Advertisement

Natural Language & Linguistic Theory

, Volume 32, Issue 4, pp 1033–1088 | Cite as

Clitic doubling at the syntax-morphophonology interface

A-movement and morphological merger in Bulgarian
Article

Abstract

True clitic doubling involves multiple expression of a single argument in different structural positions. In clitic doubling configurations of this kind, a clitic expresses features of its full nominal phrase associate in argument position. True clitic doubling has traditionally been argued to arise via agreement, so that the clitic is the manifestation of an agreement relation between a verb and the associate. However, another possibility exists: the clitic could be a (pro)nominal element related to the associate via movement; then, clitic doubling involves the simultaneous realization of both the head and the foot of a movement chain. Here, I argue for the latter analysis, showing that true clitic doubling, at least in Bulgarian, has the properties of movement—i.e., it does not involve agreement, as is standardly assumed for this language. I provide support for this claim by considering a number of diagnostics which distinguish between clitics that reflect agreement processes and clitics that do not. Specifically, I argue that the clitic is a reduced articulation of the higher occurrence of a raised object. Thus, the proposed analysis treats clitic doubling as an interface phenomenon which results from the interaction of two independently motivated operations of the syntactic and morphophonological components of grammar: A-movement and morphological merger.

Keywords

Clitic doubling Agreement A-movement Morphological merger Bulgarian 

Notes

Acknowledgements

I am grateful to Sandy Chung, Jorge Hankamer, and Jim McCloskey for all their help in the course of this work. In addition, I thank for valuable feedback on various aspects of this and related work Judith Aissen, Ryan Bennett, Hagit Borer, Vera Gribanova, Peter Jenks, Ruth Kramer, Line Mikkelsen, Ora Matushansky, Andrew Nevins, Mark Norris, Roumyana Pancheva, Maria Polinsky, Eric Potsdam, Omer Preminger, Ivan Sag, Anie Thompson, Matt Tucker, Matt Wagers, and audiences at Stanford University, UC Berkeley, UC Santa Cruz, and LSA 87. Special thanks are due to Ad Neeleman and four anonymous NLLT reviewers for detailed comments on earlier versions of this paper. All errors are mine.

References

  1. Abels, Klaus. 2003. Successive cyclicity, anti-locality, and adposition stranding. Doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut. Google Scholar
  2. Agouraki, Yoryia. 1992. Clitic-left-dislocation and clitic doubling: A unification. In UCL working papers in linguistics 4, ed. Hans van de Koot, 45–70. London: UCL Division of Psychology and Language Sciences. Google Scholar
  3. Alexandrova, Galia. 1997. Pronominal Clitics as g(eneralized) f(amiliarity)-licensing AGR0. In Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics (FASL): The Princeton meeting, 1–31. Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publications. Google Scholar
  4. Alexiadou, Artemis, and Elena Anagnostopoulou. 1998. Toward a uniform account of scrambling and clitic doubling. In German: Syntactic problems—problematic syntax, eds. Werner Abraham and Elly van Gelderen. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag. Google Scholar
  5. Alexiadou, Artemis, and Elena Anagnostopoulou. 2000. Clitic-doubling and (non)-configurationality. In North East Linguistic Society (NELS), eds. Masako Hirotani, Andries Coetzee, Nancy Hall, and Ji-yung Kim, 17–28. New Brunswick: Rutgers University, Graduate Linguistic Student Association. Google Scholar
  6. Anagnostopoulou, Elena. 1994. Clitic dependencies in Modern Greek. Doctoral dissertation, Salzburg University. Google Scholar
  7. Anagnostopoulou, Elena. 1999. Conditions on clitic doubling in Greek. In Clitics in the languages of Europe, ed. Henk C. van Riemsdijk, 761–798. Berlin: de Gruyter. Google Scholar
  8. Anagnostopoulou, Elena. 2003. The syntax of ditransitives: Evidence from clitics. Berlin: de Gruyter. Google Scholar
  9. Anagnostopoulou, Elena. 2005. Strong and weak person restrictions: A feature checking analysis. In Clitic and affix combinations: Theoretical perspectives, eds. Lorie Heggie and Francisco Ordóñez, 199–235. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar
  10. Anagnostopoulou, Elena. 2007. Clitic doubling. In The Blackwell companion to syntax, eds. Martin Everaert and Henk van Riemsdijk, 519–581. Malden: Blackwell Publishing. Chap. 14. Google Scholar
  11. Anagnostopoulou, Elena. 2012. Variation in clitic doubling. Handout, Minicourse “Meaning domains, phases and Agree” (Day 3), September 2012. Google Scholar
  12. Aoun, Joseph. 1999. Clitic-doubled arguments. In Beyond principles and parameters: Essays in memory of Osvaldo Jaeggli, eds. Kyle Johnson and Ian Roberts, 13–42. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic. Google Scholar
  13. Arregi, Karlos, and Andrew Nevins. 2008. Agreement and clitic restrictions in Basque. In Agreement restrictions, eds. Roberta D’Alessandro, Susan Fischer, and Gunnar Hrafn Hrafnbjargarson, 49–86. New York: de Gruyter. Google Scholar
  14. Baker, Mark. 1996. The polysynthesis parameter. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  15. Baker, Mark C. 2008. On the nature of the Antiagreement effect: Evidence from wh-in-situ in Ibibio. Linguistic Inquiry 39: 615–632. Google Scholar
  16. Berent, Gerald P. 1980. On the realization of trace: Macedonian clitic pronouns. In Morphosyntax in Slavic, eds. Catherine V. Chvany and Richard D. Brecht, 150–186. Columbus: Slavica Publishers. Google Scholar
  17. Bobaljik, Jonathan. 2003. Floating quantifiers: Handle with care. In The second Glot International state-of-the-article book, eds. Lisa L.-S. Cheng and Rint Sybesma, 107–148. Berlin: de Gruyter. Google Scholar
  18. Bonet, Eulàlia. 1991. Morphology after syntax: Pronominal clitics in Romance. Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge. Google Scholar
  19. Borer, Hagit. 1984. Parametric syntax. Dordrecht: Foris Publications. Google Scholar
  20. Bošković, Željko. 1999. On multiple feature checking: Multiple wh-fronting and multiple head movement. In Working minimalism, eds. Samuel Epstein and Norbert Hornstein, 159–187. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  21. Brandi, Luciana, and Patrizia Cordin. 1989. Two Italian dialects and the null subject parameter. In The null subject parameter, eds. Jaeggli Osvaldo and Kenneth Safir, 111–142. Dordrecht: Reidel. Google Scholar
  22. Bresnan, Joan, and Sam A. Mchombo. 1987. Topic, pronoun, and agreement in Chicheŵa. Language 63: 741–782. Google Scholar
  23. Cardinaletti, Anna. 2002. Against optional and null clitics. Right dislocation vs. marginalization. Studia Linguistica 56: 29–57. Google Scholar
  24. Cecchetto, Carlo. 2000. Doubling structure and reconstruction. Probus 12: 93–126. Google Scholar
  25. Chomsky, Noam. 1986a. Barriers. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  26. Chomsky, Noam. 1986b. Knowledge of language. New York: Praeger Publishers. Google Scholar
  27. Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The minimalist program. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  28. Chomsky, Noam. 2000. Minimalist inquiries: The framework. In Step by step: Essays on minimalist syntax in honor of Howard Lasnik, eds. Roger Martin, David Michaels, and Juan Uriagereka, 89–155. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  29. Chomsky, Noam. 2001. Derivation by phase. In Ken Hale. A life in language, ed. Michael Kenstowicz, 1–52. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  30. Chomsky, Noam. 2004. Beyond explanatory adequacy. In Structures and beyond: The cartography of syntactic structures, ed. Adriana Belletti. Vol. 3, 104–131. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  31. Chomsky, Noam. 2008. On phases. In Foundational issues in linguistic theory, eds. Robert Freidin, Carlos Otero, and Maria Luisa Zubizarreta, 133–166. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  32. Chung, Sandra, and William A. Ladusaw. 2004. Restriction and saturation. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  33. Cinque, Guglielmo. 1980. On extraction from NP in Italian. Journal of Italian Linguistics 1(2): 47–99. Google Scholar
  34. Cinque, Guglielmo. 1990. Types of A-dependencies. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  35. Cinque, Guglielmo. 2011. Extraction from DP in Italian revisited. Ms. University of Venice, http://hdl.handle.net/10278/2420.
  36. Collins, Chris, and Höskuldur Thráinsson. 1996. VP-internal structure and object shift in Icelandic. Linguistic Inquiry 27: 391–444. Google Scholar
  37. Coppock, Elizabeth, and Stephen Wechsler. 2012. The objective conjugation in Hungarian: Agreement without phi-features. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 30: 699–740. Google Scholar
  38. Corbett, Greville G. 2006. Agreement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
  39. Cornilescu, Alexandra, and Carmen Dobrovie-Sorin. 2008. Clitic doubling, complex heads and interarboreal operations. In Clitic doubling in the Balkan languages, eds. Dalina Kallulli and Liliane Tasmowski, 289–319. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar
  40. Cyxun, Genadij A. 1962. Mestoimennata enklitika i slovoredât v bâlgarskoto izrečenie. Bâlgarski ezik 12: 283–291. Google Scholar
  41. Demirdache, Hamida. 1991. Resumptive chains in restrictive relatives, appositives and dislocation structures. Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge. Google Scholar
  42. Déprez, Vivian. 1989. On the typology of syntactic positions and the nature of chains. Doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge. Google Scholar
  43. Diaconescu, Constanta, and María Luisa Rivero. 2007. An applicative analysis of double object constructions in Romanian. Probus 19: 209–233. Google Scholar
  44. Diesing, Molly. 1992. Indefinites. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  45. Dimitrova-Vulchanova, Mila, and Giuliana Giusti. 1995. Quantified noun phrase structure in Bulgarian. In University of Venice working papers in linguistics, Vol. 5, 43–65. Venezia: Centro Linguistico Interfacoltà, Università degli studi di Venezia. Google Scholar
  46. Dimitrova-Vulchanova, Mila, and Lars Hellan. 1999. Clitics and Bulgarian clause structure. In Clitics in the languages of Europe, ed. Henk C. van Riemsdijk, 469–514. Berlin: de Gruyter. Google Scholar
  47. Dobrovie-Sorin, Carmen. 1994. The syntax of Romanian: Comparative studies in Romance. Vol. 40 of Studies in generative grammar. Berlin: de Gruyter. Google Scholar
  48. Doggett, Teal Bissell. 2004. All things being unequal: Locality in movement. Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge. Google Scholar
  49. Embick, David. 2004. Unaccusative syntax and verbal alternations. In The unaccusativity puzzle: Explorations of the syntax-lexicon interface, eds. Artemis Alexiadou, Elena Anagnostopoulou, and Martin Evereart, 137–158. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  50. Engdahl, Elisabet. 1985. Parasitic gaps, resumptive pronouns, and subject extractions. Linguistics 23: 3–44. Google Scholar
  51. Fanselow, Gisbert, and Damir Cavar. 2001. Remarks on the economy of pronunciation. In Competition in syntax, eds. Gereon Muller and Wolfgang Sternefeld, 107–150. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar
  52. Fanselow, Gisbert, and Anoop Mahajan. 2000. Towards a minimalist theory of wh-expletives, wh-copying, and successive cyclicity. In Wh-scope marking, eds. Uli Lutz, Gereon Muller, and Armin von Stechow, 195–230. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar
  53. Franco, Jon. 2000. Agreement as a continuum: The case of Spanish pronominal clitics. In Clitic phenomena in European languages, eds. Frits Beukema and Marcel den Dikken. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar
  54. Franks, Steven. 2006. Another look at li placement in Bulgarian. The Linguistic Review 23: 161–211. Google Scholar
  55. Franks, Steven. 2009. Macedonian pronominal clitics as object agreement markers. In A linguist’s linguist: Studies in South Slavic linguistics in honor of E. Wayles Browne, eds. Steven Franks, Vrinda Chidambaram, and Brian Joseph, 189–222. Bloomington: Slavica Publishers. Google Scholar
  56. Franks, Steven, and Tracy King. 2000. A handbook of Slavic clitics. New York: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  57. Franks, Steven, and Catherine Rudin. 2005. Bulgarian clitics as K0 heads. In Formal approaches to Slavic linguistics: The South Carolina meeting, eds. Steven Franks, Frank Y. Gladney, and Mila Tasseva-Kurktchieva, 106–118. Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publications. Google Scholar
  58. Gerassimova, Veronika A., and T. Florian Jaeger. 2002. Configurationality and the direct object clitic in Bulgarian. In European Summer School in Logic, Language and Information (ESSLLI), ed. Malvina Nissim. Vol. 7. Google Scholar
  59. Giusti, Giuliana. 1997. The categorial status of determiners. In The new comparative syntax, ed. Liliane Haegeman, 95–123. Addison Wesley: Longman. Google Scholar
  60. Guentchéva, Zlatka. 1994. Thématisation de l’objet en bulgare. Frankfurt: Peter Lang. Google Scholar
  61. Guentchéva, Zlatka. 2008. Object clitic doubling constructions and topicality in Bulgarian. In Clitic doubling in the Balkan languages, eds. Dalina Kallulli and Liliane Tasmowski, 203–223. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar
  62. Haiman, John, and Paola Benincà. 1992. The Rhaeto-Romance languages. London: Routledge. Google Scholar
  63. Halle, Morris, and Alec Marantz. 1993. Distributed morphology and the pieces of inflection. In The view from building, eds. Kenneth Hale and Samuel Jay Keyser. Vol. 20, 111–176. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  64. Halle, Morris, and Alec Marantz. 1994. Some key features of Distributed Morphology. In Papers on phonology and morphology, eds. Andrew Carnie and Heidi Harley. Vol. 21 of MIT working papers in linguistics, 275–288. Cambridge: MITWPL. Google Scholar
  65. Harizanov, Boris. 2011. NonInitiality within spell-out domains: Unifying the post-syntactic behavior of Bulgarian dative clitics. In Morphology at Santa Cruz: Papers in honor of Jorge Hankamer, eds. Nick LaCara, Anie Thompson, and Matt A. Tucker. Santa Cruz: UCSC Linguistics Research Center. Google Scholar
  66. Harris, Alice. 1981. Georgian syntax: A study in relational grammar. Vol. 33 of Cambridge studies in linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
  67. Hiraiwa, Ken. 2001. Multiple agree and the defective intervention constraint in Japanese. In The MIT-Harvard joint conference, ed. Ora Matushansky. Vol. 40 of MITWPL, 67–80. Cambridge: MITWPL. Google Scholar
  68. Hiraiwa, Ken. 2004. Dimensions of symmetry in syntax: Agreement and clausal architecture. Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge. Google Scholar
  69. Holmberg, Anders. 1986. Word order and syntactic features. Doctoral dissertation, Stockholm University. Google Scholar
  70. Hornstein, Norbert. 2001. Move! A minimalist theory of construal. Oxford: Blackwell. Google Scholar
  71. Huang, C.-T. James. 1982. Logical relations in Chinese and the theory of grammar. Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Google Scholar
  72. Iatridou, Sabine. 1995. Clitics and island effects. In University of Pennsylvania working papers in linguistics 2, eds. Roumyana Izvorski and Victoria Tredinnick, 11–30. Philadelphia: Penn Linguistics Club. Google Scholar
  73. Ito, Junko, and Armin Mester. 2009. The extended prosodic word. In Phonological domains: Universals and derivations, eds. Baris Kabak and Jaent Grijzenhout, 135–194. The Hague: de Gruyter. Google Scholar
  74. Jaeggli, Osvaldo. 1982. Topics in Romance syntax. Dordrecht: Foris Publications. Google Scholar
  75. Jaeggli, Osvaldo. 1986. Three issues in the theory of clitics: Case, doubled NPs, and extraction in the syntax of pronominal clitics. In The syntax of pronominal clitics, ed. Hagit Borer. Vol. 19 of Syntax and semantics, 15–42. San Diego: Academic Press. Google Scholar
  76. Kallulli, Dalina. 2000. Restrictive relative clauses revisited. In North East Linguistic Society (NELS), eds. Masako Hirotani, Andries Coetzee, Nancy Hall, and Ji-yung Kim, 353–362. New Brunswick: Rutgers University, Graduate Linguistic Student Association. Google Scholar
  77. Kallulli, Dalina, and Liliane Tasmowski. 2008. Clitic doubling, core syntax and the interfaces. In Clitic doubling in the Balkan languages, eds. Dalina Kallulli and Liliane Tasmowski, 1–32. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar
  78. Kandybowicz, Jason. 2007. On fusion and multiple-copy spell-out: The case of verbal repetition. In The copy theory of movement, eds. Norbert Corver and Jairo Nunes, 119–150. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar
  79. Kayne, Richard S. 1984. Connectedness and binary branching. Dordrecht: Foris Publications. Google Scholar
  80. Kayne, Richard S. 1994. The antisymmetry of syntax. Vol. 25 of Linguistic inquiry monographs. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  81. Kayne, Richard S. 2000. Parameters and universals. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  82. Kechagias, Axiotis. 2011. Regulating word order in Modern Greek: Verb initial and non-verb initial orders and the conceptual-intentional interface. Doctoral dissertation, University College London. Google Scholar
  83. Kramer, Ruth. 2014. Clitic doubling or object agreement: The view from Amharic. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 32: 593–634. Google Scholar
  84. Krapova, Iliyana, and Guglielmo Cinque. 2008. Clitic reduplication constructions in Bulgarian. In Clitic doubling in the Balkan languages, eds. Dalina Kallulli and Liliane Tasmowski, 257–286. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar
  85. Kupula, Mikko. 2011. A phase extension approach to double object constructions—evidence from Modern Greek. Studia Linguistica 65: 147–169. Google Scholar
  86. Landau, Idan. 2006. Chain resolution in Hebrew V(P)-fronting. Syntax 9: 32–66. Google Scholar
  87. Leafgren, John R. 1997. Bulgarian clitic doubling: Overt topicality. Journal of Slavic Linguistics 5: 117–143. Google Scholar
  88. Legate, Julie Anne. 2012. Subjects in Acehnese and the nature of the passive. Language 88: 495–524. Google Scholar
  89. Mahajan, Anoop. 1990. The A/A-bar distinction and movement theory. Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge. Google Scholar
  90. Marantz, Alec. 1984. On the nature of grammatical relations. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  91. Marantz, Alec. 1988. Clitics, morphological merger, and the mapping to phonological structure. In Theoretical morphology: Approaches in modern linguistics, eds. Michael Hammond and Michael Noonan, 253–270. San Diego: Academic Press. Google Scholar
  92. Matushansky, Ora. 2006. Head movement in linguistic theory. Linguistic Inquiry 37: 69–109. Google Scholar
  93. McCloskey, James. 2000. Quantifier float and wh-movement in an Irish English. Linguistic Inquiry 31: 57–84. Google Scholar
  94. McDaniel, Dana. 1986. Conditions on wh-chains. Doctoral dissertation, CUNY. Google Scholar
  95. McDaniel, Dana. 1989. Partial and multiple Wh-movement. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 7: 565–604. Google Scholar
  96. Neeleman, Ad, and Hans van de Koot. 2008. Dutch scrambling and the nature of discourse templates. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 11: 137–189. Google Scholar
  97. Neeleman, Ad, and Reiko Vermeulen (eds.). 2013. The syntax of topic, focus, and contrast: An interface-based approach. Berlin: De Gruyter. Google Scholar
  98. Nevins, Andrew. 2007. The representation of third person and its consequences for person-case effects. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 25: 273–313. Google Scholar
  99. Nevins, Andrew. 2011. Multiple agree with clitics: Person complementarity vs. omnivorous number. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 29: 939–971. Google Scholar
  100. Nunes, Jairo. 1999. Linearization of chains and phonetic realization of chain links. In Working minimalism, eds. Samuel Epstein and Norbert Hornstein, 217–249. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  101. Nunes, Jairo. 2004. Linearization of chains and sideward movement. Linguistic inquiry monographs. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  102. Pancheva, Roumyana. 2005. The rise and fall of second-position clitics. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 23: 103–167. Google Scholar
  103. Papangeli, Dimitra. 2000. Clitic doubling in Modern Greek: A head-complement relation. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 12: 473–499. Google Scholar
  104. Pesetsky, David, and Esther Torrego. 2001. T-to-C movement: Causes and consequences. In Ken Hale: A life in language, ed. Michael Kenstowicz, 355–426. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  105. Philippaki-Warburton, Irena, Spyridoula Varlokosta, Michalis Georgiafentis, and George Kotzoglou. 2004. Moving from theta-positions: Pronominal clitic doubling in Greek. Lingua 114: 963–989. Google Scholar
  106. Poletto, Cecilia. 2000. The higher functional field: Evidence from Northern Italian dialects. London: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  107. Preminger, Omer. 2009. Breaking agreements: Distinguishing agreement and clitic doubling by their failures. Linguistic Inquiry 40: 619–666. Google Scholar
  108. Preminger, Omer. 2010. Failure to agree is not a failure: Phi-agreement with post-verbal subjects in Hebrew. In Linguistic variation yearbook, eds. Jeroen van Craenenbroeck and Johan Rooryck. Vol. 9, 241–278. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar
  109. Preminger, Omer. 2011. Agreement as a fallible operation. Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge. Google Scholar
  110. Pylkkänen, Liina. 2002. Introducing arguments. Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Google Scholar
  111. Rezac, Milan. 2010. φ-agree versus φ-feature movement: Evidence from floating quantifiers. Linguistic Inquiry 41: 496–508. Google Scholar
  112. Rezac, Milan. 2011. Phi-features and the modular architecture of language. Berlin: Springer. Google Scholar
  113. Richards, Norvin. 2001. Movement in language: Interactions and architectures. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  114. van Riemsdijk, Henk, and Frans Zwarts. 1997. Left dislocation in Dutch and the status of copying rules. In Materials on left dislocation, eds. Elena Anagnostopoulou, Henk van Riemsdijk, and Frans Zwarts, 119–148. Amsterdam: Benjamins. [Originally appeared in 1974]. Google Scholar
  115. Rizzi, Luigi. 1997. The fine structure of the left periphery. In Elements of grammar, ed. Liliane Haegeman, 281–337. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic. Google Scholar
  116. Roberts, Ian. 2010. Agreement and head movement. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  117. Rudin, Catherine. 1997. Agr-O and Bulgarian pronominal clitics. In Formal approaches to Slavic linguistics: The Indiana meeting, 1996, eds. Martina Lindseth and Steven Franks, 224–252. Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publications. Google Scholar
  118. Rudin, Catherine, Christina Kramer, Loren Billings, and Matthew Baerman. 1999. Macedonian and Bulgarian LI questions: Beyond syntax. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 17: 541–586. Google Scholar
  119. Schneider-Zioga, Patricia. 1994. The syntax of clitic doubling in Modern Greek. Doctoral dissertation, University of Southern California. Google Scholar
  120. Selkirk, Elisabeth. 1995. The prosodic structure of function words. In Signal to syntax: Bootstrapping from speech to grammar in early acquisition, eds. James Morgan and Katherine Demuth, 187–213. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum. Google Scholar
  121. Slavkov, Nikolay. 2008. Formal consequences of dative clitic doubling in Bulgarian ditransitives: An applicative analysis. Journal of Slavic Linguistics 16: 139–166. Google Scholar
  122. Sportiche, Dominique. 1988. A theory of floating quantifiers and its corollaries for constituent structure. Linguistic Inquiry 19: 425–449. Google Scholar
  123. Sportiche, Dominique. 1996. Clitic constructions. In Phrase structure and the lexicon, eds. Johan Rooryck and Laurie Ann Zaring, 213–276. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic. Google Scholar
  124. Suñer, Margarita. 1988. The role of agreement in clitic-doubled constructions. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 6: 391–434. Google Scholar
  125. Suñer, Margarita. 1992. Subject clitics in the Northern Italian vernaculars and the matching hypothesis. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 10: 641–672. Google Scholar
  126. Suñer, Margarita. 2000. Object-shift: Comparing a Romance language to Germanic. Probus 12: 261–289. Google Scholar
  127. Szabolcsi, Anna. 2006. Strong vs. weak islands. In The Blackwell companion to syntax, eds. Martin Everaert and Henk van Riemsdijk, 479–531. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. Google Scholar
  128. Thráinsson, Höskuldur. 2001. Object shift and scrambling. In The handbook of contemporary syntactic theory, eds. Mark Baltin and Chris Collins, 148–202. Malden: Blackwell Publishing. Google Scholar
  129. Toman, Jindrich. 1999. On clitic displacement. In Topics in South Slavic syntax and semantics, eds. Mila Dimitrova-Vulchanova and Lars Hellan, 205–228. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar
  130. Torrego, Esther. 1998. Nominative subjects and PRO-drop INFL. Syntax 1: 206–219. Google Scholar
  131. Truswell, Robert. 2011. Events, phrases, and questions. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  132. Tsakali, Vina. 2008. “Double” floating quantifiers in Modern Greek and Pontic. In Microvariation in syntactic doubling, eds. Sjef Barbiers, Olaf Koeneman, Marika Lekakou, and Margreet van der Ham. Vol. 36 of Syntax and semantics, 189–203. Bingley: Emerald. Google Scholar
  133. Ura, Hiroyuki. 1996. Multiple feature checking: A theory of grammatical function splitting. Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge. Google Scholar
  134. Uriagereka, Juan. 1995. Aspects of the syntax of clitic placement in Western Romance. Linguistic Inquiry 26: 79–124. Google Scholar
  135. Vakareliyska, Cynthia M. 1994. Na-drop in Bulgarian. Journal of Slavic Linguistics 2: 121–150. Google Scholar
  136. Vicente, Luis. 2007. The syntax of heads and phrases: A study of verb (phrase) fronting. Doctoral dissertation, Leiden University. Google Scholar
  137. Vicente, Luis. 2009. A note on the copy vs. multidominance theories of movement. Catalan Journal of Linguistics 8: 1–23. Google Scholar
  138. Wexler, Kenneth, and Peter W. Culicover. 1977. Some syntactic implications of a theory of language learnability. In Formal syntax, eds. Peter W. Culicover, Thomas Wasow, and Adrian Akmajian, 7–60. San Diego: Academic Press. Google Scholar
  139. Wexler, Kenneth, and Peter W. Culicover. 1983. Formal principles of language acquisition. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  140. Williams, Edwin. 1997. Lexical and syntactic complex predicates. In Complex predicates, eds. Alex Alsina, Joan Bresnan, and Peter Sells, 13–28. Stanford: Center for the Study of Language and Information. Google Scholar
  141. Zubizarreta, Maria Luisa. 1998. Prosody, focus, and word order. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of LinguisticsUniversity of California, Santa CruzSanta CruzUSA

Personalised recommendations