Affiliation:
1. University of New Brunswick-Saint John , Saint John , Canada
2. University of Modena and Reggio Emilia , Reggio Emilia , Italy
Abstract
Abstract
An outstanding question in current studies concerns the status of Romance SE that does not obviously mark reflexivity or anticausativity. This paper signals the presence of such constructions in Old and Modern Romanian, where SE occurs with unergative verbs and qualifies as pleonastic according to traditional grammars (i.e., it makes no difference for the truth conditions or for the argument structure). The main argument is that such constructions are actually instances of differential subject marking (DSM) in Romanian, and that the semantic triggers and the underlying configuration resemble those that occur with differential object marking (DOM) in this language. In terms of theoretical contribution, this analysis (i) widens the cross-linguistic inventory of DSM patterns, by adding Clitic Doubling; (ii) confirms the predictions of recent studies that there could be similarity rather than opposition between DOM and DSM contexts; (iii) shows the possibility of re-allocating the reflexive pronoun SE to other configurations besides (an instance of) verb reflexivization.
Subject
Linguistics and Language,Language and Linguistics
Reference61 articles.
1. Aissen, Judith. 2003. Differential object marking: Iconicity versus economy. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 21. 435–483. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1024109008573.
2. Alboiu, Gabriela. 2002. The features of movement in Romanian. Bucharest: University of Bucharest Press.
3. Alboiu, Gabriela, Michael Barrie & Chiara Frigeni. 2004. SE and the unaccusative-unergative paradox. In Martine Coene, Gretel de Cuyper & Yves D’Hulst (eds.), Antwerp papers in linguistics, vol. 107, 109–139. Universiteit Antwerp.
4. Alexiadou, Artemis & Elena Anagnostopoulou. 1998. Paremetrizing AGR: Qord order, verb-movement and EPP-checking. Natural Languages and Linguistic Theory 16. 491–539. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1006090432389.
5. Alsina, Alex. 1996. The role of argument structure in grammar. Evidence from Romance. CSLI Lecture Notes 62. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.