Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Truncation feeds intervention

Two clause type effects in Basque

  • Published:
Natural Language & Linguistic Theory Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In the generative literature, clause type effects have typically been modeled in one of two ways—“truncation” whereby embedded clauses are structurally reduced relative to root clauses, and intervention, by which non-root clauses have additional material that blocks movement available in root contexts. This paper analyzes two clause type effects in Basque—the possibility of verb-initial word orders (V1) and variation in the relative order of Aux, Neg and VP in embedded contexts. We show that these two effects covary systematically across clause types. We present a unified approach to these clause type effects that suggests that these two mechanisms interact, that is, that truncation feeds intervention. Omission of a Force head responsible for the *V1 effect in relevant clause types forces a set of operators to remerge in a position where they block movement of negation. VP-Neg-Aux orders in these clause types reflect a smuggling repair operation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. A further exception is found in the speech of some (especially younger) speakers, who allow for finite-verb-initial patterns in presentational contexts as in (i), where a heavy intonational break obligatorily appears between the finite verb and the following material. We set these cases aside in the remaining discussion.

    1. (i)
      figure f

  2. See Elordieta and Jouitteau (2010) for a somewhat different approach to expletive insertion in Basque and Breton.

  3. Wiklund et al. (2009) argue instead that V2 word order does not covary strictly with any pragmatic meaning, but rather that the possibility of embedded V2 word order correlates with possible Main Point of Utterance (MPU) interpretation for the embedding (Simons 2007). Specifically, Wiklund et al. note that the same predicate classes that allow for embedded V2 also allow for embedded MPU: predicates of class A, B, and E allow for both V2 and embedded MPU, classes C and D allow for neither. Importantly, Wiklund et al. note that V2 word order itself does not strictly covary with MPU interpretation, since non-V2 embedded clauses with classes A, B and E can have MPU interpretation. Following Simons (2007), they use, as a diagnostic of MPU, whether a given embedded clause can be a felicitous answer to a preceding question.

    In Basque, the possibility of verb-initial orders appears not to correlate with the predicate classes that best allow MPU interpretation. The question-answer pairs in (i) show that as in English, Swedish and Norwegian, complements of say-class complements are fine on an MPU interpretation, while complements of doubt-class predicates are degraded. Again, complements of both predicate classes are generally bad without expletive ba-.

    1. (i)
      figure z

  4. In the examples in (25)–(29), the embedded clauses all appear to the right of the main clause. All of these main clause predicates, however, allow for an alternative word order whereby the embedded clause appears to the left of the main clause verb as in the example with esan, ‘say’ in (i). This word order difference appears to have no consequence for the availability of expletive ba- in V-initial contexts.

    1. (i)
      figure aa

  5. These complementizers surface as -la and -n when preceded by a person or tense morpheme and as -ela and -en, elsewhere. For convenience, we represent these complementizers as -(e)n and -(e)la throughout. Other Basque complementizers include bait- ‘since’, found mainly in Eastern dialects and ba- (protasis) ‘if’ homophonous with the affirmative/expletive particle discussed above. These elements appear left-adjacent to the auxiliary. These morphemes do not co-occur with ba-support, and are therefore not useful for examining the correlations we focus on here.

  6. A reviewer wonders whether any generalizations can be made about the cross-speaker variation reported here, that is, which speakers show the exceptional patterns and why. The data summarized in this section and in Sect. 3 are based on consultations with fifteen native speakers from different dialect areas, but mainly from southern dialects. The results suggest no clear geographic patterning to the cross-speaker variation. Without a larger data set and a more carefully designed sample it’s difficult to know what other grammatical properties this cross-speaker variation might covary with, and we set this important issue aside here.

  7. The complementizer -(e)lako is plausibly bimorphemic, consisting of the complementizer -(e)la plus genitive -ko. We set this issue aside here. What will be important for the analysis to be developed below will be that -(e)lako is generally incompatible with *V1 and VP-Neg-Aux orders as discussed below.

  8. This characterization holds for wide-focus (“out of the blue”) contexts in all dialects. Some eastern dialects allow for word orders where a focalized XP can appear left-adjacent to the auxiliary as in (i). We set aside these facts here.

    1. (i)
      figure an

  9. Here, we set aside orders in subjunctive clauses. See Artiagoitia and Elordieta (2016) and Elordieta and Artiagoitia (2016) for discussion.

  10. For expository convenience we focus here on analytic verbs. The analysis for synthetic verbs on this approach is quite similar with the main difference that V raises to T.

  11. We assume that exponence of -(e)n rather than -(e)la reflects an agree relation between the clause-typing feature and Fin, though this agreement plays no role in explaining the clause-type effects discussed here (Roberts 2004; Ortiz de Urbina 1999; Artiagoitia and Elordieta 2016).

  12. This is an adaptation of Ortiz de Urbina’s hierarchy, which does not include an evidential head position nor a Σ position.

  13. This includes auxiliaries as well as the synthetic verb forms like (3).

  14. In the case of intra-speaker variation, we assume these two grammars are in competition in the sense of Kroch (1989).

  15. A reviewer notes that factives like (28) (repeated here) require ba-support and Neg-Aux-VP orders.

    1. (i)
      figure by

    If such sentences involve a factive operator, our analysis will require that this operator always sits high in ForceP and never FinP, since such sentences never give rise to intervention.

  16. A reviewer worries about the nature of this last movement step. One possibility is that this is one step in a “roll-up” sequence in the sense of Kayne (1994) and Biberauer et al. (2014)—iterative complement-to-spec movement starting at the bottom of a spine. Such a process would presumably be responsible for the uniformly head-final nature of the Basque Verbal complexes. On this approach, then, complement-head linearization in Basque verbal complexes would be derived by movement, rather than by head directionality parameterization. A second possibility compatible with directionality parameterization but not Biberauer et al.’s approach, is that this is a single case of complement-to-spec movement whose motivation is opaque to us. Again, we do not take a position on these issues here.

  17. Note that -(e)n also appears in embedded wh-questions:

    1. (i)
      figure cd

    From the perspective of our proposal, these facts must mean that the wh-item in such contexts does not sit in FocP, but rather in some other position—plausibly unextracted from PredP in the spec of ΣP. This is explained below.

  18. We are grateful to Pablo Albizu for these observations and for a helpful discussion of these facts.

  19. A reviewer points out that a problem for the proposal so far concerns the possibility of sentences like the second sentence in (i), with third-person subjects and directive force. These take the complementizer -(e)la, but the tense-bearing verb abuts the left edge of the sentence, unlike in the declarative contexts described in Sect. 2.

    1. (i)
      figure cv

    Our analysis cannot model these facts, as the reviewer rightly observes. We note that this seems to be a calque on Spanish third person directives with complementizer que. In historical texts, a further context in which the tense bearing verb appears clause initially were in Catechisms, calqued on Romance:

    1. Q:
      figure cw
    1. A:
      figure cx

    We speculate that these constructions involve a partially distinct grammar conditioned by contact with Spanish.

  20. We owe this idea to Richard Kayne (p.c.).

  21. This approach is not entirely novel in spirit. Uriagereka (1999) also notes that adjacency between the focused constituent and the tense-bearing V is not absolute and attributes the string-wise proximity of these elements to phonological factors. Here we suggest that the relevant movement steps ensuring this proximity are information-structural in nature.

References

  • Abraham, Werner, and Lászloó Molnárfi. 2002. German clause structure under discourse functional weight: Focus and antifocus. In Issues in formal German(ic) typology, eds. Werner Abraham and Cornelius Jan-Wouter Zwart, Vol. 45, 1–43. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Albizu, Pablo. 2002. Basque verbal morphology: Redefining cases. In Erramu boneta: Festschrift for Rudolf P.G. de Rijk, eds. Xabier Artiagoitia, Patxi Goenaga, and Joseba Andoni Lakarra, 1–19. Bilbao: Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea.

    Google Scholar 

  • Altube, Severo. 1929. Erderismos, 2nd edn. Bilbao: Indauchu.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arregi, Karlos. 2006. Stress and Islands in Northern Bizkaian Basque. Anuario del Seminario de Filología Vasca “Julio de Urquijo” 40 (1–2): 81–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arregi, Karlos, and Andrew Nevins. 2012. Morphotactics: Basque auxiliaries and the structure of spellout. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Arteatx, Inigo. 2011. Euskarazko egitura jokatugabeak: -t(z)en morfemadun perpaus osagarrien azterketa sintaktikoa. PhD diss, University of the Basque Country.

  • Artiagoitia, Xabier. 2003. Adjunct subordination. In A grammar of Basque, eds. José Ignacio Hualde and Jon Ortiz de Urbina, 710–762. Berlin: de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Artiagoitia, Xabier, and Arantzazu Elordieta. 2016. On the semantic function and selection of Basque finite complementizers. In The semantics of complementizers in European languages, eds. Kasper Boyle and Petar Kehayov. Berlin: de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bayer, Josef. 2004. Decomposing the left periphery: Dialectal and cross-linguistic evidence. In The syntax and semantics of the left periphery, eds. Horst Lohnstein and Susanne Trissler, 59–95. Berlin: de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benincà, Paola, and Cecilia Poletto. 2004. Topic, focus, and V2. In The structure of CP and IP, ed. Luigi Rizzi, 52–75. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biberauer, Theresa, Anders Holmberg, and Ian Roberts. 2014. A syntactic universal and its consequences. Linguistic Inquiry 45: 169–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bresnan, Joan. 1977. Variables in the theory of transformations. In Formal syntax, eds. Peter Culicover, Thomas Wasow, and Adrien Akmajian, 157–196. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cardinaletti, Anna, and Michal Starke. 1999. The typology of structural deficiency: A case study of the three classes of pronouns. In Clitics in the languages of Europe, ed. Henk Van Riemsdijk, 145–234. Berlin: de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, Lisa, and Hamida Demirdache. 1993. External arguments in Basque. In Generative studies in Basque Linguistics, eds. José Ignacio Hualde and Jon Ortiz de Urbina, 71–87. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, Noam. 1977. On wh-movement. In Formal syntax, eds. Peter Culicover, Thomas Wasow, and Adrian Akmajian, 71–132. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, Noam. 2000. Minimalist inquiries: The framework. In Step by step: Essays on minimalist syntax in honor of Howard Lasnik, eds. Roger Martin, Dan Michaels, and Juan Uriagereka, 83–155. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cinque, Guglielmo. 1999. Adverbs and functional heads: A cross-linguistic perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cinque, Guglielmo. 2004. Restructuring and functional structure. In Structures and beyond: The cartography of syntactic structures, ed. Adriana Belletti. Vol. 3 of Cartography of syntactic structures, 132–191. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, Chris. 2005a. A smuggling approach to raising in English. Linguistic Inquiry 36 (2): 289–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collins, Chris. 2005b. A smuggling approach to the passive in English. Syntax 8 (2): 81–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coon, Jessica. 2010. VOS as predicate fronting in Chol. Lingua 120 (2): 354–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coon, Jessica. 2012. Predication, predicate fronting, and what it takes to be a verb. Paper presented at North East Linguistic Society (NELS) 43.

  • Déchaine, Rose-Marie, and Martina Wiltschko. 2002. Decomposing pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry 33 (3): 409–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • den Besten, Hans. 1983. On the interaction of root transformations and lexical deletive rules. In On the formal syntax of the Westgermania, ed. Werner Abraham, 47–131. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • den Dikken, Marcel. 2006. Either-float and the syntax of co-ordination. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 24 (3): 689–749.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duguine, Maia, and Aritz Irurtzun. 2008. Ohar batzuk nafar-lapurterazko galdera eta galdegai indartuez. In Gramatika jaietan: Patxi goenagaren omenez, eds. Xabier Artiagoitia and Joseba Lakarra, 195–208. Bilbao: Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duguine, Maia, and Aritz Irurtzun. 2014. From obligatory wh-movement to optional wh-in-situ in Labourdin Basque. Language 90 (1): 1–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elfner, Emily. 2012. Syntax-prosody interactions in Irish. PhD diss, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

  • Elordieta, Arantzazu. 2001. Verb movement and constituent permutation in Basque. Utrecht: LOT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elordieta, Arantzazu. 2002. On the (im)possibility of prosodic focus marking in embedded contexts in Northern Bizkaian Basque. Anuario del Seminario de Filología Vasca “Julio de Urquijo” 44: 153–177.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elordieta, Arantzazu. 2008. OA hizkuntzak: Oinarrizko hurrenkeraz eta hurrenkera eratorriez. In Antisimetriaren hipotesia vs. buru parametroa: Euskararen oinarrizko hurrenkera ezbaian, 93–126. Bilbao: EHUko Argitalpen Zerbitzua.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elordieta, Arantzazu, and Xabier Artiagoitia. 2016. Gaztelaniazko polaritate subjuntiboa eta euskarazko konplementatzaileak. In Txipi ormaetxearen omenez, eds. Gotzon Aurrekoetxea and Pello Salaberri, 73–89. Bilbao: Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elordieta, Arantzazu, and Mélanie Jouitteau. 2010. Verb-doubling in Basque and Breton. Talk given at the 4th European Dialect Syntax Meeting, Donostia.

  • Elordieta, Gorka. 1997. Morphosyntactic feature chains and phonological domains. PhD diss, University of Southern California.

  • Etxepare, Ricardo. 2003. Negation. In A grammar of Basque, eds. José Ignacio Hualde and Jon Ortiz de Urbina, 564–571. Berlin: de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Etxepare, Ricardo. 2010. Omen bariazioan. In Euskara eta euskarak: aldakortasun sintaktikoa aztergai, eds. Beatriz Fernandez, Pablo Albizu, and Ricardo Etxepare, 85–112. Bilbao: UPV-EHU.

    Google Scholar 

  • Etxepare, Ricardo. 2015. Verbal periphrases in Basque and the contextual determination of Phases. Talk given at University of Konstanz.

  • Etxepare, Ricardo, and Bill Haddican. 2017. Repairing Final-Over-Final Constraint violations: Evidence from Basque verb clusters. In Order and structure in syntax, eds. Laura Bailey and Michelle Sheehan. Language Science Press.

  • Etxepare, Ricardo, and Jon Ortiz de Urbina. 2003. Focalization. In A grammar of Basque, eds. José Ignacio Hualde and Jon Ortiz de Urbina, 460–516. Berlin: de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Etxepare, Ricardo, and Myriam Uribe-Etxebarria. 2009. Hitz hurrenkera eta birregituraketa euskaraz. Anuario del Seminario de Filología Vasca Julio de Urquijo 43 (1–2): 335–355.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faller, Martina T. 2002. Semantics and pragmatics of evidentials in Cuzco Quechua. PhD diss, Stanford University.

  • Fernández, Beatriz, and Pablo Albizu. 2000. Ergative displacement in Basque and the division of labour between morphology and syntax. In Chicago Linguistic Society (CLS) 36, eds. Akira Okrent and John P. Boyle, Vol. 2, 103–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franco, Irene. 2012. Minimality and embedded V2 in Scandinavian. In Main clause phenomena: New horizons, eds. Lobke Aelbrecht, Liliane Haegeman, and Rachel Nye, 319–344. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Haddican, Bill. 2004. Sentence polarity and word order in Basque. Linguistic Review 21: 87–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haddican, Bill. 2015. A note on Basque vocative clitics. In Ibon Sarasola, Gorazarre, eds. Beatriz Fernandez and Pello Salaburu, 303–317. Bilbao: University of the Basque Country.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haegeman, Liliane. 2006. Conditionals, factives and the left periphery. Lingua 116 (10): 1651–1669.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haegeman, Liliane. 2010a. The internal syntax of adverbial clauses. Lingua 120 (3): 628–648.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haegeman, Liliane. 2010b. The movement derivation of conditional clauses. Linguistic Inquiry 41 (4): 595–621.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haegeman, Liliane. 2012. The syntax of MCP: Deriving the truncation account. In Main clause phenomena: New horizons, eds. Lobke Aelbrecht, Liliane Haegeman, and Rachel Nye, 113–134. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Haegeman, Liliane. 2013. The syntax of adverbial clauses. In The language-cognition interface, eds. Stephen Anderson, Jacques Moeschler, and Fabienne Reboul. Vol. 45 of Langues et cultures, 135–165. Geneva: Droz.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haegeman, Liliane. 2014. Locality and the distribution of main clause phenomena. In Locality, eds. Enoch Obladé Aboh, Maria Teresa Guasti, and Ian Roberts, 186–222. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Haegeman, Liliane, and Barbara Ürögdi. 2010. Referential CPs and DPs: An operator movement account. Theoretical Linguistics 36 (2–3): 111–152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Han, Chunghye. 1998. The structure and interpretation of imperatives: Mood and force in Universal Grammar. PhD diss, University of Pennsylvania.

  • Heycock, Caroline. 2006. Embedded root phenomena. In The Blackwell companion to syntax, eds. Martin Everaert and Henk Van Riemsdijk, 174–209. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Holmberg, Anders. 2013. The syntax of answers to polar questions in English and Swedish. Lingua 128: 31–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holmberg, Anders. 2015. Verb second. In Syntax—theory and analysis: An international handbook, eds. Tibor Kiss and Artemis Alexiadou, 342–383. Berlin: de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hooper, Joan B., and Sandra A. Thompson. 1973. On the applicability of root transformations. Linguistic Inquiry 4 (4): 465–497.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hrafnbjargarson, Gunnar Hrafn, and Anna-Lena Wiklund. 2009. General embedded V2: Icelandic A, B, C, etc. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 84: 21–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hualde, José Ignacio, Gorka Elordieta, and Arantzazu Elordieta. 1994. The Basque dialect of Lekeitio. Supplements of anuario del Seminario de Filología Vasca “Julio de Urquijo”. Donostia: Gipuzkoako Foru Aldundia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Irurtzun, Aritz. 2007. The grammar of focus at the interfaces. PhD diss, University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), Vitoria-Gasteiz.

  • Jayaseelan, KA. 2008. Topic, focus and adverb positions in clause structure. Nanzan Linguistics 4: 43–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jayaseelan, KA. 2010. Stacking, stranding, and pied-piping: A proposal about word order. Syntax 13 (4): 298–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jouitteau, Melanie. 2008. The Brythonic reconciliation. Linguistic Variation Yearbook 7: 163–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Julien, Marit. 2009. Embedded V2 in Norwegian and Swedish. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 80: 103–161.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kandybowicz, Jason. 2009. Embracing edges: Syntactic and phono-syntactic edge sensitivity in Nupe. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 27 (2): 305–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kayne, Richard S. 1994. The antisymmetry of syntax. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kramer, Ruth, and Kyle Rawlins. 2009. Polarity particles: An ellipsis account. In North East Linguistic Society (NELS) 39, eds. Suzi Lima, Kevin Mullin, and Brian Smith. Amherst: GLSA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kroch, Anthony. 1989. Reflexes of grammar in patterns of language change. Language variation and change 1 (3): 199–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laka, Itziar. 1990. Negation in syntax, on the nature of functional categories and projections. PhD diss, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

  • Laka, Itziar. 1993. The structure of inflection: A case study in X0 syntax. In Generative studies in Basque linguistics, eds. José Ignacio Hualde and Jon Ortiz de Urbina, 21–70. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Leu, Thomas. 2015. Generalized X-to-C in Germanic. Studia Linguistica 69 (3): 272–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Massam, Diane. 2000. VSO and VOS: Aspects of Niuean word order. In The syntax of verb initial languages, eds. Andrew Carnie and Eithne Guilfoyle, 97–116. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Massam, Diane. 2001. Pseudo noun incorporation in Niuean. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 19 (1): 153–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Massam, Diane. 2010. V1 or V2?: On the left in Niuean. Lingua 120 (2): 284–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ortiz de Urbina, Jon. 1989. Some parameters in the grammar of Basque. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ortiz de Urbina, Jon. 1993. Checking domains in Basque and Breton. Anuario del seminario de filologia vasca “Julio de Urquijo” 27: 751–775.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ortiz de Urbina, Jon. 1994. Verb-initial patterns in Basque and Breton. Lingua 94 (2): 125–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ortiz de Urbina, Jon. 1995. Residual verb second and verb first in Basque. In Discourse configurational languages, ed. Katalin É Kiss, 99–121. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ortiz de Urbina, Jon. 1999. Focus in Basque. In The grammar of focus, eds. Georges Rebuschi and Laurice Tuller, 311–334. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Ortiz de Urbina, Jon. 2002. Focus of correction and remnant movement in Basque. In Erramu boneta. Festschrift for Rudolf PG de Rijk, ed. Xabier Artiagoitia, 511–524. Bilbao: University of the Basque Country.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poletto, Cecilia. 2002. The left-periphery of V2-Rhaetoromance dialects: A new view on V2 and V3. In Syntactic microvariation, eds. Sjef Barbiers, Leonie Cornips, and Susanne van der Kleij. Amsterdam: Meertens Instituut. Available at https://www.meertens.knaw.nl/books/synmic/pdf/poletto.pdf. Accessed 28 August 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  • Potts, Christopher. 2002. The syntax and semantics of as-parentheticals. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 20 (3): 623–689.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rezac, Milan. 2008. The syntax of eccentric agreement: The Person Case Constraint and absolutive displacement in Basque. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 26 (1): 61–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rizzi, Luigi. 1990. Relativized minimality. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rizzi, Luigi. 1996. Residual verb second and the Wh-criterion. In Parameters and functional heads: Essays in comparative syntax, eds. Adriana Belletti and Luigi Rizzi, 63–90. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rizzi, Luigi. 1997. The fine structure of the left periphery. In Elements of grammar, ed. Liliane Haegeman, 281–337. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, Ian. 2004. The C-system in Brythonic Celtic languages, V2, and the EPP. In The cartography of syntactic structures, vol. 2, ed. Luigi Rizzi, 297–327. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rooryck, Johan. 2001. Evidentiality, part I. Glot International 5 (4): 125–133.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selkirk, Elisabeth. 2009. On clause and intonational phrase in Japanese: The syntactic grounding of prosodic constituent structure. Gengo Kenkyu 136: 35–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selkirk, Elisabeth. 2011. The syntax-phonology interface. The handbook of phonological theory 2: 435–483.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simons, Mandy. 2007. Observations on embedding verbs, evidentiality, and presupposition. Lingua 117 (6): 1034–1056.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Travis, Lisa. 1984. Parameters and effects of word order variation. PhD diss, MIT.

  • Truckenbrodt, Hubert. 2006. On the semantic motivation of syntactic verb movement to C in German. Theoretical Linguistics 32 (3): 257–306.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uriagereka, Juan. 1999. Minimal restrictions on Basque movements. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 17 (2): 403–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uribe-Etxebarria, Myriam. 1994. Interface licensing conditions on negative polarity items: A theory of polarity and tense interactions. PhD diss, University of Connecticut.

  • Uribe-Etxebarria, Myriam. 2003. Euskararen eta hizkuntza erromanikoen foko egituren arteko zenbait paralelotasunez. In Euskal gramatikari eta literaturari buruzko jardunaldiak xxi. mendearen atarian (i-ii), 437–457. Bilbao: Euskaltzaindia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Urk, Coppe, and Norvin Richards. 2015. Two components of long-distance extraction: Successive cyclicity in Dinka. Linguistic Inquiry 46 (1): 113–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiklund, Anna-Lena, Kristine Bentzen, Gunnar Hrafn Hrafnbjargarson, and Þorbjörg Hróarsdóttir. 2009. On the distribution and illocution of V2 in Scandinavian that-clauses. Lingua 119 (12): 1914–1938.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wurmbrand, Susi. 2001. Infinitives: Restructuring and clause structure. Berlin: de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wurmbrand, Susi. 2004. Two types of restructuring—lexical vs. functional. Lingua 114 (8): 991–1014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zanuttini, Raffaella. 2008. Encoding the addressee in the syntax: Evidence from English imperative subjects. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 26 (1): 185–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zanuttini, Raffaella, and Paul Portner. 2003. Exclamative clauses: At the syntax-semantics interface. Language 79 (1): 39–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Many many thanks to three very insightful NLLT reviewers for careful critical discussions, and to Txomin Arratibel, Iñigo Arteatx, Xabier Artiagoitia, Maia Duguine, Urtzi Etxeberria, Ricardo Etxepare, Iñaki Camino, Patxi Goenaga, Melanie Jouitteau, Richard Kayne, Oihana Lujanbio, Ad Neeleman, Ane Odria, Beñat Oyharçabal, Koldo Zuazo, audiences of PLC 36, Wedisyn 2013, BLS 40 and members of the Basque Dialect Grammar team. This research is supported by grant from the Basque Government GIC12/61 IT769-13. All errors are our own.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Linguistics and Basque Studies, Faculty of Arts, University of the Basque Country, Vitoria-Gasteiz, Spain

    Arantzazu Elordieta

  2. Department of Linguistics and Communication Disorders, CUNY-Queens College, New York, USA

    Bill Haddican

  3. Department of Linguistics, CUNY-Graduate Center, New York, USA

    Bill Haddican

Authors
  1. Arantzazu Elordieta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bill Haddican
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bill Haddican.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Elordieta, A., Haddican, B. Truncation feeds intervention. Nat Lang Linguist Theory 36, 403–443 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-017-9381-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-017-9381-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation