clitic clusters such as me, te, se, or nos followed by lo, los, la, and las and(A1) (A2)) Me (N = 198). lo h-ic-e de un color sepia, oscur-it-o, (XXVII, 325:20) ((A1) andMe (A2)) (N =lo198). (A1) me-DAT.1SG it-ACC.M.3SG h-ic-edo-PRET .1SG deof un a-M .SG colorcolor sepia,sepia, oscur-it-o,dark-DIM- M(XXVII,.SG, 325:20) me-DAT.1SG it-ACC.M.3SG do-PRET.1SG of a-M.SG color sepia, dark-DIM-M.SG, (A1) me-MeDAT .1SG itlo-ACC .M.3SG do-h-ic-ePRET .1SG of de a-unM. SG color color sepia,sepia, dark-oscur-it-o,DIM-M .(XXVII,SG, 325:20) (A1) ‘IMe did it (for myself)lo on darkishh-ic-e sepia’ de un color sepia, oscur-it-o, (XXVII, 325:20) ‘Ime- didDAT it (for.1SG myself) it-ACC on.M darkish.3SG do-sepia’PRET .1SG of a-M.SG color sepia, dark-DIM-M.SG, ‘I did it (for myself) on darkish sepia’ me-‘I didDAT it .1(forSG myself)it-ACC on.M .3darkishSG do- sepia’PRET .1SG of a-M.SG color sepia, dark-DIM-M.SG, (A2) esa observación me la han- hecho much-ísim-a-s (XXXI, (A2) esa‘I did it (for observación myself) on darkishme sepia’ la han- hecho much-ísim-a-s (XXXI, (A2) esa observación[…] me la han- hecho much-ísim-a-s454:3) (XXXI, (A2) esa […] observación me la han- hecho 454:3)much-ísim-a-s (XXXI, that- […]observation me- it- have- do- 454:3)many- SUP-F-PL (A2) that-esa observation observación me-me itla- have-han- do-hecho many-much-ísim-a-sSUP-F-PL (XXXI, […] me- it- 454:3)SUP F PL that-F.S observation[…] DAT.1SG ACC.M.3SG have-3PL do-PTCP many- - - F.S […][…] DAT.1SG ACC.M.3SG 3PL PTCP 454:3) Fthat-.S […]observation DATme-.1SG ACCit- .M.3SG 3have-PL PTCPdo- many-SUP-F-PL ‘manythat- haveobservation made that observationme- to me’ it- have- do- many-SUP-F-PL ‘manyF.S have[…] made that observationDAT.1SG to me’ ACC.M.3SG 3PL PTCP ‘many have made that observation to me’ F‘many.S have[…] made that observationDAT.1SG to me’ACC .M.3SG 3PL PTCP (b) Tokens with ser ‘be’ + adjective + Infinitive, which show invariable enclisis (A3) (N = 3). (b) Tokens‘many with have ser made ‘be’ + that adjective observation + Infinitive, to me’ which show invariable enclisis (A3) (N = 3). (b) Tokens with ser ‘be’ + adjective + Infinitive, which show invariable enclisis (A3) (N = 3). (b) Tokens with ser ‘be’ + adjective + Infinitive, which show invariable enclisis (A3) (N = 3). (b) Tokens with ser ‘be’ + adjective + Infinitive, which show invariable enclisis (A3) (N = 3). (b)(A3) Tokens enwith ser ‘be’ una + adjectivemujer... + esté... Infinitive, which es showmás invariablefácil enclisisentender- (A3)lo.. (IX,(IX, (N 140:2) 140:2)= 3). entender-lo. (IX, 140:2) (A3) enin unaa-F mujer...woman… esté... hm… esis másmore fácileasy understand-it-ACC.M.3SG in a-F woman… hm… is more easy understand-it-ACC.M.3SG (A3) inen a- unaF woman…mujer... esté... hm… is es moremás easyfácil understand-entender-loit. (IX,-ACC 140:2).M.3SG (A3) ‘Iten is easier una to understand mujer... it esté... in a woman’ es más fácil entender-lo. (IX, 140:2) ‘Itin is easier a-toF understandwoman… it in hm…a woman’ is more easy understand-it-ACC.M.3SG ‘It is easier to understand it in a woman’ in‘It is easiera- toF understandwoman… it in hm… a woman’ is more easy understand-it-ACC.M.3SG (c) Tokens with haber que ‘have to’ + Infinitive, which also show invariable enclisis (A4) (N = 46). (c) Tokens with‘It is easierhaber queto understand ‘have to’ +it Infinitive,in a woman’ which also show invariable enclisis (A4) (N = 46). (c) Tokens with haber que ‘have to’ + Infinitive, which also show invariable enclisis (A4) (N = 46). (c) Tokens(c) Tokens with withhaberhaber que ‘have que ‘have to’ + to’Infinitive,+ Infinitive, which which also show also show invariable invariable enclisis enclisis (A4) (A4)(N = (N46).= 46). (A4) Hay que hacer-lo con precisión (XIV, 223:1) (c) (A4) Tokens Haywith haber que ‘have que to’ + Infinitive,hacer-lo which alsocon show invariable precisión enclisis (XIV,(A4) 223:1)(N = 46). (A4) Hayhave- PRS.3SG queto hacerdo- it-lo-ACC .M.3SG conwith precisiónprecision (XIV, 223:1) have-PRS.3SG to do- it-ACC.M.3SG with precision (A4) have-Hay PRS.3SG to que do-hacer it-ACC-lo .M.3SG withcon precision precisión (XIV, 223:1) (A4) ‘One‘OneHay hashas toto dodo itit withwith que precision’precision’ hacer -lo con precisión (XIV, 223:1) ‘Onehave- hasPRS to.3 SGdo it withto precision’ do- it-ACC.M.3SG with precision have-PRS.3SG to do- it-ACC.M.3SG with precision ‘One has to do it with precision’ (d) Tokens ‘Oneof clitics has to used do it in with juxtaposed precision’ or coordinated constructions (A5) (N = 7). (d) Tokens(d) Tokens of clitics of clitics used usedin juxtaposed in juxtaposed or coordinated or coordinated constructions constructions (A5) (N (A5) = 7). (N = 7). (d) Tokens of clitics used in juxtaposed or coordinated constructions (A5) (N = 7). (d) Tokens of clitics used in juxtaposed or coordinated constructions (A5) (N = 7). (A5) puede adquirir ese cuadr-it-o- y tenerlo- y disfrutarlo (IX, (d) (A5) Tokens puede of clitics adquirir used in ese juxtaposed cuadr-it-o or coordinated- y constructions tenerlo- (A5) (Ny = 7). disfrutarlo (IX, (A5) puede adquirir ese cuadr-it-o- y tenerlo- y disfrutarlo150:3) (IX, (A5) puede adquirir ese cuadr-it-o- y tenerlo- y 150:3) disfrutarlo (IX, can- purchase that-M.SG painting-DIM-M and have-it- and 150:3)enjoy- it- (A5) can-puede purchase adquirir that- ese M.SG painting- cuadr-it-oDIM- -M andy have-tenerlo-it- andy enjoy- disfrutarloit- (IX, M SG DIM M have-it- enjoy-150:3)it- can-3SG purchase that- . painting- - and ACC.M.3SG and ACC.M.3SG 3SG ACC.M.3SG ACC150:3).M .3SG 3can-SG purchase that-M.SG painting-DIM-M and ACChave-.M.3it-SG and ACCenjoy-.M.3it-SG ‘can‘cancan- purchasepurchasepurchase thatthat littlelittle that- paintipaintiM.SGng andpainting- gave it,DIM and-M enjoyand it’ have-it- and enjoy-it- ‘can3SG purchase that little painting and gave it, and enjoy it’ ACC.M.3SG ACC.M.3SG 3SG ACC.M.3SG ACC.M.3SG ‘can purchase that little painting and gave it, and enjoy it’ (e) A token‘can thatpurchase appeared that little as truncated painting and (A6) gave (N it, = and1). enjoy it’ (e) A token(e) A tokenthat appeared that appeared as truncated as truncated (A6) (N (A6) = 1). (N = 1).

(e) A token that appeared as truncated (A6) (N = 1). (e)(A6) A tokenporque that appeared as truncatedlo (A6) (N =tiene 1). que... (XXIX, 383:19) lo (A6) porqueBecause it-ACC.M.3SG tienehave-3. SG que...to… (XXIX, 383:19) Because it-ACC.M.3SG have-3.SG to… (A6) Becauseporque it-loACC .M.3SG have-3.tiene SG to… que... (XXIX, 383:19) (A6) ‘becauseporque (s)he has to…’lo tiene que... (XXIX, 383:19) ‘becauseBecause (s)he has to…’it- ACC.M.3SG have-3.SG to… ‘because (s)he has to…’ Because‘because (s)he has to…’it-ACC .M.3SG have-3.SG to… (f) Tokens for which the referent of the clitic could not be identified (N = 7). ‘because (s)he has to…’

Languages 2020, 5, x FOR PEER REVIEW 22 of 26 Languages 2020, 5, x FOR PEER REVIEW 22 of 26 Languages 2020, 5, x FOR PEER REVIEW 22 of 26 (f) Tokens for which the referent of the clitic could not be identified (N = 7). Languages(f) Tokens 2020 for, 5 ,which 33 the referent of the clitic could not be identified (N = 7). 22 of 26 (f) Tokens for which the referent of the clitic could not be identified (N = 7). (A7) Méjico va a tener-lo mucho auténticamente americano nosotros (XXX, tener-lo (A7) Méjico va a másmucho auténticamente queamericano 414:6)nosotros (XXX, (A7) Méjico va a tener-lo muchomás auténticamente americanoque nosotros414:6) (XXX, Mexico go- to have-it- much authentically American us Mexico go- to have-it- másmuch authentically queAmerican 414:6)us 3.SG ACC.M.3SG more than Mexico go-SG to have-ACC.Mit-.3SG much authentically American us ‘Mexico is going3. to have it more authenticallymore American than us’ than 3.SG ACC.M.3SG more than ‘Mexico is going to have it more authentically American than us’ ‘Mexico is going to have it more authentically American than us’ (g) Tokens in which there was intervening material between the finite and non-finite verbs (N = 3).

(g) Tokens in which there was intervening material between the finite and non-finite verbs (N = 3). (g) Tokens(g) Tokens in which in which there there was intervening was intervening material material between between the finite the finite and and non-finite non-finite verbs verbs (N (N= 3).= 3). (A8) no podemos... los trabajos ésos ahí en el Ides exponerlos en mitades. (XXI, 17:10) (A8) no podemos... los trabajos ésos ahí en el Ides exponerlos en mitades. (XXI, 17:10) we can’t…the Works those there at the Ides expose-them.ACC.M.3PL in halves. (A8) nowe podemos... can’t…the losWorks trabajos those ésos there ahí at en the el Ides exposeexponerlos-them. enACC mitades..M.3PL (XXI,in halves. 17:10)

we can’t…the Works those there at the Ides expose-them.ACC.M.3PL in halves. (h) Contexts of a finite verb followed by multiple non-finite forms (N = 25) were identified. Of (h) Contexts of a finite verb followed by multiple non-finite forms (N = 25) were identified. Of those,(h) Contexts only the of instances a finite verb that followed allowed onlyby multip two cliticle non-finite positions forms (as in (N examples = 25) were (A9a,b)) identified. were Of (h)those, Contexts only theof a instances finite verb that followed allowed by only multip twole clitic non-finite positions forms (as in(N examples = 25) were (A9a,b)) identified. were Of included includedthose, only in thethe analysisinstances (N that = 11). allowed Cases only in which two clitic the clitic positions could (as occupy in examples an additional (A9a,b)) third were position those,in the only analysis the instances (N = 11). that Cases allowed in which only thetwo clitic cliticcould positions occupy (as in an examples additional (A9a,b)) third positionwere (as in (asincluded in examples in the (A9analysis c, d)) (N were = 11). excluded Cases in(N which = 14). the clitic could occupy an additional third position includedexamples in (A9 the c,analysis d)) were (N excluded = 11). Cases (N = in14). which the clitic could occupy an additional third position (as in examples (A9 c, d)) were excluded (N = 14). (as in examples (A9 c, d)) were excluded (N = 14). (A9) a. lo tiene que haber matado. (XXXI, 439:1)28 (A9) a. lo tiene que haber matado. (XXXI, 439:1)28 ACC M SG it- - 3 has to have killed 28 (A9) a. loit- ACC-M3SG tienehas queto haber have matado. killed (XXXI, 439:1) ‘he/she must have killed it’ it-ACC-M3SG has to have killed ‘he/she must have killed it’ ‘he/she must have killed it’ b. lo debo haber tenido adentro (XVI, 239:9) b. lo debo haber tenido adentro (XVI, 239:9) it-ACC-M3SG must have had inside b. loit- ACC-M3SG debo haber tenido adentro (XVI, 239:9) I must have had it inside’ must have had inside it-ACC-M3SG must have had inside I must have had it inside’ I must have had it inside’ c. hay que uno jamás las va volver a ver (I, 17:5) c. hay que uno jamás las va volver a ver (I, 17:5) materias c. haymaterias que uno jamás las va volver a ver (I, 17:5) EXIST that one never them-ACC-F3PL go to return to see materiasEXIST that one never them-ACC-F3PL go to return subjects to see EXISTsubjects that one never them-ACC-F3PL go to return to see ‘there are subjects that one will never encounter again’ subjects ‘there are subjects that one will never encounter again’ ‘there are subjects that one will never encounter again’ d. no queríamos seguirlo viendo todos los días d. no queríamos seguirlo viendo todos los días NEG want.PRET.1PL keep = it-ACC- see.GER all the days d. noNEG queríamoswant.PRET .1PL seguirlokeep = it- ACC- viendosee.GER todosall los the días days M3SG NEG want.PRET.1PL keepM3SG = it-ACC- see.GER all the days ‘We didn’t want to keep seeing it every day.’ (XXII, 99:9) M3SG ‘We didn’t want to keep seeing it every day.’ (XXII, 99:9) ‘We didn’t want to keep seeing it every day.’ (XXII, 99:9) OtherOther cases cases were were extracted, extracted, but but were were excluded excluded for for the the analysis analysis because because they they either either display display no no variationvariationOther in in casesclitic clitic placement,were placement, extracted, or or because because but were very very excluded few few tokens tokens for thewere were analysis found found becauseof of a a given given they construction. construction. either display In In whatno Other cases were extracted, but were excluded for the analysis because they either display no whatvariationfollows, follows, we in exemplifyclitic we exemplifyplacement, such such cases. or because cases. very few tokens were found of a given construction. In variation in clitic placement, or because very few tokens were found of a given construction. In what follows, we exemplify such cases. whatENCLISIS follows, ONLY we exemplify such cases. ENCLISIS ONLY

ENCLISIS- - AllAll constructionsconstructions ONLY consistingconsisting of of a a single single non-finite non-finite form form of of a a verb verb that, that, in in present-day present-day Spanish, Spanish, can ENCLISIS ONLY can-only All only constructions take take the the clitic clitic postverbally.consisting postverbally. of a This single This also non-finitealso includes includes form imperatives imperatives of a verb (N that, =(N165). = in 165). present-day Spanish, - canAll onlyconstructions take the clitic consisting postverbally. of a single This non-finite also includes form imperativesof a verb that, (N in = 165).present-day Spanish, -[ - [gustargustar ‘like’‘like’ ++ Infinitive-Clitic]Infinitive-Clitic] constructions (N(N = 9) can- [gustar only take‘like’ the + Infinitive-Clitic] clitic postverbally. constructions This also includes (N = 9) imperatives (N = 165). (A10)(A10) me me gustar gustaríaíahacerlo hacerlo (XXIV, (XXIV, 210:9) 210:9) - (A10)[gustar ‘like’ me gustaría+ Infinitive-Clitic] hacerlo (XXIV, constructions 210:9) (N = 9) -[ - [tratartratar dede ‘try‘try to’to’ ++ Infinitive-Clitic]Infinitive-Clitic] constructions (N(N = 6) (A10)- [tratar de me ‘try gustaría to’ + Infinitive-Clit hacerlo (XXIV,ic] constructions210:9) (N = 6) (A11)(A11) El El trata trata de de solucionarlos solucionarlos en en lo lo m másás posible posible (V, (V, 93:1) 93:1) - (A11)[tratar de El‘try trata to’ +de Infinitive-Clit solucionarlosic] en constructions lo más posible (N (V,= 6) 93:1) - - ExpressionsExpressions withwith [[valevale lala penapena/da/da penapena‘it’s ‘it’s a a pity’ pity’++ Infinitive]Infinitive] (N(N == 2) (A11)- Expressions El trata with de [solucionarlosvale la pena/da enpena lo ‘it’smás aposible pity’+ Infinitive](V, 93:1) (N = 2) (A12) A mí me da mucha pena- - - dejarlo, abandonarlo (XXIX, 387:17) - Expressions with [ vale la pena/da pena ‘it’s a pity’+ Infinitive] (N = 2)

28 All examples belong to the Corpus de Habla Culta de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires (Barrenechea 1987) and 28 All examples belong to the Corpus de Habla Culta de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires (Barrenechea 1987) and appear followed by the conversation number (XXXI), then the page number (439), and finally the paragraph 2828 AllappearAll examples examples followed belong belong by to the theto the Corpusconversation Corpus de Habla de number Habla Culta de Culta(XXXI), la Ciudad de th laen de Ciudad Buenosthe page Airesde number Buenos (Barrenechea (439), Aires 1987and (Barrenechea )finally and appear the 1987)paragraph followed and by number (1). appearnumberthe conversation followed (1). number by the (XXXI),conversation then the number page number (XXXI), (439), then and the finally page the number paragraph (439), number and finally (1). the paragraph number (1). Languages 2020, 5, 33 23 of 26

-[ dejar de ‘stop’ + Infinitive-Clitic] constructions (N = 2) (A13) así dejás de— llamarlo. (XXIV, 203:11) -[ entrar a ‘begin’ + Infinitive-Clitic] constructions (N = 2) (A14) entraría a respetarla (X, 157:1) -[ andar ‘go’+ Gerund-Clitic] (N = 2) (A15) Pero vos sabés que yo ando persiguiéndolo a este señor (XIV, 203:2) - Constructions occurring only once in the corpus with enclisis: [estar ‘be’ + PP + PP-Clitic] (A15),[haber ‘there be’ + NP + PP-Clitic] (A16), [quedar en ‘agree to’ + Infinitive-Clitic] (A17), as well as [acordarse ‘remember’ + haber ‘having’+ Participle-Clitic] (A18), [animarse a ‘fancy’ + Infinitive-Clitic] (A19), [atreverse a ‘dare’ + infinitive-Clitic] (A20), [comprometerse a ‘commit to’ + Infinitive-Clitic] (A21), [convenir ‘arrange/agree’+ Infinitive-Clitic] (A22), [intentar ‘attempt’ + Infinitive-Clitic] (A23), [lograr ‘achieve’ + Infinitive-Clitic] (A24), [molestar ‘bother’ + Infinitive-Clitic] (A25), [negarse a ‘refuse’ + infinitive-Clitic] (A26), [pensar ‘consider’ + infinitive-Clitic] (A27), [ponerse a ‘start’ + Infinitive-Clitic] (A28), [proponerse ‘intend’ + Infinitive-Clitic] (A29), [pretender ‘pretend’ + Infinitive-Clitic] (A30), and [terinar por ‘end’ + Infinitive-Clitic] (A31). (A16) no estoy en edad de hacerlo tampoco (XIV, 216:5) (A17) no hay forma de aprenderlo (XXII, 88:11) (A18) Quedé en irla a visitar el miércoles. (XXXII, 474:7) (A19) Desde chico me acuerdo haberlo visto (XXVII, 323:3) (A20) ¿Te animás a escucharlo de nuevo? (IV, 69:1) (A21) Es que uno no se atreve a dejarlos a ver qué pasa. (IX, 154:7) (A22) Cada cual se comprometió en su país a seguirlos trabajando... (XXI, 17:20) (A23) si ese juicio me conviene conciliarlo o no (XXIII, 114:3) (A24) intentar criarlo allí (VIII, 128:5) (A25) no logro localizarlo (XXIV, 203:2) (A26) nos molestaba hacerla (VII, 114:3) (A27) se negaba a ponerlos en la mesa (IV, 82:9) (A28) así que piensa emplearlo en un... Un empleo comercial nomás. (V, 88:2) (A29) un día me pongo a hacerla (V, 93:7) (A30) me propuse- - - hacerlo hasta— un momento determinado... (XXI, 57:19) (A31) como él pretendió hacerlo ver (XXIV, 140:6) (A32) a fuerza de escucharlas terminarán por corearlas junto a nosotros (XIX, 285:1)

PROCLISIS ONLY - All cases of a clitic used with a single finite verb were excluded, as they only allow the clitic to appear preverbally (N = 1265). - [Clitic + hacer ‘make’ + Infinitive] constructions (to make someone do something) (N = 12) (A33) El lo hizo correr (XXVIII, 371:12) - [Clitic + ir ‘go’ + Gerund] constructions (N = 11) (A34) Yo las fui guiando (XI, 169:11) - [Clitic + llegar a ‘get to’ + Infinitive] (N = 6) (A35) un poco lo llego a dominar y me aburre después (I, 24:18) - [Clitic + dejar ‘stop’ + Infinitive] (N = 4) (A36) Te está diciendo que lo dejes pensar - [Clitic + volver a ‘do ... again’ + Infinitive] (N = 3) (A37) la he vuelto a hacer (XXIV, 212:5) Languages 2020, 5, 33 24 of 26

- [Clitic + haber ‘there be’ de + Infinitive] constructions (N = 2) (A38) No la ha de saber manejar (XXII, 102:4) - [Clitic + ver ‘see’ + Infinitive] (N = 2) (A39) los veo manejarse en coche (XXIII, 131:11) - [Clitic + deber de ‘must’ + haber ‘have’+ Participle] constructions (N = 2) (A40) Pero él la debe de haber presentido a traves de las sombras (XXIX, 396:1) - [Clitic + invitar a ‘invite to’+ Infinitive] (N = 2) (A41) de tanto en tanto la invite a salir (X, 158:1) - Constructions occurring only once in the corpus with proclisis: [Clitic + dar a entender ‘suggest’] (A41), [Clitic + obligar a ‘force to’ + Infinitive] (A42), [Clitic + mandar (a) ‘have something done’ +Infinitive] (A43), [Clitic + saber ‘know’ + Infinitive] (A44), and [Clitic + terminar de ‘finish’ + Infinitive] (A45). (A42) como lo dan a entender sus títulos (XX, 294:1) (A43) Por eso, los obligó a leer. (XI, 177:12) (A44) No los mandé hacer todavía. (XXIV, 144:7) (A45) no lo sé hacer (XXIV, 158:5) (A46) Todavía no lo terminamos de- - - elaborar (XIV, 213:3)

References

Aijón Oliva, Miguel A. 2011. Variación Sintáctica y creación de estilos: Los clíticos reflexivos en el discurso. In Variación Variable. España: Círculo Rojo, pp. 21–56. Aijón Oliva, Miguel A., and Julio Borrego Nieto. 2013. La variación gramatical como forma y significado: El uso de los clíticos verbales en el español peninsular. Lingüística 29: 93–126. Aissen, Judith L., and David M. Perlmutter. 1976. Clause Reduction in Spanish. In Studies in Relational Grammar 1. Edited by David M. Perlmutter. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 360–404. Barrenechea, Ana M., ed. 1987. El habla culta de la ciudad de Buenos Aires: Materiales Para su Estudio. Buenos Aires: Universidad Nacional de Buenos Aires. Bauman, Joseph R. 2013. Grammaticalization and Variation in the Modal Domain of Obligation: The Evolution of Spanish [tener que + Infinitive]. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, The Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA, USA. Blas Arroyo, José L. 2018. Comparative variationism for the study of language change: Five centuries of competition amongst Spanish deontic periphrases. Journal of Historical Sociolinguistics 4: 177–219. [CrossRef] Blas Arroyo, José L., and Kim Schulte. 2017. Competing modal periphrases in Spanish between the 16th and the 18th centuries. Diachronica 34: 1–39. [CrossRef] Brown, Esther L., and Javier Rivas. 2012. Grammatical relation probability: How usage patterns shape analogy. Language Variation and Change 24: 317–41. [CrossRef] Bybee, Joan. 1985. Morphology: A Study of the Relation between Meaning and Form. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Bybee, Joan. 1988. Morphology as lexical organization. In Theoretical Morphology. Edited by Michael Hammond and Michael Noonan. San Diego: Academic Press. Bybee, Joan. 1998. The emergent lexicon. Chicago Linguistic Society 34: 421–35. Bybee, Joan. 2001. Phonology and language Use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bybee, Joan. 2003. Mechanisms of change in grammaticization: The role of frequency. In The Handbook of Historical Linguistics. Edited by Brian D. Joseph and Richard Janda. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 602–23. Bybee, Joan. 2010. Language, Usage and Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bybee, Joan L., and William Pagliuca. 1987. The evolution of future meaning. In Papers from the 7th International Conference on Historical Linguistics. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, pp. 109–22. Bybee, Joan, and Sandra A. Thompson. 1997. Three frequency effects in syntax. Berkeley Linguistics Society 23: 65–85. [CrossRef] Cinque, Guglielmo. 2006. Restructuring and Functional Heads. Oxford: Oxford University Press, vol. 4. Davies, Mark. 1995. Analyzing Syntactic Variation with Computer-Based Corpora: The Case of Modern Spanish Clitic Climbing. Hispania 78: 370–80. [CrossRef] Languages 2020, 5, 33 25 of 26

Davies, Mark. 1998. The evolution of Spanish clitic climbing: A corpus-based approach. Studia Neophilologica 69: 251–63. [CrossRef] Davies, Mark. 2002. Corpus del Español: 100 Million Words, 1200s–1900s. Available online: http://www. corpusdelespanol.org (accessed on 11 July 2020). DuBois, John W. 1985. Competing motivations. In Iconicity in Syntax. Edited by John Haiman. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 343–65. Fernández Ulloa, Teresa. 2001. Perífrasis verbales en el castellano de Bermeo (Bizkaia). Revista Española de Lingüística/Spanish Journal of Linguistics 30: 1–34. Garachana, Mar. 2017. Perífrasis formadas en torno a tener en español. Ser tenudo/tenido o/a/de + infinitivo, tener a/de + infinitivo, tener que + infinitivo. In La Gramática en la Diacronía. La Evolución de las Perífrasis Verbales Modales en Español. Edited by Mar Garachana. Madrid-Frankfurt: Iberoamericana/Vervuert. Garachana, Mar, and Áxel Hernández. 2017. La reestructuración del sistema perifrástico en el español decimonónico. El caso de haber de/tener de + infinitivo, haber que/tener que + infinitivo. In Herencia e Innovación en el Español del Siglo XIX. Edited by Elena Carpi and Rosa M. García Jiménez. Pisa: Pisa University Press, pp. 127–46. Gerlach, Brigit. 2002. Clitics between Syntax and Lexicon. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, vol. 51. Giammatteo, Graciela M., and Ana M. Marcovecchio. 2009. Perífrasis verbales: Una mirada desde los universales lingüísticos. Sintagma 21: 21–38. Givón, Talmy. 1971. On the verbal origin of the Bantu verb suffixes. Studies in African linguistics 2: 145. Givón, Talmy. 1979. On Understanding Grammar. New York: Academics Press. Givón, Talmy. 1983. Topic continuity in discourse: An introduction. In Topic Continuity in Discourse: A Quantitative Cross-Language Study. Edited by Talmy Givón. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, vol. 3, pp. 1–42. Givón, Talmy. 1992. The grammar of referential coherence as mental processing instructions. Linguistics 30: 5–55. [CrossRef] Givón, Talmy. 1995. Coherence in text vs. coherence in mind. In Coherence in Spontaneous Text. Edited by M. A. Gernsbacher and T. Givón. Pittsburgh: John Benjamins, pp. 59–115. Goldberg, Adele E. 1995. Construction Grammar. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Goldberg, Adele E. 2006. Constructions at Work: The Nature of Generalization in Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Gómez Manzano, Pilar. 1992. Perífrasis Verbales Con Infinitivo: Valores y usos en la Lengua Hablada. Madrid: UNED. González López, Verónica. 2008. Spanish Clitic Climbing. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, The Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA, USA. González López, Verónica. 2013. Asturian identity reflected in pronoun use: Enclisis and proclisis patterns in Asturian Spanish. In Selected Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on Spanish Sociolinguistics. Edited by Ana M. Carvalho and Sara Beaudrie. Somerville: Cascadilla Proceedings Project, pp. 76–86. Gudmestad, Aarnes. 2006. Clitic climbing in Caracas Spanish: A sociolinguistic study of ir and querer. Indiana University Linguistics Club Working Papers 6: 1–14. Heine, Bernd, and Tania Kuteva. 2002. World Lexicon of Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Heine, Bernd, and Mechthild Reh. 1984. Grammaticalization and Reanalysis in African Languages. Hamburg: Helmet Buske. Hopper, Paul J. 1987. Emergent Grammar. Berkeley Linguistics Society 13: 139–57. [CrossRef] Hopper, Paul J., and Elizabeth C. Traugott. 2003. Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Johnson, Daniel E. 2009. Getting off the GoldVarb standard: Introducing Rbrul for mixed-effects variable rule analysis. Language and Linguistics Compass 3: 359–83. [CrossRef] Langacker, Ronald W. 1987. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar: Descriptive Application. Stanford: Stanford University Press, vol. 1. Lewis, David. 1970. General semantics. Synthese 22: 18–67. [CrossRef] Lewis, David. 1979. Scorekeeping in a Language Game. Journal of Philosophical Logic 8: 339–59. [CrossRef] Martínez Díaz, Eva. 2003. La frecuencia de haber y tener en las estructuras perifrásticas de obligación. Algún fenómeno de variación en el español de Cataluña. Interlingüística 14: 691–94. Languages 2020, 5, 33 26 of 26

Matthews, Peter H. 2007. Animacy Hierarchy. The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Linguistics. Available online: https://www-oxfordreference-com.libweb.lib.utsa.edu/view/10.1093/acref/9780199202720.001.0001/acref- 9780199202720-e-173?rskey=reZLMy&result=1 (accessed on 11 July 2020). Miller, D. Gary, and Elly van Gelderen. 2017. Grammaticalization. In Oxford Bibliographies Online: Linguistics. Available online: https://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/view/document/obo-9780199772810/ obo-9780199772810-0019.xml (accessed on 4 September 2020). Myhill, John. 1988. The Grammaticalization of Auxiliaries: Spanish Clitic Climbing. Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 14: 352–63. [CrossRef] Myhill, John. 1989. Variation in Spanish clitic climbing. In Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics 1988. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, pp. 227–50. Myhill, John. 2005. Quantitative methods of discourse analysis. In Quantitative Linguistics: An International Handbook. Edited by Reinhard Köhler, Gabriel Altmann and Rajmund Piotrowski. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 471–98. Napoli, Donna. J. 1981. Semantic Interpretation vs. Lexical Governance: Clitic Climbing in Italian. Language 57: 841–87. [CrossRef] Olbertz, Hella. 1998. Verbal Periphrases in a Functional Grammar of Spanish. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, vol. 22. R Core Team. 2014. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing; R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Available online: http://www.r-project.org (accessed on 11 July 2020). Requena, Pablo E. 2015. Direct Object Clitic Placement Preferences in Argentine Child Spanish. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, The Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA, USA. Rizzi, Luigi. 1976. Ristrutturazione. Rivista Di Grammatica Generativa Roma 1: 1–54. Rizzi, Luigi. 1978. A restructuring rule in Italian syntax. Recent transformational studies in European languages. In Linguistic Inquiry Monograph. Edited by Samuel J. Keyser. Cambridge: MIT Press, vol. 3, pp. 113–58. Russell, B. 1905. On Denoting. Mind, New Series 14: 479–93. [CrossRef] Schwenter, Scott A., and Rena Torres Cacoullos. 2014. Competing constraints on the variable placement of direct object clitics in Mexico City Spanish. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada/Spanish Journal of Applied Linguistics 27: 514–36. [CrossRef] Silva-Corvalán, Carmen. 1994. Language Contact and Change: Spanish in Los Angeles. New York: Oxford University Press. Sinnott, Sarah, and Ella Smith. 2007. ¿Subir o no subir? A Look at Clitic Climbing in Spanish. Paper presented at the 36th New Ways of Analyzing Variation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA, October 12. Strozer, Judith R. 1976. Clitics in Spanish. Ph.D. Dissertation, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA. Suñer, Margarita. 1980. Clitic Promotion in Spanish Revisited. In Contemporary Studies in Romance Languages. Edited by Frank H. Naussel. Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club, pp. 300–30. Tagliamonte, Sali A. 2006. Analysing Sociolinguistic Variation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Torres Cacoullos, Rena. 1999. Construction frequency and reductive change: Diachronic and register variation in Spanish clitic climbing. Language Variation and Change 11: 143–70. [CrossRef] Troya Déniz, Magnolia, and Ana M. Pérez Martín. 2011. Distribución de clíticos con perífrasis verbales en hablantes universitarios de las Palmas de Gran Canaria. Lingüística 26: 9–25. Weinreich, Uriel. 1966. On the semantic structure of language. In Universals of Language, 2nd ed. Report of a Conference Held at Dobbs Ferry, NY, USA, April 13–15. Edited by Joseph H. Greenberg. Cambridge: MIT Press, pp. 114–71. First published 1963. Zabalegui, Nerea. 2008. La posición de los pronombres átonos con verbos no conjugados en el español actual de Caracas. Akademos 10: 83–107.

© 2020 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).