Book contents
- Exploring Interfaces
- Exploring Interfaces
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Preface
- Acknowledgments
- Contributors
- Introduction: The Road to Interfaces
- I Syntax–Lexicon Interface
- II Syntax–Semantics Interface
- 5 Negative Idioms
- 6 Scope, Syntax, and Prosody in Russian as a Second or Heritage Language
- 7 On the Syntax of Pronominal Clitics: A View from Greek
- III Linearization
- Index
- References
7 - On the Syntax of Pronominal Clitics: A View from Greek
from II - Syntax–Semantics Interface
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 03 August 2019
Book contents
- Exploring Interfaces
- Exploring Interfaces
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Preface
- Acknowledgments
- Contributors
- Introduction: The Road to Interfaces
- I Syntax–Lexicon Interface
- II Syntax–Semantics Interface
- 5 Negative Idioms
- 6 Scope, Syntax, and Prosody in Russian as a Second or Heritage Language
- 7 On the Syntax of Pronominal Clitics: A View from Greek
- III Linearization
- Index
- References
Summary
In her exploration of the left edge of the clause and its interaction with discourse-related functions such as questions, topic, and focus, Zubizarreta closely examined the frontier between TP and CP in Romance languages. One result of her research in this area was the discovery of a dedicated position in this region “whose function is to ‘externalize’ an argument of a verb v with respect to the tense associated with v” (Zubizarreta, 1999, p. 256). Zubizarreta called this projection the CL(itic)-phrase (1999) and, later, the phi-phrase (2007). She proposed that “clitics and strong agr are the morphological manifestation of an abstract Cl[itic] position” (Zubizarreta, 1999, p. 272). That is, if pronominal clitics or strong agreement occur in a language, then CL occurs. Her work sheds light on the syntax of clitic left-dislocated expressions, and other expressions on the left periphery such as preverbal subjects and Wh-operators in languages that have pronominal clitics and/or strong agreement.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Exploring Interfaces , pp. 171 - 208Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2019
References
Alexiadou, A. (2002). Word order patterns in Greek nominals: aspects of diachronic change. ZAS Papers in Linguistics, 27, 91–107.Google Scholar
Alexiadou, A. & Stavrou, M. (2001). Adjective–clitic combinations in the Greek DP. In Gerlach, B. & Grijzenhout, J., eds., Clitics in phonology, morphology and syntax. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 63–84.Google Scholar
Anagnostopoulou, E. (2003). The syntax of ditransitives: evidence from clitics. Berlin / New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Anagnostopoulou, E.(2005). Cross-linguistic and cross-categorial variation of datives. In Stavrou, M. & Terzi, A., eds., Advances in Greek generative grammar: in honor of Dimitra Theophanopoulou-Kontou. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 61–126.Google Scholar
Anagnostopoulou, E. & Everaert, M. (1999). Toward a more complete typology of anaphoric expressions. Linguistic Inquiry, 30(1), 97–119.Google Scholar
Anagnostopoulou, E. & Everaert, M.(2013). Identifying anaphoric dependencies. In Cheng, L. & Corver, N., eds., Diagnosing syntax. Oxford University Press, pp. 340–70.Google Scholar
Anagnostopoulou, E. & Sevdali, C. (2016). Two modes of dative and genitive case assignment: evidence from two stages of Greek. Ms., University of Crete and Ulster University.Google Scholar
Baker, M. C. (2015). Case: its principles and its parameters. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Botwinik-Rotem, I. & Terzi, A. (2008). Greek and Hebrew locative prepositional phrases: a unified Case-driven account. Lingua, 118(3), 399–424.Google Scholar
Charnavel, I. & Zlogar, C. (2016). English reflexive logophors. In Ershova, Ksenia, Falk, Joshua, and Geiger, Jeffrey, eds., Proceedings of CLS 51. Chicago Linguistics Society, pp. 83–97.Google Scholar
Chiou, M. (2007). NP-anaphora in Modern Greek: a neo-Gricean pragmatic approach (unpublished doctoral dissertation). Reading University.Google Scholar
Daskalaki, E. & Mavrogiorgos, M. (2016). Two ways of encoding location in Greek: locative applicatives and prepositions. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics, 1(16), 1–33.Google Scholar
den Dikken, M. (2006). Relators and linkers: the syntax of predication, predicate inversion, and copulas. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Halpern, A. (1995). On the morphology and placement of clitics. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Holton, D., Mackridge, P., & Philippaki-Warburton, I. (2004). An essential grammar of the Modern Greek language. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Iatridou, S. (1986). An anaphor not bound in its governing category. Linguistic Inquiry, 17, 766–72.Google Scholar
Iatridou, S.(1991). Clitic left dislocations and island effects. Ms., MIT, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Iatridou, S.(1995). Clitics and island effects. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics, 2(1), 11–30.Google Scholar
Kordoni, V. (2001). Linking experiencer–subject psych verb constructions in Modern Greek. In Flickinger, D. & Kathol, A., eds., Proceedings of the 7th International HPSG Conference, UC Berkeley (22–23 July, 2000). Stanford: CSLI Publications, pp. 198–213.Google Scholar
Lechner, W. & Anagnostopoulou, E. (2005). Clitics and adjacency in Greek PPs. In Broekhuis, H., Corver, N., Koster, J., Huybregts, R., & Kleinhenz, U., eds., Organizing grammar: Llinguistic studies in honor of Henk van Riemsdijk. Berlin / New York: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 390–406.Google Scholar
Marantz, A. (1991). Case and licensing. In Westphal, G. F., Ao, B., and Chae, H.-R., eds., Eastern States Conference on Linguistics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell Linguistics Club, pp. 234–53.Google Scholar
Mavrogiorgos, M. (2009). CT and the EPP: deriving enclisis in Modern Greek. In Halpert, C., Hartman, J., & Hill, D., eds., MITWPL 57: Proceedings of the 2007 Workshop in Greek Syntax and Semantics at MIT. Cambridge, MA: MITWPL, pp. 139–54.Google Scholar
Merchant, J. (2009). Phrasal and clausal comparatives in Greek and the abstractness of syntax. Journal of Greek Linguistics, 9(1), 134–64.Google Scholar
Merchant, J.(2012). The two phrasal comparatives of Greek. Accepted with revisions for Natural Language & Linguistic Theory.Google Scholar
Pancheva, R. (2009). Directionality of cliticization: comments on Mavrogiorgos’ “C-T and the EPP: deriving enclisis in Modern Greek.” In Halpert, C., Hartman, J., & Hill, D., eds., MITWPL 57: Proceedings of the 2007 Workshop in Greek Syntax and Semantics at MIT. Cambridge, MA: MITWPL, pp. 155–70.Google Scholar
Schneider-Zioga, P. (1994). The syntax of clitic doubling in Modern Greek (doctoral dissertation). ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.Google Scholar
Schneider-Zioga, P.(1998). A predication analysis of clitic pronouns in Greek. In Proceedings of the North East Linguistic Society 28. Amherst: Graduate Linguistic Student Association, pp. 183–96.Google Scholar
Terzi, A. (1991). Genitive clitics of prepositions. Ms., City University of New York Graduate Center.Google Scholar
Terzi, A.(2008). Locative prepositions as modifiers of an unpronounced noun. In Chang, C. and Haynie, H., eds. Proceedings of the 26th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics. Somerville, MA: Casacdilla Proceedings Project, pp. 471–9. Retrieved from www.lingref.com/cpp/wccfl/26/paper1704.pdf.Google Scholar
Terzi, A.(2010). Locative prepositions and place. In Cinque, G. & Rizzi, L., eds., Mapping spatial PPs: the cartography of syntactic structures, Oxford Studies in Comparative Syntax, 6. Oxford University Press, pp. 196–224.Google Scholar
Zubizarreta, M. L. (1999) The cl(itic) projection in questions. Catalan Working Papers in Linguistics, 7, 253–77.Google Scholar
Zubizarreta, M. L.(2007). The left edge in the Spanish clausal structure. In Masullo, P., O’Rourke, E., & Huang, C.-H., eds., Romance Linguistics 2007: selected papers from the 37th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages, Pittsburgh, 15–18 March 2007. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing, pp. 339–57.Google Scholar