LINGUIST List 30.290

Thu Jan 17 2019

Confs: Linguistic Theories, Morphology, Phonology, Syntax/Spain

Editor for this issue: Everett Green <everettlinguistlist.org>



Date: 17-Jan-2019
From: Anna Pineda <anna.pinedaupf.edu>
Subject: 1st FARMM Challenge Formal Approaches to Romance Microvariation and Microcontact
E-mail this message to a friend

1st FARMM Challenge Formal Approaches to Romance Microvariation and Microcontact

Date: 15-Feb-2019 - 15-Feb-2019
Location: Barcelona, Spain
Contact: Anna Pineda
Contact Email: < click here to access email >
Meeting URL: http://formalmicrovariati.wixsite.com/farm

Linguistic Field(s): Linguistic Theories; Morphology; Phonology; Syntax

Meeting Description:

The FARMM initiative organizes the first Challenge, a workshop oriented at providing an answer to specific questions to a specific datasets within a relevant phenomenon. The event will be held in Barcelona, 15 February 2019. The empirical domain of this challenge is clitics. The datasets are the following:

Dataset 1

Current syntactic analyses claim that in most Romance languages clitic placement occurs in either T or v (Kayne 1991, Sportiche 1998, Roberts 2010, Gallego 2016 a.o.). However, in several varieties proclitic/enclitic placement is affected by phenomena/features encoded in C:

- in most Romance languages, clitic placement is affected by Finiteness, see (1);
- in all medieval Romance languages and in present day western Ibero-Romance, enclisis is forbidden in sentences featuring Focus/Wh fronting, see (2);
- subject clitic inversion is conditioned by illocutionary Force (Munaro 2010);
- enclisis is never permitted with complementisers introducing irrealis/subjunctive clauses, whereas realis/indicative clauses are more liberal with respect to clitic placement (see Fernández-Rubiera 2010; Pescarini & Benincà 2014). If the two Cs are located respectively in Fin0 and Force0 (Ledgeway 2007), the pattern in (3) and (4) confirms that C heads affect cliticisation.

(1)
a. dice che lo sa (Italian)
pro.says that it= knows
‘He/she says that he/she know is’
b. Dice di saperlo
pro.says to know=it
‘He/she says that he/she know is’

(2)
a. Quem me chamou / *chamou-me? (Port.)
Who 1.ACC= call.PST.3SG call.PST.3SG=1.ACC
‘Who called me?’
b. Só ele a entende / *entende-a
Only he 3SG.F= understand.3SG understand.3SG=3SG.F
‘Only he understands her’

(3)
a. 'do:ʧə ka sə lu 'maɲɲə 'sɛmprə
says that to.him/her-self= it= eats always
b. 'do:ʧə ka 'maɲɲə sə lu 'sɛmprə
says that eats =to.him/her-self =it always
‘He/she says that he/she always eats it’

(4)
a. 'wojə kə tə lu 'mɪɲɲə
I.want that to.you= it= eat
b. *'wojə kə 'mɪɲɲə te lu
I.want that you.eat =to.yourself =it
‘I want you to eat it’


Dataset 2

Phonological analyses cannot always account for stress shift phenomena triggered by enclitic placement, see (1) and (2). Enclisis/proclisis asymmetries arguably result from a lexical alternation, as witnessed by patterns of fully-fledged suppletion, cf. (3).

(1)
a. t o 'portə (Neapolitan)
you= it= I.bring
‘I’ll bring it to you’
b. porta-t-íllə
bring=to.yourself=him/them.M/it.M
‘bring him/it.m/them for you’

(2)
Finir-lù ‘to end it’ (Viozene, Lig.)
saver-lù ‘to know it’
portama-rù ‘let us take it’
vindirù ‘sell it’
servirsì ‘to help oneself’

(3)
a. Il me le donne (French)
He to.me= it= gives
‘He gives it to me’
b. Donne-le-moi!
Give=it=to.me
‘Give it to me!’

The nature of the alternation, however, remains unclear. Ordóñez and Repetti 2006 argue that the alternation results from the presence of two classes of pronouns, viz. weak vs clitic (but see Pescarini 2018 a.o.). However, one wonders how the distribution of lexical variants – regardless of their inner structure – is ultimately linked to (or affected by) the syntactic mechanisms yielding proclitic/enclitic placement (see above).

Challenge --> See Call Information
Invited Speakers --> See Call Information

Program:

1st FARMM Challenge
Formal Approaches to Romance Microvariation and Microcontact

Venue: Universitat Pompeu Fabra – Campus del Poblenou
Roc Boronat, 138, Barcelona.
Room: Sala d'activitats 55.003

9:00 – 9:20:
Welcome

9:20 – 10:00:
Francisco Ordóñez. The challenge. 1. Split configurations, clitics and weak pronouns

10:00 – 10:40:
Maria Rita Manzini. The challenge. 2. Proclisis/enclisis alternations in Romance: Microvariation and macrocategories in syntax

10:40 – 11:10: Coffee Break

11:10 – 11:50:
Ian Roberts. The challenge. 3. Interactions of clitics with the left periphery

11:50 – 13:30:
Challenge: discussion among the contenders + open question time

13:30 – 15:00: Lunch

15:00 – 15:35:
Clàudia Pons-Moll, Jordi Fortuny. Enclisis/proclisis alternation and defectivity in Majorcan and Minorcan Catalan gerundenclitic sequences

15:35 – 16:10:
Diego Pescarini. Some diachronic remarks on the emergence of Romance clitics

16:10 – 16:40: Coffee Break

16:40 – 17:15:
Paolo Lorusso, Andrea Moro. On the propredicative clitics in Italo-Romance

17:15 – 17:50:
Adolfo Ausín, Francisco Fernandez-Rubiera. Towards a uniform account of accusative and dative clitic doubling

17:50 - ?:
Conclusive roundtable

20:00:
Dinner at El Menjador de la Beckett (Pere IV, 228-232, Barcelona, Spain)




Page Updated: 17-Jan-2019