Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T09:51:34.957Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

How to define relaxed V2 languages and how to distinguish them from non-V2 languages: A reply to Brandtler (2014)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 April 2015

Federica Cognola
Federica Cognola*
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Lettere e Filosofia, Via Tomaso Gar, 14, 38122 Trento, Italy. [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

This paper provides evidence for the idea that relaxed verb-second (V2) languages exist and exhibt specific properties which distinguish them from both strict V2 and non-V2 languages. The identification of the relaxed subtype of V2 languages implies that V2 should not be understood as a linear restriction, but as an abstract rule involving the movement of the finite verb to a head of the left periphery in all main clauses.

Keywords

competing grammarsMòchenosubject–verb inversionsyntaxverb movement
Type
Short Communication
Information
Nordic Journal of Linguistics , Volume 38 , Issue 1 , May 2015 , pp. 93 - 100
Copyright
Copyright © Nordic Association of Linguistics 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Alber, Birgit. 2013. Aspetti fonologici del mòcheno. In Bidese, Ermenegildo & Cognola, Federica (eds.), Introduzione alla linguistica del mòcheno, 15–35. Torino: Rosenberg & Sellier.Google Scholar
Benincà, Paola. 2006. A detailed map of the left periphery of Medieval Romance. In Zanuttini, Raffaella, Campos, Hector & Herburger, Elena (eds.), Crosslinguistic Research in Syntax and Semantics: Negation, Tense, and Clausal Architecture, 53–86. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Benincà, Paola & Poletto, Cecilia. 2004. Topic, Focus, and V2: Defining the CP sublayers. In Rizzi (ed.), 52–75.Google Scholar
Biberauer, Theresa & Cognola, Federica. 2014. The expletive–impersonal connection: Mòcheno insights into the typology of null-subject languages. Ms., University of Cambridge & University of Trento.Google Scholar
Brandtler, Johan. 2014. Review of Federica Cognola's Syntactic Variation and Verb Second: A German Dialect in Northern Italy. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 37 (1), 107–111.Google Scholar
Cognola, Federica. 2013. Syntactic Variation and Verb Second: A German Dialect in Northern Italy. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
de Crousaz, Isabelle & Shlonsky, Ur. 2003. The distribution of a subject clitic pronoun in a Franco Provençal dialect and the theory of pro. Linguistic Inquiry 34 (3), 413–442.Google Scholar
den Besten, Hans. 1983. On the interaction of root transformations and lexical delective rules. In Abraham, Werner (ed.), On Formal Syntax of the Westgermania, 47–131. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gast, Volker & van derAuwera, Johan. 2013. Towards a distributional typology of human impersonal pronouns, based on data from European languages. In Bakker, Dik & Haspelmath, Martin (eds.), Languages across Boundaries: Studies in Memory of Anna Siewierska, 119–158. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmberg, Anders. 1993. Two subject positions in IP in Mainland Scandinavian. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 52, 29–41.Google Scholar
Holmberg, Anders. 2005. Is there a little pro? Evidence from Finnish. Linguistic Inquiry 36, 533–564.Google Scholar
Holmberg, Anders. 2015. Verb second. In Tibor Kiss & Artemis Alexiadou (eds.), An International Handbook of Contemporary Syntactic Research, 342–382. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Poletto, Cecilia. 2002. The left periphery of a V2-Rhaetoromance dialect: A new perspective on V2 and V3. In Barbiers, Sjef, Cornips, Leonie & van der Kleij, Susanne (eds.), Syntactic Microvariation, 214–242. Amsterdam: Meertens Institute.Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 1996. Residual verb second and the wh-criterion. In Belletti, Adriana & Rizzi, Luigi (eds.), Parameters and Functional Heads, 63–90. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 1997. The fine structure of the left periphery. In Haegeman, Liliane (ed.), Elements of Grammar: A Handbook of Generative Syntax, 281–337. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi (ed.). 2004. The Structure of CP and IP: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, vol. 2. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Roberts, Ian. 2004. The C-system in Brythonic Celtic languages, V2 and the EPP. In Rizzi (ed.), 297–328.Google Scholar
Roberts, Ian & Holmberg, Anders. 2010. Introduction: Parameters in minimalist theory. In Theresa Biberauer, Anders Holmberg, Ian Roberts & Michelle Sheehan, Parametric Variation: Null Subjects in Minimalist Theory, 1–57. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rowley, Anthony. 2003. Liacht as de spròch: grammatica della lingua mòchena. Palù del Fersina: Pubblicazioni dell'Istituto mòcheno di cultura.Google Scholar
Svenonius, Peter. 2000. Quantifier movement in Icelandic. In Svenonius, Peter (ed.), The Derivation of VO and OV, 255–291. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar