• Forthcoming titles
      • New in paperback
      • New titles by subject
      • February 2023
      • January 2023
      • December 2022
      • November 2022
      • New serials
      • Latest issues
      • Currently in production
      • Active series
      • Other series
      • Open-access books
      • Text books & Course books
      • Dictionaries & Reference
      • By JB editor
      • Active serials
      • Other
      • By JB editor
      • Printed catalogs
      • E-book collections
      • Amsterdam (Main office)
      • Philadelphia (North American office)
      • General
      • US, Canada & Mexico
      • E-books
      • Examination & Desk Copies
      • General information
      • Access to the electronic edition
      • Special offers
      • Terms of Use
      • E-newsletter
      • Book Gazette
Article published in:
New Perspectives on Romance Linguistics: Vol. I: Morphology, Syntax, Semantics, and Pragmatics. Selected papers from the 35th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL), Austin, Texas, February 2005
Edited by Chiyo Nishida and Jean-Pierre Y. Montreuil
[Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 275] 2006
► pp. 69–

Null Directional Prepositions in Romanian and Spanish

Jonathan E. MacDonald

This paper is concerned with non-reflexive non-argumental clitic pronouns of Spanish and reflexive non-argumental clitic pronouns of Romanian. These two clitics pattern together when contrasted with reflexive non-argumental clitic pronouns of Spanish with respect to the following properties: 1. the ability to elicit a telic interpretation of the predicate; 2. the ability to express an on/with entailment; 3. the ability to express temporary relations; 4. the ability to prevent idiomatic interpretation; and 5. the ability to be modified by adjectival secondary predicates. Considering these properties, it is shown that Spanish reflexives pattern with goal PPs (e.g. to) and that Spanish non-reflexives and Romanian reflexives pattern with directional PPs (e.g. toward). Based on these patterns, it is argued that each of these clitics is introduced as the complement of a null preposition that merges as a complement of the verb; the low merger of the null PP accounts for properties 4. and 5. Variation comes from the presence or absence of the properties in 1.-3 on the null prepositions themselves.

Published online: 31 August 2006
https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.275.14mac
Share via FacebookShare via TwitterShare via LinkedInShare via WhatsApp
About us | Disclaimer | Privacy policy | | | | Antiquariathttps://benjamins.com