Subjects, topics and the interpretation of referential pro : AAAAn interface approach to the linking of (null) pronouns

Natural Language and Linguistic Theory

Volumn 25, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 691-734

  Frascarelli, Mara ^a  

^a ROMA TRE UNIVERSITY   (Italy)

Author keywords

Aboutness shift topic; Agree; C domain; Interface; Matching; Preverbal subject(s); Referential pro; Silent topic; Strong weak pronoun(s); Topic criterion

Indexed keywords

EID: 39149096005     PISSN: 0167806X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11049-007-9025-x     Document Type: Article

References (119)

1. Abraham, W. (1993). Null subjects in the history of german: From IP to CP'. Lingua, 89, 117-142.
2. Ackema, P., Brandt, P., Schoorlemmer, M., & Weerman, F. (eds.) (2006). Agreement and arguments. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
3. Alba-Salas, J. (2004). Lexically selected expletives: Evidence from basque and romance. SKY Journal of Linguistics, 17, 35-100.
4. Alexiadou, A. (1997). Adverb placement: A case study in antisymmetric syntax. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
5. Alexiadou, A., & Anagnostopoulou, E. (1998). Parametrizing AGR: Word Order, V-Movement and EPP Checking. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 16, 491-539.
6. Ambar, M. (1992). Para uma Sintaxe da Inversão Sujeito-Verbo em Português. Lisbon: Colibri.
7. Barbosa, P. (1995). Null subjects. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.
8. Barbosa, P. (2000). Clitics: A window into the null subject property. In J. Costa (Ed.), Essays in portuguese comparative syntax (pp. 31-94). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
9. Belletti, A. (2004a). Aspects of the low IP area. In L. Rizzi (Ed.), The cartography of syntactic structures, Vol. 2. The structure of CP and IP (pp. 16-51). Oxford University Press, Oxford.
10. Belletti, A. (ed.) (2004b). The cartography of syntactic structures, Vol. 3. Structures and beyond. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
11. Belletti, A., & Rizzi, L. (eds.) (1996). Parameters and functional heads. essays in comparative syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
12. Benincà, P. (2001). The position of topic and focus in the left periphery. In G. Cinque, & G. Salvi (Eds.), Current studies in Italian Syntax. Essays offered to Lorenzo Renzi (pp. 39-64). Amsterdam/London: Elsevier.
13. Benincà, P., & Cinque, G. (1985). Lexical subjects in Italian and the pro-drop parameter. paper presented at the Comparative Generative Grammar Fiesta", Salzburg.
14. Benincà, P., & Poletto C. (2004). Topic, focus, and V2. Defining the CP sublayers. In L. Rizzi (Ed.), The cartography of syntactic structures, Vol. 2, The structure of CP and IP (pp. 52-75). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
15. Benincà, P., Salvi, G., & Frison, L. (1988). L'Ordine degli Elementi della Frase e le Costruzioni Marcate. In L. Renzi (Ed.) Grande Grammatica Italiana di Consultazione, Vol. I (pp. 115-225), Bologna: Il Mulino.
16. Bonvino, E. (2006). Le Sujet Postverbal en Italien Parlé: syntaxe, zones et intonation. Paris, Ophrys: Bibliotheque des faits des langues.
17. Büring, D. (1999). Topic. In P. Bosch, & van der Sandt, R. (Eds.), Focus. Linguistic cognitive and computational perspectives (pp. 142-165). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
18. Calabrese, A. (1986). Pronomina. Some properties of the italian pronominal system. In N. Fukui, T. R. Rapoport, & E. Sagey (Eds.), Papers in theoretical linguistics (pp. 1-46). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
19. Calabrese, A. (1992). Some remarks on focus and logical structure in Italian. Harvard Working Papers in Linguistics, 1, 91-127.
20. Cardinaletti, A. (1990). Impersonal constructions and sentential arguments in German. Padua: Unipress.
21. Cardinaletti, A. (1997). Subjects and clause structure. In L. Haegeman (ed.), The new comparative syntax (pp. 33-63). London and New York: Longman.
22. Cardinaletti, A. (2002). Against optional and zero clitics. Right dislocation vs. marginalization. Studia Linguistica, 56, 29-57.
23. Cardinaletti, A. (2004). Towards a cartography of subject positions. In L. Rizzi (Ed.), The cartography of syntactic structures, Vol. 2, The structure of CP and IP (pp. 115-165). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
24. Cardinaletti, A., & Starke, M. (1999). The typology of structural dependency. A case study of three classes of pronouns. In H. van Riemsdijk (Ed.), Clitics in the language of Europe (pp. 145-233). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
25. Cecchetto, C. (1999). A comparative analysis of left and right dislocation in romance. Studia Linguistica, 53, 40-67.
26. Chomsky, N. (1981). Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht: Foris.
27. Chomsky, N. (2001). Derivation by phase. In M. Kenstowicz (Ed.), Ken hale: A life in language (pp. 1-52). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
28. Chomsky, N. (2004). Beyond explanatory adequacy. In A. Belletti (Ed.), The cartography of syntactic structures. Vol. 3, structures and beyond (pp. 104-131). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
29. Chomsky, N. (2005). On phases, ms. Cambridge, MA: MIT.
30. Cinque, G. (1990). Types of A'-dependencies. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
31. Cinque, G. (ed.) (2002). The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, Vol. 1. Functional Structure in DP and IP. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
32. D'Imperio, M. (2002). Italian Intonation: An overview and some questions', Probus 14, 37-69.
33. Duarte, Maria Eugenia. 1993. 'Do Pronome Nulo ao Pronome Pleno', in I. Roberts and M.A. Kato (eds.), Portogês Brasileiro: uma viagen diacrônica, Editora da UNICAMP, Campinas, pp. 107-128.
34. Féry, C. (1992). Focus, topic and intonation in German. Arbeitspapiere des sonder-forschungsbereichs 340, Bericht Nr. 20, University of Tübingen.
35. Frascarelli, M. (2000). The syntax-phonology interface in focus and topic constructions in Italian. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
36. Frascarelli, M. (2004a). Dislocation, clitic resumption and minimality: A comparative analysis of left and right topic constructions in Italian. In R. Bok-Bennema, B. Hollebrandse, B. Kampers-Manhe, & P. Sleeman (Eds.), Romance languages and linguistic theory 2002 (pp. 99-118). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
37. Frascarelli, M. (2004b). 'L'interpretazione del Focus e la Portata degli Operatori Sintattici. In F. Albano Leoni, F. Cutugno, M. Pettorino, & R. Savy (Eds.), Il parlato italiano. Atti del Convegno Nazionale (13-15 febbraio 2003), M. D'Auria Editore, CIRASS, Naples, (CD Rom), B06.
38. Frascarelli, M. (2006). The fine structure of the topic field, paper presented at the "Bantu-Romance Connection" Workshop, Leeds, May, 25-27.
39. Frascarelli, M., & Hinterhölzl, R. (2007). Types of topics in German and Italian. In S. Winkler & K. Schwabe (Eds.), On information structure, meaning and form (pp. 87-116). Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
40. Frascarelli, M., & Puglielli, A. to appear. 'Focus in the Force-Fin System. Information Structure in Cushitic Languages. In A. Enoch, K. Hartmann, & M. Zimmermann (Eds.), Focus Strategies: Evidence from African languages. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
41. Frota, S. (2000). Prosody and focus in european portoguese: Implication for intonation theory. New York: Garland.
42. Gilligan, G. M. (1987). A cross-linguistic approach to the pro-drop parameter, Ph.D. dissertation. Los Angeles: University of Southern California.
43. Givón, T. (1983). Topic continuity in discourse: An introduction. In T. Givón (Ed.), Topic continuity in discourse: A quantitative cross-language study (pp. 5-41). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
44. Goldsmith, J. A. (ed.) (1999). Phonological Theory. The essential readings, Blackwell Publishing, London.
45. Grimshaw, J., & Samek-Lodovici, V. (1998). Optimal subjects and subject universals. In P. Barbosa, et al. (Ed.), Is the best good enough? Optimality and competition in syntax (pp. 193-219). MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
46. Haegeman, L. (1992). Sentential negation in Italian and the NEG criterion. GenGenP, 0, 10-26.
47. Hasegawa, Y. (1985). On the so-called 'Zero-pronouns' in Japanese. The Linguistic Review, 4, 243-289.
48. Hayes, B., & Lahiri, A. (1991). Bengali intonational phonology. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 9, 47-96.
49. Heim, I. (1982). The semantics of definite and indefinite noun phrases, Ph.D dissertation. Amherst: University of Massachusetts.
50. Hicks, G. (2005). Binding theory and its consequences for features, phases, and derivation, ms., The University of York.
51. Hinterhölzl, R., & Pili, D. (2002). Argument Shift across Language Types', paper presented at the XXVIII Incontro di Grammatica Generativa, Università di Lecce.
52. Holmberg, A. (2005). Is there a little pro? Evidence from Finnish. Linguistic Inquiry, 36, 535-564.
53. Hornstein, N. (2000). Move! A minimalist theory of construal. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
54. Horvath, J. (1986). Focus in the theory of grammar and the syntax of Hungarian. Dordrecht: Foris.
55. Huang, C. T. J. (1984). On the distribution and reference of empty pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry, 15, 531-574.
56. Huang, C. T. J. (1989). Pro-drop in Chinese: A generalized control theory. In O. Jaeggli, & K. Safir (Eds.), The null subject parameter (pp. 185-214). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
57. Huang, Y. (2000). Anaphora. a cross-linguistic approach. Oxford: University Press.
58. Hulk, A., & Pollock, J.-Y. (eds.) (2001). Subject inversion in romance and the theory of universal grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
59. Ihsane, T., & Puskás, G. (2001). Specific is not definite. In U. Shlonsky & T. Ihsane (Eds). Generative Grammar in Geneva, 2, 39-54.
60. Jackendoff, R. (1983). Semantics and cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
61. Jaeggli, O. (1982). Topics in romance syntax. Dordrecht: Foris.
62. Jaeggli, O., & Safir, K. (eds.) (1989a). The null subject parameter. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
63. Jaeggli, O., & Safir, K. (1989b). The null subject parameter and parametric theory. In O. Jaeggli, & K. Safir (Eds.), The null subject parameter (pp. 1-44). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
64. Kato, M. A. (1999). Strong pronouns and weak pronominals in the null subject parameter. Probus, 11, 1-37.
65. Kayne, R. (2002). Pronouns and their antecedents. In S. D. Epstein, & T. D. Seely (Eds.), Derivation and explanation in the minimalist program (pp. 133-166). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
66. Kayne, R. (2005). On parameters and on principles of pronunciation. ms., NYU.
67. Kenesei, I. (2006). Focus is identification. In V. Molnár, & S. Winkler (Eds.), The architecture of focus (pp. 137-168). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
68. Kenstowicz, M. (1989). The null subject parameter in modern arabic dialects. In O. Jaeggli, & K. Safir (Eds.), The null subject parameter (pp. 263-276). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
69. Kiss, É. K. (1998). Identificational focus versus information focus. Language, 74, 245-273.
70. Kuroda, S.-Y. (1972). The categorical and thetic judgment. Foundations of Language, 9, 153-185.
71. Lambrecht, K. (1994). Information structure and sentence form: Topic, focus and the mental representation of discourse referents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
72. Lasnik, H., & Stowell, T. (1991). Weakest crossover. Linguistic Inquiry, 22, 687-720.
73. Lipták, A. (2005). Relativization strategies in temporal adjunct clauses, ms. ULCL, Leiden University.
74. Marotta, G. (2000). Allineamento e Trascrizione dei Toni Accentuali Complessi: una proposta. In Atti delle Decime Giornate del Gruppo di Fonetica Sperimentale, A.I.A, Naples, pp. 139-149.
75. Marotta, G., & Sardelli, E. (2003). 'Sulla Prosodia della Domanda con Soggetto Postverbale in due Varietà di Italiano Toscano (pisano e senese)', in P. Cosi, E. Magno Caldognetto and A. Zamboni (eds.), Voce, Canto, Parlato. Studi in onore di F. Ferrero, Unipress, Padua, pp. 205-212.
76. Molnár, V. (2002). Contrast - from a contrastive perspective. In H. Hallelgard, S. Johansson, B. Behrens, & C. Fabricius-Hansen (Eds.), Information structure in a cross-linguistic perspective (pp. 147-162). Amsterdam/New York: Rodopi.
77. Moro, A. (1997). The raising of predicates. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
78. Nespor, M., & Vogel, I. (1986). Prosodic phonology. Dordrecht: Foris.
79. Pesetsky, D. (1987). Wh-in-situ: Movement and unselective binding. In E. Reuland & A. ter Meulen (Eds.), The representation of (In)definiteness (pp. 98-129). Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
80. Pierrehumbert, J. (1980). The Phonology and phonetics of english intonation, Ph.D. dissertation. Cambridge, MA: MIT.
81. Pierrehumbert, J., & Hirschberg, J. (1990). The meaning of intonational contours in the interpretation of discourse. In P. R. Cohen, R. Philip, J. Morgan, & M. E. Pollack (eds.), Intentions in communication (pp. 271-311). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
82. Poletto, C. (2000). The higher functional field. Evidence from northern italian dialects. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
83. Poletto, C., & Pollock, J.-Y. (2004). On the left periphery of some romance wh-questions. In L. Rizzi (Ed.), The cartography of syntactic structures. Vol. 2, The structure of CP and IP (pp. 251-296). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
84. Pollock, J.-Y. (1996). Elements de Syntaxe du Verbe dans les Langues Germaniques et Romaines. Ms., Université d'Amiens.
85. Ramaglia, F. (2006). 'Focused Topic', paper presented at the "XXXII Incontro di Grammatica Generativa", Università di Firenze.
86. Reinhart, T. (1981). Pragmatics and linguistics: An analysis of sentence Topics. Philosophica, 27, 53-94.
87. Reuland, E., & Reinhart, T. (1995). Pronouns, anaphors and case. In H. Haider, S. Olsen, & S. Vikner (Eds.), Studies in comparative germanic syntax (pp. 241-269). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
88. Rizzi, L. (1982). Issues in italian syntax. Dordrecht: Foris.
89. Rizzi, L. (1986). Null objects in italian and the theory of pro. Linguistic Inquiry, 17, 501-558.
90. Rizzi, L. (1990). Relativized minimality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
91. Rizzi, L. (1994). Early null subjects and root null subjects. In T. Hoekstra, & B. Schwartz (Eds.) Language acquisition studies in generative grammar (pp. 151-176). Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
92. Rizzi, L. (1996). Residual verb second and the wh-criterion. In A. Belletti & L. Rizzi (Eds.), Parameters and functional heads. essays in comparative syntax (pp. 63-90). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
93. Rizzi, L. (1997a). A parametric approach to comparative syntax properties of the pronominal system. In L. Haegeman (Ed.), The new comparative syntax (pp. 268-285). London: Longman.
94. Rizzi, L. (1997b). The fine structure of the left periphery. In L. Haegeman (Ed.), Elements of grammar. Handbook in generative syntax (pp. 281-337). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
95. Rizzi, L. (2001). Locality and left periphery, ms. Università di Siena.
96. Rizzi, L. (ed.) (2004). The cartography of syntactic structures, Vol. 2. The Structure of CP and IP. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
97. Rizzi, L. (2006). On the form of chains: Criterial positions and ECP effects. In L. Cheng, & N. Corver (Eds.), Wh Movement: Moving on (pp. 97-133). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
98. Roberts, I. (2004). 'Some Consequences of a Deletion Analysis of Null Subjects', paper presented at the "LAGB Annual Meeting", University of Surrey, Roehampton.
99. Rochemont, M., & Culicover, P. (1990). English focus constructions and the theory of grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
100. Rohrbacher, B. W. (1999). Morphology-driven syntax: A theory of V to I raising and pro-drop. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
101. Safir, K. (1985). Missing subjects in german. In J. Toman (Ed.), Linguistic theory and the grammar of german (pp. 193-229). Dordrecht: Foris.
102. Samek-Lodovici, V. (2005). Prosody-syntax interaction in the expression of focus. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 23, 687-755.
103. Selkirk, E. (1986). On derived domains in sentence phonology. Phonology, 3, 371-405.
104. Selkirk, E. (2000). The interaction of constraints on prosodic phrasing. In M. Horne (Ed.), Prosody: Theory and experiment. Studies presented to Gösta Bruce (pp. 231-261). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
105. Selkirk, E., & Kratzer, A. (2007). Focus, Phases and Phrase Stress', ms. University of Massachusetts at Amherst.
106. Sigurosson, H. Á. (1993). Argument-drop in old Icelandic. Lingua, 89, 247-280.
107. Sigurosson, H. Á. (2004a). The syntax of person, tense, and speech features. Italian Journal of Linguistics, 16, 219-251 [Special issue, ed. by V. Bianchi and K. Safir].
108. Sigurosson, H. Á. (2004b). Agree and agreement: Evidence from germanic. In W. Abraham (Ed.), Focus on germanic typology (Studia Typologica 6) (pp. 61-103). Berlin: Akademie Verlag.
109. Sigurosson, H. Á., & Maling, J. (2006). Argument drop and the empty left edge condition (ELEC), lingBuzz 000313.
110. Steedman, M. (2000). Information structure and the syntax-phonology interface. Linguistic Inquiry, 31, 649-689.
111. Suñer, M. (2003). The lexical preverbal subject in a romance null subject language. Where are thou? In R. Núñez-Cedeño, L. López, & R. Cameron (Eds.), A romance perspective on language knowledge and use (pp. 341-357). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
112. Svenonius, P. (ed.) (2002). Subjects, Expletives and the Extended Projection Principle. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
113. Travis, L. (1984). Parameters and effects of word order variation, Ph.D. dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.
114. Trecci, A. (2006). Who is lui? Reference of italian overt and covert subject pronouns. In M. Frascarelli (Ed.), Phases of interpretation (pp. 321-339). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
115. Truckenbrodt, H. (1999). On the relation between syntactic phrases and phonological phrases. Linguistic Inquiry, 30, 219-255.
116. Vanelli, L. (1986). Strutture tematiche in italiano antico. In H. Stammerjohann (Ed.), Tema-rema in italiano (pp. 249-273). Tubingen: Narr.
117. Zubizarreta, M. L. (1994). The grammatical representation of topic and focus: Implication for the structure of the clause. University of Venice Working Papers in Linguistics, 4, 97-126.
118. Zubizarreta, M. L. (1998). Prosody, focus and word order. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
119. Zwart, J.-W. (2002). Issues relating to a derivational theory of binding. In S. D. Epstein, & T. D. Seely (Eds.), Derivation and explanation in the minimalist program (pp. 269-304). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.