ROMANCE LANGUAGES AND LINGUISTIC THEORY 2000 AMSTERDAM STUDIES IN THE THEORY AND HISTORY OF LINGUISTIC SCIENCE General Editor E F KONRAD KOERNER (University of Cologne) Series IV – CURRENT ISSUES IN LINGUISTIC THEORY Advisory Editorial Board Raimo Anttila (Los Angeles); Lyle Campbell (Christchurch, N.Z.) Sheila Embleton (Toronto); John E Joseph (Edinburgh) Manfred Krifka (Berlin); Hans-Heinrich Lieb (Berlin) E Wyn Roberts (Vancouver, B.C.); Hans-Jürgen Sasse (Köln) Volume 232 Claire Beyssade, Reineke Bok-Bennema, Frank Drijkoningen and Paola Monachesi (eds) Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2000 Selected papers from ‘Going Romance’ 2000, Utrecht, 30 November–2 December ROMANCE LANGUAGES AND LINGUISTIC THEORY 2000 SELECTED PAPERS FROM 'GOING ROMANCE' 2000, UTRECHT, 30 NOVEMBER – DECEMBER Edited by CLAIRE BEYSSADE Université de Paris III REINEKE BOK-BENNEMA University of Groningen FRANK DRIJKONINGEN Utrecht University PAOLA MONACHESI Utrecht University JOHN BENJAMINS PUBLISHING COMPANY AMSTERDAM/PHILADELPHIA TM The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Information Sciences — Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1984 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2000 : Selected papers from 'Going Romance' 2000, Utrecht, 30 November – December / Edited by Claire Beyssade [et al.] p cm (Amsterdam studies in the theory and history of linguistic science Series IV, Current issues in linguistic theory, ISSN 0304-0763 ; v 232) Includes bibliographical references and index Romance languages Congrsses I Beyssayde, Claire II Series PC11 R62 2002 440 dc21 2002027970 ISBN 90 272 4742 (Eur.) / 58811 331 (US) (Hb; alk paper) © 2002 – John Benjamins B.V No part of this book may be reproduced in any form, by print, photoprint, microfilm, or any other means, without written permission from the publisher John Benjamins Publishing Co • P.O.Box 36224 • 1020 ME Amsterdam • The Netherlands John Benjamins North America • P.O.Box 27519 • Philadelphia PA 19118-0519 • USA INTRODUCTION In the nineties, Going Romance has emerged as the major European annual discussion forum for theoretically relevant research on Romance languages Going Romance is an international initiative of the Dutch university community involved in research on Romance languages; it is organized by and held at the various universities of the country In 1998 the steering committee judged that the quality of the papers presented was so high that this should be reflected in proceedings volumes The current book is the second proceedings volume The articles form a selection of the papers that have been presented at the occasion of Going Romance 2000 (XIV) - which was held at Utrecht University on November 30 through December The three day program included a workshop on Topic and Focus Next to the articles discussing pragmatic factors and their interaction with phonology, syntax and semantics, the volume contains articles dealing with a variety of topics that bear on the specifics of one or more Romance languages The editors would like to thank everyone w h o contributed to the success of Going Romance XIV Next to the editors, the organization committee consisted of Sergio B a a u w (Utrecht, UiL-OTS), Denis Delfitto (Utrecht, UiL-OTS), Jenny Doetjes (Utrecht, UiL-OTS), Aafke Hulk (Amsterdam, HIL), Brigitte Kampers-Manhe (Groningen, C L C G ) , Johan Rooryck (Leiden, HIL), Jan Schroten (Utrecht, UiL-OTS), Henriëtte de Swart (Utrecht, UiL-OTS) and Els Verheugd (Amsterdam, HIL) The selection committee for the more than fifty abstracts consisted of editors and organizers and was assisted by the following independent advisors: Elisabeth Delais-Roussarie (Orléans), Donka Farkas ( U C S B ) , Haike Jacobs (Nijmegen, C L S ) , K n u d Lambrecht (Texas), Jean-Marie Marandin (Paris VII), Jean-Yves Pollock (Amiens), Georges Rebuschi (Paris III), Annie Rialland (Paris III), and Roberto Zamparelli (Bergamo) Vi The Organizers and the editors gratefully acknowledge financial support from the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences ( K N A W ) and the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research ( N W O ) , from the host of Going Romance 2000, the Utrecht institute of Linguistics-OTS (UiL-OTS), the Holland Institute of Generative Linguistics (HIL), and the PICS project Finally, w e wish to thank Taka Hara, Erica van Lente and Hiske van der Meulen for their invaluable help in the final phases of preparing the manuscript Claire Beyssade Reineke Bok-Bennema Frank Drijkoningen Paola Monachesi CONTENTS Arbitrary pronouns are not that indefinite Luis Alonso-Ovalle Wh-questions and Wh-exclamatives - unifying mirror effects Manuela Ambar 15 Impersonal constructions, control and second-order predication Raúl Aranovich 41 Complementizer Deletion in Florentine: the interaction between Merge and M o v e Gloria Cocchi and Cecilia Poletto Rhematic focus at the left periphery: the case of Romanian Alexandra Cornilescu 57 77 Multiple focus in European Portuguese: apparent optionality and subject positions Joäo Costa 93 External subjects in two varieties of Portuguese: evidence for a non-unified analysis Joäo Costa and Charlotte Galves 109 Extreme Non-Specificity in Romanian Donka Farkas 127 Resultatives: Small Clauses or complex VPs? Raffaella Folli 153 CONTENTS Topic, focus and secondary predication: the French Presentational Relative Construction Knud Lambrecht Viii 171 Intonative structure of focalization in French and Greek David Le Gac and Hi-Yon Yoo 213 Splitting up subject clitic-verb inversion Nicola Munaro 233 Edging Quantifiers: on QP-Fronting in Western Romance Josep Quer 253 Partitive constructions and antisymmetry Petra Sleeman and Ellen-Petra Kester 271 Stress-Focus correspondence in Italian Kriszta Szendrői 287 Definite and Bare Kind-denoting N o u n Phrases Roberto Zamparelli 305 Index of languages and dialects Subject Index 345 347 ARBITRARY PRONOUNS ARE NOT THAT INDEFINITE LUIS ALONSO-OVALLE University ofMassachusetts at Amherst Introduction Although defining structural constraints on coindexing proved fruitful, its semantic import still remains unclear.1 Syntactic work in the late seventies and early eighties extended the use of indexing to capture the 'arbitrariness' of examples like (la) (Chomsky and Lasnik 1977, C h o m s k y 1980), (1b), (1c) (Casielles 1993) or (1d) (Suñer 1983) (1) a P R O a r b smoking is dangerous b E n ese restaurante, proarb trabajas c o m o un esclavo In that restaurant proarb work:2s like a slave "In that restaurant, you (generic) work like a slave" c E n ese restaurante, proarb trabajan c o m o esclavos In that restaurant proarb work:3PL like slaves "In that restaurant, they work like slaves" d Proarb llaman a la puerta proarb knock:3PL to the door "Somebody is knocking at the door" The semantic import of this type of indexing is not less unclear Chierchia (1984) argues against the very existence of PRO a r b , which he takes to be a mere reflection of second order predication I will cast some doubts about the existence of proarb * I a m very grateful to Reineke Bok-Bennema, Francesco D'Introno, Donka Farkas, L y n Frazier, Kyle Johnson, Paula Menéndez-Benito, Barbara Partee, María Luisa Rivero, audiences in Barbara Partee's Fall 99 U M a s s seminar and two anonymous reviewers Thanks to Irene H e i m and Kai von Fintel for being so generous with their teaching and materials I a m truly indebted to Barbara Partee for more advice, help and encouragement than I could acknowledge Usual disclaimers apply See H e i m 1998 and references therein 340 R O B E R T O ZAMPARELLI b La casa esta sucisima E n el sotano están *(los) ratones, y the house is very dirty In the sink are (the) mice, and bajo la fregadera vivon *(las) cucarachas under the fridge live (the) cockroaches (91) La maison est dégueulasse Dans la cave, il y a {?les / des} souris, et dans Γ évier vivent {?les / des} cafards Definỵtes with mass nouns as in (92) are unacceptable both in Spanish and French (92) In the object position in (93), the definite seems to force the meaning that architects build all the houses, or the houses in a certain location (see Laca 1990 for similar data) Again, in French the partitive article seems to be possible, but it becomes impossible in examples such as dentists cure teeth (where w e mean: all teeth) (92) a Estoy enfermo y he dejado de beber (*el) café I a m sick and I have stopped to drink (the) coffee b *Pour le moment, je ne bois pas {*le / de} café (93) W h a t architects for a living? a Los arquitectos construyen las casas b Ils construisent {les / des} maisons These data minimally show that within R o m a n c e languages different strategies are used to obtain the existential reading In particular, the French use of the indefinite partitive is clearly different from the Italian use, which is m u c h closer to the English some: (92) and (93) contrast with (94) (94) a ??Con questi disturbi ho dovuto smettere di bere [del caffe] with this condition I had to stop to drink [some coffee] b ??Gli architetti costruiscono delle case the architects build some houses answer to: What architects for a living? Conclusions This paper has argued that Italian (and Romance) bare nouns are more different from English ones than previous accounts would have it, but that at the same time generic defmites in Italian (and to some extent Romance) are surprisingly close to English bare nouns Moreover, Italian definỵtes offer some evidence that the existential reading of English bare plurals might c o m e from more than one source: from an original kind-denotation, or from an original object-level denotation M o r e empirical work remains to be done to understand DEFINITE AND BARE KIND-DENOTING NOUN PHRASES 341 in what conditions definỵtes can be used to produce 'nameless representatives' of the kind they refer to, and what is the relevant cross-linguistic parameter At a more theoretical level, these data raise the issue of h o w exactly the notions of 'blocking' and 'semantics-driven economy' must be understood References Brugger, G., 1993 "Generic interpretations and expletive articles." M s University of Venice Carlson, G N., 1977 Reference to Kinds in English Ph D thesis, University of Massachusetts at Amherst Carlson, G N., 1987 "The semantic composition of English generic sentences." Property Theory, Type Theory, and Semantics, ed by G Chierchia, B Partee & R Turner Dordrecht, The Netherlands: D Reidel Publishing Co Casalegno, P., 1987 "Sulla logica dei plurali." Teoria 2, 125-143 Chierchia, G., 1996 "Plurality of mass nouns: on the notion of 'semantic parameter'." Technical Report 7, Istituto Scientifico H S Raffaele, DIPSCO Chierchia, G., 1998 "Reference to kinds across languages." Natural Language Semantics 6, 339-405 Cinque, G., 1990 Types of A'-Dependencies Volume 17 of Linguistic Inquiry Monographs Cambridge, Mass.: M I T Press Contreras, H., 1986 "Spanish bare N P s and the ECP." Generative Studies in Spanish Syntax, ed by I Bordelois, H Contreras & Κ Zagona Dordrecht: Foris Dayal, V., 2000 "Number marking and (in)defmiteness in kind terms." M s Rutgers University Delfitto, D & J Schroten, 1992 "Bare plurals and the number affix in DP." Technical Report Diesing, M., 1992 Indefinites Cambridge, Mass.: M I T Press Dobrovie-Sorin, C and B Laca, 1997 "On the definiteness of generic bare NPs." Ms Fox, D., 1995 "Economy and scope." Natural Language Semantics 3, 283341 Gerstner, C & M Krifka 1987 "Genericity, an introduction." M s Universitat Tubingen Heim, I., 1982 The Semantics of Definite and Indefinite Noun Phrases Ph D thesis, University of Massachusetts, Amherst Herburger, E., 1994 "Focus and the L F of N P quantification." Proceedings of SALT-III, ed by U Lahiri & A Zachary Wyner 342 ROBERTO ZAMPARELLI Kleiber, G., 1990 L'article LE générique La généricité sur le mode massif Number 23 in Langue et Culture Droz Kratzer, Α., 1995 "Stage level and individual level predicates." The Generic Book, ed by G Carlson & F Pelletier, 125-175 Chicago: The University of Chicago Press Krifka, M et al., 1995 "Genericity: A n introduction." The Generic Book, ed by G.N Carlson & F.J Pelletier, 1-124 Chicago: University of Chicago Press Laca, B., 1990 "Generic objects: some more pieces of the puzzle." Lingua 81, 25-46 Lawler, J., 1973 "Studies in English Generics." University of Michigan Papers in Linguistics 1(1) Lewis, D., 1975 "Adverbs of quantification." Formal Semantics of Natural Language, ed by E Keenan, 3-15 Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Link, G., 1983 "The logical analysis of plurals and mass terms: A latticetheoretical approach." Meaning, Use and Interpretation of Language, ed by R Bauerle, C Schwarze & A von Stechow, 302-323 Berlin: Walter de Gruyter Longobardi, G., 1994 "Proper names and the theory of N-movement in syntax and logical form." Linguistic Inquiry 25, 609-665 Longobardi, G., 1999 " H o w comparative is semantics? A unified parametric theory of bare nouns and proper names." M s Università di Trieste Rizzi, L., 1997 "The fine structure of the left periphery" Elements of Grammar: Handbook of Generative Syntax, ed by L Haegeman, 281-337 Dordrecht: Kluwer Sharvy, R., 1980 " A more general theory of definite descriptions." The Philosophical Review 89.4, 607-624 V a n Greenhoven, V., 1996 Semantic Incorporation and Indefinite Descriptions Ph D thesis, University of Tubingen Vergnaud, J.-R & M L Zubizaretta, 1992 "The definite determiner and the inalienable constructions in French and in English." Linguistic Inquiry 23(4), 595-652 Wilkinson, K., 1991 Studies in the Semantics of Generic Noun Phrases Ph D thesis, University of Massachusetts, Amherst Wilson, D & D Sperber, 1979 "Ordered entailments: A n alternative to presuppositional theories." Presupposition Volume 11 of Syntax and Semantics, 299-323 N e w York: Academic Press Zamparelli, R., 1995 Layers in the Determiner Phrase Ph D thesis, University of Rochester (Published by Garland, 2000.) Zamparelli, R., 1998 " A theory of Kinds, Partitives and OF/z Possessives." Possessors, Predicates and Movement in the Determiner Phrase Volume DEFINITE A N D BARE KIND-DENOTING N O U N PHRASES 343 22 of Linguistics Today, ed by A Alexiadou & C Wilder, 259-301 Amsterdam: John Benjamins Zamparelli, R., in preparation "Understanding subkinds." M s Università di Bergamo Zucchi, Α., 1995 "The ingredients of definiteness and the Defmiteness Effect." Natural Language Semantics 3, 33-78 INDEX OF LANGUAGES AND DIALECTS This index lists languages and dialects that are mentioned in the texts and languages and dialects that are illustrated in examples Bulgarian: 80 Catalan: 116, 120, 253-269, 275 Chinese: 18,20,21,24,36,37 Dutch: 287 English: 1, 2, 6, 19, 21, 22, 24, 33, 43-45,52,60,61,64,65,67,71, 72, 74, 103, 110, 111, 128, 131, 132, 153-169, 181, 182, 184, 186, 187, 189, 191-193, 198200, 204, 205, 208, 253, 262, 266, 277, 287, 294, 305-340 French: 16-21, 25-27, 31-33, 36, 109-111, 113, 132, 134, 171208, 213-230, 233, 243, 244, 271-285, 307, 308, 339, 340 Quebec French: 35 Franco-Provenỗal Valdotain: 244 German: 59, 65, 67, 192, 198, 208 Greek: 3, 86, 213, 214, 216, 226229 Hungarian: 16-18, 24-27, 30-33, 36, 103, 104, 128,263,289,294, 296 Iraqui: 24 Italian: 3-5, 12, 41, 42, 49, 57-62, 64, 65, 67-70, 74, 77, 87, 96, 109-111, 118, 132, 134, 153, 169, 192, 229, 242, 246, 253, 255, 256, 266-269, 287-302, 305-340 Florentine: 57-65, 67, 69, 72-74 Piedmontese & Ligurian: 66, 69 Trentino: 115, 116, 120 Nothern Italian dialects: 82, 234236 North-Eastern Italian dialects: 233-250 Korean: 229 Latin: 192 Portuguese: 109-123, 253, 256, 266269 European: 16-36, 82, 93-106 Brazilian: 16, 17, 19, 22, 24-26, 31,32,37 Polish: 41, 42, 65 Romanian: 77-90, 127-150, 229 Scandinavian: 59 Scottish Gaelic: 167 Serbo-Croatian: 80 Somali: 229 Spanish: 1-12, 41, 42, 45-53, 86, 192, 253-269, 339, 340 Mexican Spanish: 260 Tetum (East Timor): 16, 17, 19, 21, 24-26, 30-32, 36, 37 SUBJECT INDEX This index does not claim to be exhaustive Specific language items are printed in italic accomplishment 157-166 active 182 activities 13 adjacency 25, 26, 28, 30, 79 adverb 265 of quantification 42, 52, 53, 136, 311 agent-oriented 12 placement 110 adverbial 60, 64, 70 affirmative 138 agreement 24, 272-274, 283-285 anaphora 42, 44, 50 bound 42 reflexive 42 anaphoric 5, 42, 180,202 destressing 288 interpretation 287 antecedents in conditionals 136 antisymmetry 242, 271-285 any 132, 141 A-over-A principle 282 appositive 172, 175,204 arbitrariness 1-13 argument, external 11 aspect 174, 183, 185 assertion 17, 36, 83-85, 173, 175, 178, 182,234,238,264 assertive feature 21, 30, 33 AssertiveP 16, 18, 20, 22-25, 2931,35,36 asymmetry, root-embedded 15 atelic 153,159 auxiliary 57, 63, 68, 69, 72, avoir 181, 206 B background 225 bare kind N P 305-340 bare noun, see noun bare plurals 84, 259 barrier 282 binding 2, 86-87 domains 43, 163 unselective 42, 50, 52, 53, 132, 143 bound variable 48 boundary tones 217 bridging 317-318 C cardinal 83, 84 case, exceptional - marking 156 causation event 154 celui 275-279, 284 certain 132 change 155 checking, alternative 58, 65, 67-69, 74 choice-functional D P 127 cite129,131, 141-149 cleft 173, 177, 178, 182, 187, 190, 192,193,196,200,206-208 clitic(s) 23, 24, 28fh, 57, 58, 69, 73, 85-89, 172,234,253-269 doubling 83, 85 enclisis 23 348 SUBJECT INDEX left dislocation 78, 82-83, 86 proclisis 23 pronoun 68 right dislocation 257 auxiliary 65 pronoun 65, 74 reflexive clitic 41 coercion 195, 196, 198,209 cognitive status 181,196, 207 Common Ground 16fn, 22, 33 comparative 139, 141, 149 complement,rationale/volitional, 12 complementizer 15, 17, 18, 24, 30, 33, 35, 37, 58, 60, 68, 74, 235, 263 deletion 57-74 position 66 null 64 semantics of 71 conditional sentences 237 conditional 130, 139-147 constrastive 78 Context Change Semantics (CCS), 135,147 control 41-54, 162 count nouns 305 counterfactual 237, 240, 243-249 cross-over 78 D de dietο reading, 328 declarative utterances, 222, 226 definite, 2, 6, 7-11, 13, 24, 30, 83, 131, 186, 187, 193, 199, 201fh, 202, 204, 207 description 129, 130,317 NP 305-340 scales 132 ±defmitive status 17 definiteness 36 (in)defmiteness Scale 130-131 effect 266 restriction 318 definitive feature (spécifie) 31 deictic 177,180,199,202 demonstrative 187 derived kind predecation 312 destressing 297 determinacy of reference 130 determinerless NP 305 discourse-new entity, 182, 198, 202, 205 discourse-new situation 182 discourse-old entity 198, 205 disjoint reference, 47 disjunctive 237, 239, 240-249 dislocation 16, 27 disourse referent distributive 129 quantifier 84 DKP 326, 333-337 d-linked 78-90 non d-linked 78-90 - quantifiers 89 - wh-phrases 30 double object constructions 167 dynamic Aktionsart 195 Ε echo 28 echo-like structures 22, 29 economy 296, 326, 333-340 ECP, 282 embedded asymmetry 31 emotive factive 146 emphatically stressed 86 empty nominal head 272, 281 en, 182, 190,191,279-282 enclisis 234-250 enumerative 177, 182, 199, 200, 202-206-208 episodic 3, 4, 8, 10, 176, 309, 316 SUBJECT INDEX epistemic 132, 264 EPP feature 167 ergative 32fh evaluation 17, 34, 36, 37 EvaluativeP 16, 17, 35 event structure 154, 155, 159 event 11, 21fn, 138, 165, 183, 189, 195,199,206,237,250 eventive 183, 188, 190, 193, 194, 195,196,206,306 eventualities, 2,11-15 exclamative 34, 237, 241, 242, 248 exhaustive 99-103 non-exhaustive 104 existence 173 existential, 6, 12, 128, 129, 139, 143, 172, 177,182, 185-188, 192, 193, 199,206, 306-340 closure 312, 333 force operator 307 reading 2-4 external argument 154 extraction 271, 281-282 extrametricality 298, 301 F factivityl7, 33, 34, 36 familiarity 127 feature: AgrS feature 66 categorial feature 155 evaluative feature 17, 33 feature checking 16, 29fh, 155 finiteness 73, 74 focus feature 80, 89, 301 force feature 68, 70, 74 interprétable feature 155 modal C-feature 68 mood feature 66 realis feature 59, 65 349 uninterpretable feature 155 fiecare 129, 142, 149 floating quantifiers 111-112 focalization 20 focus 32fn, 34fn, 85, 171-209, 213228, 253, 255, 257, 258, 262, 264, 268, 307, 337 contrastive focus, 96, 103, 296fh focus fronting 253- 255 focus movement 80, 253, 294 focus set 290 informational focus 93, 96, 103 interpretation focus 287 left-peripheral focus 290, 300 multiple foci 97 phrase 95 right-peripheral focus 290, 294 sentence focus 98, 105 string-medial focus 290, 298 focused subj ect 100 FocusP, 16, 27fh, 34fh, 77 Force-P 77, 249 free choice existential 134 free choice universal 135 frequency 310, 322 functional projection 58, 70 G generic reading 2, 3, 13 generic 3-11, 138-143, 149, 305340 genitive 191 given 79, 179 given-new distinction 78, 82 given-new parameter 175 gnomic operator (Gn) 312-313, 321 Ground 16fh, 31 32fn H habitual 185, 339 350 SUBJECT INDEX hypothetical 137, 147, 149, 240246, 249 I if-clauses 237, 241 if-conditionals 246 illocutionary act 17fn illocutionary forces 13 imperative 138, 141-142 imperfect 194 imperfective, frequentative 136-140, 147 impersonal construction 41-54, 184-185 inactive 182 incorporation 131, 168 indefinite 1-13, 23, 24, 30, 50, 53, 83-86, 127-150, 184, 185, 186, 190-191,207,208,307-340 indefinite expressions 29fh heimian indefinite 2, 13 ordinary 132-133 particular 132 partitive 307-340 quodlibetic 132-134 specific indefinite 130 -ti marked 130 vreun indefinites 127-150 indexical2, 4, 6-11 indicative 62 individual-level 195, 196, 307 information packaging, 253 information structure, 171, 179, 181, 182, 200, 205, 213, 219, 265 intensional: component 319, 328 operator 319 predicate 139-141, 149 interrogative 67, 83, 136, 137, 141142,149,234,238,241-247 feature 67 inversion 233 ,236 pronoun 135 utterances 215, 217-218, 222, 228 intonation 22, 28, 30, 253 ,266 contour, parenthetical 204 coutour, low 204 intonational break 297 intonational contour 336 intonational phrase boundary 301 intonative morphemes 217 intonative phrases (IP) 220 intonative word (IW) 220 inverse 86 inverse scope 88 inversion, 15, 18 19-25, 28, 31, 35, 36, 84, 234, 239, 240-245 subject-clitic inversion 67 K kind-level predicates 309, 311 kinds 311 L left align stress 293 left dislocation 73, 110-122, 196, 197 position 66 left detachment 202, 203 left dislocated clitic 119, 253-269 Local Pronoun Condition 43-46, 48,49 locative 158, 173, 178, 179, 182, 185, 188, 195,206-208 low adverb 112 SUBJECT INDEX M marked utterance 289, 294 mass 329 mass/count contrast 330 maximalization operator (Max) 314 modality 130, 143, 174 M(ood)P, 77 m o o d 59, 81 motion: goal of motion 153-169 path of motion 154 N N(egative)-words 139, 101-103 negation, 58, 69, 72, 85-89, 130, 174, 190, 191fn, 237,248, 319 negative 138, 140-142, 149 marker 57, 67 polarity 139, 259 polarity item 140, 147 predicate 139 QP268 new 79, 174, 179 nominalisation 161 nominative 78, 83 non-quantificational 127 non-specificity 127-150 non-veridical 140-141 noun: bare noun 306, 307-340 count noun 259 ellipsis 283 novelty 127 nuclear stress rule (NSR) 292 numeral 135, 327-334 numerical scale 135 O oarecare 132, 142 old-new information 81 opacity 319 351 operator epistemic modal operator 146 existential 50 generic (Gn) self 43,49,51 operator-variable 77 optative 237, 240-242, 249 orice 142-143, 147-149 P parasitic gap licensing 254, 257 partitive, 130-131, 134, 179, 188, 261,271-285,306-340 perception 177, 178 PF-LF communication 288 pitch accent 258 possession 181, 194 possessive 193,271-282 predicate 172 accomplishment 153 complex 155, 166 depictive predecation 166 dyadic 11 inversion 274-278 secondary 153-169, 171-209 predication 174,208 primary 178 second-order 41-54 predicative 172, 176, 179, 206 prefixation 168 present perfect 62 presentational 174, 180, 194, 196, 205, 208 presupposition, 78,82, 88, 175, 182, 200, 201, 203, 237, 242-244, 247 non-presuppositional 89 preverbal negative 63, 68, 74 preverbal subject 78, 83, 104, 109110 352 SUBJECT INDEX Principle of the Separation of Reference and Relation (PSRR), 174, 186 process 153, 155, 165 proclitic 235-236 pronominal 180 pronoun(s) 23, 187,319 arbitrary 1-13 clitic 71 definite 198,205 demonstrative 199 doubling 114-118 indefinite personal 43, 49fn , 130 possessive 49fn preverbal clitic pronoun, 62 pro 278-279, 283 proarb 1-13, 47, 53 reflexive 42, 50,51,53 proper n a m e 130 proper names of kinds 306-340 prosody 33, 85, 265 prosodic form 179 prosodic model 219 prosodie structure 84, 214, 128 pseudo-questions 241 Q quantification 2, 4, 77, 78, 127, 129 generic 13 force properties 310-314 quantificational QP-fronting 253 quantifier(s) 60, 77, 82-83, 140, 189,259 adverbial 4, existential 3, 49, 51, 127 phrases 255, 261 quantifier scope 42, 43, 50 quantifier store 49 selfAA strong 89 universal 52, 127, 141, 145, 317 quelques-uns 278-279 question 130 wh-question: see w h yes/no question 145 quodlibetic specificity 132 R Reconstruction 83, 86-87, 163 referential phrases 77, 78, 83 reflexive 44 relative 326 relative clause 172, 206, 207, 265, 275-278, 282-284, 307 non-restrictive 171 relative construction: appositive 175,176 continuative 176 presentational (PRC), 167, 171 175, 176-182, 184,202 cleft P R C 192, 196, 198-200 existential P R C 188 repetitive activity 162 result event 164 resultatives 153-169 rhematic focus 77-89 rheme 337-38 right align stress, 293 right dislocation 295, 297 cliticrightdislocation 297 prosodieright-dislocation301 root 18, 28 root asymmetry 31 S scope: 'local' scope 141 narrowest-scope requirement 320 SUBJECT INDEX narrow scope, 51, 83, 89, 128, 141,319-327,333 of negation 146 of negative expressions 137 nuclear principle 85-88 quantifier 51 scopal specificity 132 wide scope 5, 128, 320, 325-27 scrambling 85-88 second order predication secondary predicate 204 ShareP 129 S H I F T 321 Short verb-movement 110-111 silent expletive 47 situations 7-9 prototypical 9-10 small clauses 153-169 specific individuals 77, 83, 86 specificity 83, 131 quodlibetic 132 scopal 132 stage-level 195 state 195,206 stative 183, 184, 185, 189, 193-195, 206,316 stress 162,255,258,264 stress strengthening 289 stress-focus 287-302 strong/weak distinction 127 subject 30, 60, 69, 72, 263 clitic 233-250 non-dislocated 63 null subjects 120-121 thematic 156 subject-clitic inversion 233-250 subject-verb inversion 192 subjunctive 147, 247 superiority effects 80, 81 syncretic category 16 syntax-phonology 292, 301 353 mapping 291, T taxonomic properties of kinds 310314 telicity 153-165 temporal adverbial 319 theta-assignment 156 internal theta-role 165 theta-dentification 158 theta-projection 158 tone: copy 216, 223-224 inversion 216, 223-224 tonal alignment 227 tonal lowering 225 tonal primitive 221, 227, 229 unmarked tone, 226 topic 29fh, 71-209, 213-229, 255, 307 comment 174 feature 82, 85, 88, 89 orientation 114-120 post-focal 215-229 pre-focal 215-229 Topic/Focus, 16fh Top(ic)P, 77 topicalisation 20, 21-23, 89, 269 transitory 306 type-shifting operator 312 typology of focus 289 U unaccusative(s) 185, 192, 194, 307 universal 139, 336 unmarked utterance 288 unselectively bound 312 V valuation constraint 127, 129 354 SUBJECT INDEX variable(s), 2, 3, 42, 47, 52, 53, 88, 128 individual 129 situational 129 verb(s): activity verb 153-156 affective verb 61 bridge verb 59, 65, 68 ergative 12 of existence 206 modal verb 68 non-bridge verb 59 of perception 206 passive 12 subjunctive verb 66 verb second 59, 65, 67 V-feature(s)16,20,27, 31 voilà 172, 177, 178 vreun N P , 128-150 W weak cross-over 81, 88, 254, 257 weak existential 144-148 weak indefinites 261, 307 Wh: multiple wh-questions 99-104 wh-element 266 wh-exclamatives 15-37 wh-extraction 161 wh-feature(s) 16, 20, 21, 27, 79, 80 wh-in situ 15, 17, 18, 19-25,30, 36,37 wh-interrogatives 242 wh-items 242 wh-movement 15, 18, 22, 68, 80 wh-movement, overt 15 wh-phrase 77, 78 wh-question(s), 15-37, 254, 257, 266 ... Drijkoningen and Paola Monachesi (eds) Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2000 Selected papers from ‘Going Romance 2000, Utrecht, 30 November–2 December ROMANCE LANGUAGES AND LINGUISTIC THEORY 2000. . .ROMANCE LANGUAGES AND LINGUISTIC THEORY 2000 AMSTERDAM STUDIES IN THE THEORY AND HISTORY OF LINGUISTIC SCIENCE General Editor E F KONRAD KOERNER... 1997, 2000 Paris; Going Romance 1999, Leiden; I G G 2000, R o m e ; Going Romance 2000, Utrecht and I G G 2001, Trieste I thank the audiences and organizers of those meetings for their comments and