Phases, labeling, antilocality and intonational phrases: recomplementation in Spanish
Abstract
This paper addresses recomplementation (i.e. double-complementizer constructions) in Spanish, comparing Latin American Spanish (LAS) and European Spanish (ES). I make the novel observation that in spite of a superficial difference whereby a lower que after a left dislocate (LD) surfaces in ES but not in LAS, LAS does have recomplementation. In fact, LAS patterns with ES in that there are two constructions in each variety, i.e. a construction in which an intonational break following the LD is present and a construction in which the break is absent. I argue that the constructions with the break differ from the constructions without it with regard to reconstruction effects, no insertion and the position of high adverbs, which arise due to a locality violation in the former but not in the latter. I propose a syntactic analysis in terms of phases and argue that the locality violation is circumvented in the constructions with no break via verb movement, which is not possible in the constructions with the break. I further propose a mapping from the syntactic structures of recomplementation into prosody that correlates with the presence/absence of the intonational break in these constructions, hence providing prosodic evidence for phasal structure more generally.
Acknowledgments
I am indebted to Željko Bošković and Jon Gajewski for their constant support in the development of this project. I am also thankful to Karlos Arregi, Sarah Asinari, Jonathan Bobaljik, Andrea Calabrese, Norbert Corver, Magdalena Kaufmann, Stefan Kaufmann, Renato Lacerda, Sabine Laszakovits, Luis López, Jason Merchant, Emma Nguyen, Jairo Nunes, Hiromune Oda, Ian Roberts, Nic Schrum, Tania Torres Oyarce, Julio Villa-García, Susi Wurmbrand and two anonymous reviewers from Probus for their feedback. I also thank the LSRL 47 audience.
Appendix: Waveforms of sentences with recomplementation
In this appendix, I present waveforms that represent double-complementizer utterances in ES and LAS. The main point here is to show the phonetic presence of the intonational break that I have discussed above. I have noted that in examples like (63), there is a prosodic boundary after the LD in the ES ||+que-construction and the LAS ||+Cnull-construction. In contrast, there is no prosodic boundary following the LD in the ES Ø-construction and the LAS Ø-construction.
| a. | Dice | que | a | la | fiesta | || que | no | quieren | ir. | (ES) |
| b. | Dice | que | a | la | fiesta | || Cnull | no | quieren | ir. | (LAS) |
| c. | Dice | que | a | la | fiesta | Ø | no | quieren | ir. | (ES/LAS) |
| says | that | to | the | party | that | no | want | go |
‘S/He says that they don’t want to go to the party.’
(Villa-García 2015: 21)
The waveforms below show exactly this contrast. The waveforms in (64) and (65), taken from Villa-García (2015: 21–22), show the contrast between the ES ||+que-construction and the ES Ø-construction. In the ES ||+que-construction, where the LD is sandwiched between the two ques, there is an obligatory pause. This is shown in (64). In the ES Ø-construction, where the LD is preceded but not followed by a que, the pause is not present. This is shown in (65).
Waveform of a sentence with recomplementation in the ES ||+que-construction
Waveform of a sentence with recomplementation in the ES Ø-construction
The waveforms in (66) and (67) show the contrast between the LAS ||+Cnull-construction and the LAS Ø-construction. In LAS, both constructions have an LD preceded but not followed by que. Here the intonational break following the LD is optional (though its presence/absence correlates with different structures): (66) illustrates the case where it is present, namely the LAS ||+Cnull-construction, and (67) illustrates the case where it is not present, namely the LAS Ø-construction.
Waveform of a sentence with recomplementation in the LAS ||+Cnull-construction
Waveform of a sentence with recomplementation in the LAS Ø-construction
The discussion in this appendix is by no means conclusive (although suggestive), and further experimental work is needed. Interestingly, there have been other attempts to provide experimental support to the claim that there is an intonational break following the LD. Specifically, Frank and Toribio (2017), who have undertaken experimental work on Cuban Spanish, show that there is indeed a contrast along the lines addressed in this paper regarding the presence/absence of the intonational break in this variety. I thus take that the distinctions suggested by the waveforms in (64)–(67) and Frank and Toribio (2017) indicate the phonetic reality of the prosodic structures argued for in this paper.
References
Abels, Klaus. 2003. Successive cyclicity, antilocality, and adposition stranding. University of Connecticut dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Aelbrecht, Lobke. 2010. The syntactic licensing of ellipsis. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/la.149Search in Google Scholar
Alexiadou, Artemis. 1997. Adverb placement: A case study in antisymmetric syntax. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/la.18Search in Google Scholar
An, Duk-Ho. 2007. Clauses in noncanonical positions at the syntax-phonology interface. Syntax 10. 38–79.10.1111/j.1467-9612.2007.00096.xSearch in Google Scholar
Antonelli, André. 2013. On the left periphery of Spanish complementizerless clauses. In Jennifer Cabrelli Amaro, Gillian Lord, Ana de Prada Pérez & Jessi Alana Aaron (eds.), Selected proceedings of the 16th hispanic linguistics symposium, 15–26. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Search in Google Scholar
Barbosa, Pilar. 2000. Clitics: A window into the null subject property. In João Costa (ed.), Portuguese syntax. New comparative studies, 31–94. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Barbosa, Pilar. 2009. Two kinds of subject pro. Studia Linguistica 63. 2–58.10.1111/j.1467-9582.2008.01153.xSearch in Google Scholar
Bellert, Irena. 1977. On semantic and distributional properties of sentential adverbs. Linguistic Inquiry 8. 337–351.Search in Google Scholar
Bocci, Giuliano. 2013. The syntax-prosody interface: A cartographic perspective with evidence from Italian. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/la.204Search in Google Scholar
Boeckx, Cedric. 2005. Some notes on bounding. Ms Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.Search in Google Scholar
Bošković, Željko. 1994. D-structure, theta-criterion, and movement into theta-positions. Linguistic Analysis 24. 247–286.Search in Google Scholar
Bošković, Željko. 1997. The syntax of nonfinite complementation: An economy approach. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar
Bošković, Željko. 2001. On the nature of the syntax-phonology interface: Cliticization and related phenomena. Amsterdam: Elsevier.10.1163/9780585474250Search in Google Scholar
Bošković, Željko. 2005. On the locality of left branch extraction and the structure of NP. Studia Linguistica 59. 1–45.10.1111/j.1467-9582.2005.00118.xSearch in Google Scholar
Bošković, Željko. 2007. On the locality and motivation of move and agree: An even more minimal theory. Linguistic Inquiry 38. 589–644.10.1162/ling.2007.38.4.589Search in Google Scholar
Bošković, Željko. 2008. On successive cyclic movement and the freezing effect of feature checking. In Jutta M. Hartmann, Veronika HegedüS & Henk van Riemsdijk (eds.), Sounds of silence: Empty elements in syntax and phonology, 195–233. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Search in Google Scholar
Bošković, Željko. 2011. Rescue by PF deletion, traces as (non)interveners, and the that-trace effect. Linguistic Inquiry 42. 1–44.10.1162/LING_a_00027Search in Google Scholar
Bošković, Željko. 2013a. Phases beyond clauses. In Lilia SchüRcks, Anastasia Giannakidou & Urtzi Etxeberría (eds.), The nominal structure in Slavic and beyond, 75–128. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter.10.1515/9781614512790.75Search in Google Scholar
Bošković, Željko. 2013b. Traces do not head islands: What can PF deletion rescue? In Yoichi Miyamoto, Daiko Takahashi, Hideki Maki, Masao Ochi, Koji Sugisaki & Asako Uchibori (eds.), Deep insights, broad perspectives: Essays in honor of Mamoru Saito, 56–93. Tokyo: Kaitakusha.Search in Google Scholar
Bošković, Željko. 2014. Now i’m a phase, now i’m not a phase: On the variability of phases with extraction and ellipsis. Linguistic Inquiry 45. 27–89.10.1162/LING_a_00148Search in Google Scholar
Bošković, Željko. 2015. From the complex NP constraint to everything: On deep extractions across categories. The Linguistic Review 32. 603–669.10.1515/tlr-2015-0006Search in Google Scholar
Bošković, Željko. 2016a. Contextual phasehood and the ban on extraction from complements of lexical heads: When does X become a phase? In Miyoko Yasui & Manabu Mizuguchi (eds.), Phase theory and its consequences, 5–39. Tokyo: Kaitakusha.Search in Google Scholar
Bošković, Željko. 2016b. On the timing of labeling. The Linguistic Review 33. 17–66.10.1515/tlr-2015-0013Search in Google Scholar
Campos, Héctor. 1992. Los bearneses que quequean, ¿y nosotros qué? Hispanic Linguistics 4. 329–349.Search in Google Scholar
Cerrudo, Alba & Ángel Gallego. to appear. Island effects under recomplementation in Spanish: A derivational account. Linguistic Analysis.https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/d72a87_ed7ee6be186646d0b7721e7f962f0c27.pdfSearch in Google Scholar
Chen, Matthew. 1990. What must phonology know about syntax? In Sharon Inkelas & Draga Zec (eds.), The phonology-syntax connection, 19–46. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar
Cheng, Lisa Lai-Shen & Laura J. Downing. 2009. Where’s the topic in Zulu? The Linguistic Review 26. 207–238.10.1515/tlir.2009.008Search in Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1972. Some empirical issues in the theory of transformational grammar. In Stanley Peters (ed.), Goals of linguistic theory, 63–130. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Search in Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2000. Minimalist inquiries. In Roger Martin, David Michaels & Juan Uriagereka (eds.), Step by step: Essays on minimalist syntax in honor of Howard Lasnik, 89–155. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2001. Derivation by phase. In Michael Kenstowicz (ed.), Ken Hale: A life in language, 1–52. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2013. Problems of Projection. Lingua 130. 33–49.10.1016/j.lingua.2012.12.003Search in Google Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo. 1999. Adverbs and functional heads: A cross-linguistic perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo. 2004. Issues in adverbial syntax. Lingua 114. 683–710.10.1016/S0024-3841(03)00048-2Search in Google Scholar
Demonte, Violeta & Fernández-Soriano Olga. 2007. La periferia izquierda oracional y los complementantes del español. In Juan Cuartero & Martine Emsel (eds.), Vernetzungen: Kognition, Bedeutung, (kontrastive) Pragmatik. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Search in Google Scholar
Demonte, Violeta & Fernández-Soriano Olga. 2009. Force and finiteness in the Spanish complementizer system. Probus 21. 23–49.10.1515/prbs.2009.002Search in Google Scholar
Demonte, Violeta & Fernández-Soriano Olga. 2013a. El ‘que’ citativo en español y otros elementos de la periferia oracional. Variación inter e intralingüística. In Daniel Jakob & Katya Plooj (eds.), Autour de ‘que’. El entorno de ‘que’, 47–69. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Search in Google Scholar
Demonte, Violeta & Fernández-Soriano Olga. 2013b. Evidentials dizque and que in Spanish. Grammaticalization, parameters and the (fine) structure of comp linguistica. Revista De Estudos Linguísticos Da Universidade Do Porto 8. 211–234.Search in Google Scholar
Den Dikken, Marcel. 2007. Phase extension: Contours of a theory of the role of head movement in phrasal extraction. Theoretical Linguistics 33. 1–41.10.1515/TL.2007.001Search in Google Scholar
Dobashi, Yoshishito. 2003. Phonological phrasing and syntactic derivation. Cornell University dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Erlewine, Michael. 2016. Anti-locality and optimality in Kaqchikel agent focus. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 34. 429–479.10.1007/s11049-015-9310-zSearch in Google Scholar
Escribano, José & Luis Rafael. 1991. Una teoría de la oración. Oviedo: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Oviedo.Search in Google Scholar
Etxepare, Ricardo. 2010. From hearsay evidentiality to samesaying relations. Lingua 120. 604–627.10.1016/j.lingua.2008.07.009Search in Google Scholar
Fernández-Rubiera, Francisco José. 2009. Clitics at the Edge: Clitic Placement in Western Iberian Romance Languages. Georgetown University dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Frank, Josh & Almeida Jacqueline Toribio. 2017. Syntactic variation in Cuban Spanish: Evidence from multiple complementizers. Poster presented at the 47th Linguistics Symposium of Romance Languages (LSRL 47).Search in Google Scholar
Frascarelli, Mara. 2000. The syntax-phonology interface in focus and topic constructions in Italian. Dordrecht: Kluwer.10.1007/978-94-015-9500-1Search in Google Scholar
Gallego, Ángel & Juan Uriagereka. 2007. Sub-extraction from subjects. In José Camacho, Nydia Flores-Ferrán, Liliana Sánchez, Viviane Déprez & Marí José Cabrera (eds.), Romance linguistics 2006, 149–162. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/cilt.287.12galSearch in Google Scholar
Grohmann, Kleanthes. 2011. Antilocality: Too close relations in grammar. In Cedric Boeckx (ed.), The Oxford handbook of linguistic minimalism, 260–290. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Hamlaoui, Fatima & Kriszta SzendrőI. 2015. A flexible approach to the mapping of intonational phrases. Phonology 32. 79–110.10.1017/S0952675715000056Search in Google Scholar
Hamlaoui, Fatima & Kriszta SzendrőI. 2017. The syntax-phonology mapping of intonational phrases in complex sentences: A flexible approach. Glossa: a Journal of General Linguistics 2(55). 1–32.10.5334/gjgl.215Search in Google Scholar
Holmberg, Anders. 2001. The syntax of yes and no in Finnish. Studia Linguistica 55. 140–174.10.1111/1467-9582.00077Search in Google Scholar
Ishii, Toru. 1999. Cyclic spell-out and the that-trace effect. In Sonya Bird, Andrew Carnie, Jason Haugen & Peter Norquest (eds.), Proceedings of the West Coast conference on formal linguistics, vol. 18. 220–231. Sommerville: Cascadilla Press.Search in Google Scholar
Jeong, Youngmi. 2006. The landscape of applicatives. University of Maryland, College Park dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Kahnemuypour, Arsalan. 2004. The syntax of sentential stress. University of Toronto dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Kahnemuypour, Arsalan. 2009. The syntax of sentential stress. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199219230.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Kratzer, Angelika & Elisabeth Selkirk. 2007. Phase theory and prosodic spellout: The case of verbs. The Linguistic Review 24. 93–135.10.1515/TLR.2007.005Search in Google Scholar
Lasnik, Howard. 2001. When can you save a structure by destroying it? In Min-Joo Kim & Uri Strauss (eds.), Proceedings of the North Eastern linguistics society, vol. 31, 301–320. Amherst: GLSA, University of Massachusetts.Search in Google Scholar
Ledgeway, Adam & Alessandra Lombardi. 2005. Verb movement, adverbs and clitic positions in Romance. Probus 17. 79–113.10.1515/prbs.2005.17.1.79Search in Google Scholar
López, Luis. 1995. The hierarchy of negation and tense: The case of English. In Proceedings of the Eastern States Conference on Linguistics X: 186–197.Search in Google Scholar
López, Luis. 2009a. Ranking the linear correspondence axiom. Linguistic Inquiry 40. 239–276.10.1162/ling.2009.40.2.239Search in Google Scholar
López, Luis. 2009b. A derivational syntax for information structure. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199557400.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Martín González, Javier. 2002a. (Non-)occurrence of sentential no in Spanish negative sentences. Transactions of the Philological Society 98. 161–183.10.1111/1467-968X.00061Search in Google Scholar
Martín González, Javier. 2002b. The Syntax of Sentential Negation in Spanish. Harvard University dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Merchant, Jason. 2001. The syntax of silence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Nespor, Marina & Irene Vogel. 1986. Prosodic phonology. Dordrecht: Foris.Search in Google Scholar
Olarrea, Antxon. 1996. Pre and Postverbal Subjects in Spanish: A Minimalist Account. University of Washington dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Paoli, Sandra. 2006. The fine structure of the left periphery: COMPs and subjects: Evidence from Romance. Lingua 117. 1057–1079.10.1016/j.lingua.2006.05.007Search in Google Scholar
Petrosino, Roberto. 2017. The left periphery fragmented: Evidence from Italian. Poster presented at the 48th Annual Meeting of the North Eastern Linguistic Society, University of IcelandSearch in Google Scholar
Radanović-Koćić, Vesna. 1988. The grammar of Serbo-Croatian clitics: A synchronic and diachronic perspective. University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 1978. A restructuring rule in Italian syntax. In Samuel J. Keyser (ed.), Recent transformational studies in European languages, 113–158. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 2001. On the position ‘Int(errogative)’ in the left periphery of the clause. In Guglielmo Cinque & Giampaolo Salvi (eds.), Current studies in Italian syntax. Essays offered to Lorenzo Renzi, 287–296. Amsterdam: Elsevier.10.1163/9780585473949_016Search in Google Scholar
Rodríguez-Ramalle, Teresa. 2003. La gramática de los adverbios en -mente o cómo expresar maneras, opiniones y actitudes a través de la lengua. Madrid: Ediciones de la Universidad Autónoma de Madrid.Search in Google Scholar
Ron, María Pilar. 1998. The position of the subject in Spanish and clausal structure: Evidence from dialectal variation. Northwestern University dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Saito, Mamoru & Keiko Murasugi. 1999. Subject predication within IP and DP. In Kyle Johnson & Ian Roberts (eds.), Beyond principles and parameters, 167–188. Dordrecht: Kluwer.10.1007/978-94-011-4822-1_7Search in Google Scholar
Sato, Yosuke. 2012. Phonological interpretation by phase: Nuclear stress, domain encapsulation and edge sensitivity. In Ángel Gallego (ed.), Phases: Developing the framework, 283–308. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110264104.283Search in Google Scholar
Sato, Yosuke & Yoshihito Dobashi. 2016. Prosodic phrasing and the That-trace effect. Linguistic Inquiry 47. 333–349.10.1162/LING_a_00213Search in Google Scholar
Schifano, Norma. 2015. Verb-movement: A Pan-Romance Investigation. Cambridge University dissertationSearch in Google Scholar
Schütze, Carson. 1994. Serbo-Croatian second position clitic placement and the phonology-syntax interface. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 21. 373–473.Search in Google Scholar
Selkirk, Elisabeth. 1984. Phonology and syntax: The relation between sound and structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar
Selkirk, Elisabeth. 1986. On derived domains in sentence phonology. Phonology Yearbook 3. 371–405.10.1017/S0952675700000695Search in Google Scholar
Selkirk, Elisabeth. 2009. On clause and intonational phrase in Japanese: The syntactic grounding of prosodic constituent structure. Gengo Kenkyu 136. 35–73.Search in Google Scholar
Selkirk, Elisabeth. 2011. The syntax-phonology interface. In John Goldsmith, Jason Riggle & Yu Alan C. L. (eds.), The handbook of phonological theory, 435–484. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.10.1002/9781444343069.ch14Search in Google Scholar
Sobin, Nicholas. 2002. The comp-trace effect, the adverb effect and minimal CP. Journal of Linguistics 38. 527–560.10.1017/S0022226702001652Search in Google Scholar
Suñer, Margarita. 1994. V-movement and the licensing of argumental Wh-Phrases in Spanish. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 12. 335–372.10.1007/BF00993148Search in Google Scholar
Suñer, Margarita. 1995. Negative elements, island effects, and resumptive ‘no’. The Linguistic Review 12. 233–273.10.1515/tlir.1995.12.3.233Search in Google Scholar
Talić. 2018. Spelling out enclitics and giving their tone a voice: Cyclic clitic incorporation in BCS and breaking the cycle. The Linguistic Review 35. 307–370.10.1515/tlr-2017-0026Search in Google Scholar
Ticio, M. Emma. 2005. Locality and anti-locality in Spanish DPs. Syntax 8. 229–286.10.1111/j.1467-9612.2005.00080.xSearch in Google Scholar
Torrego, Esther. 1984. On inversion in Spanish and some of its effects. Linguistic Inquiry 15. 103–129.Search in Google Scholar
Uribe-Etxebarría, Myriam. 1992. On the structural position of the subject in Spanish. In Joseba A. Lacarra & Jon Ortiz de Urbine (eds.), Syntactic theory and Basque syntax, 448–491. Donostia: UPV/EHU, Gipuzkoako Foru Aldundia.Search in Google Scholar
Villa-García, Julio. 2012. Recomplementation and locality of movement in Spanish. Probus 24. 257–314.10.1515/probus-2012-0011Search in Google Scholar
Villa-García, Julio. 2015. The syntax of multiple-que sentences in Spanish. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/ihll.2Search in Google Scholar
Villa-García, Julio. 2016. TP-ellipsis with a polarity particle in multiple-complementizer contexts in Spanish: On topical remnants and focal licensors. Borealis. An International Journal of Hispanic Linguistics 5. 135–172.10.7557/1.5.2.3781Search in Google Scholar
Villa-García, Julio. 2018. Recomplementation in English and Spanish: Delineating the Geometry of the CP. Ms, University of Manchester.10.5334/gjgl.845Search in Google Scholar
Zagona, Karen. 1982. Verb phrase syntax: A parametric study of English and Spanish. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Search in Google Scholar
Zec, Draga & Sharon Inkelas. 1990. Prosodically constrained syntax. In Sharon Inkelas & Draga Zec (eds.), The phonology-syntax connection, 365–378. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar
Zubizarreta, María Luisa. 1998. Prosody, focus, and word order. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar
© 2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Original Article
- Not a fact: A synchronic analysis of el hecho de and o facto de
- Focus in Italian echo wh-questions: An analysis at syntax-prosody interface
- Gerunds become prepositional infinitives in Romance Small Clauses: The effects of later Merge to the syntactic spine
- Focus Fronting in Spanish: Mirative implicature and information structure
- Syllabically-driven stricture effects in Majorcan Catalan high vocoids
- Phases, labeling, antilocality and intonational phrases: recomplementation in Spanish
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Original Article
- Not a fact: A synchronic analysis of el hecho de and o facto de
- Focus in Italian echo wh-questions: An analysis at syntax-prosody interface
- Gerunds become prepositional infinitives in Romance Small Clauses: The effects of later Merge to the syntactic spine
- Focus Fronting in Spanish: Mirative implicature and information structure
- Syllabically-driven stricture effects in Majorcan Catalan high vocoids
- Phases, labeling, antilocality and intonational phrases: recomplementation in Spanish
