Cover not available
Article published In:
Variation in C: Comparative approaches to the Complementizer Phrase
Edited by Jacopo Garzonio and Silvia Rossi
[Linguistic Variation 18:2] 2018
► pp. 265–298

On relative complementizers and relative pronouns

| Goethe-Universität Frankfurt
| Università degli Studi di Padova
This paper explores the syntactic status of che and (il) qual(e) relativizers, i.e. what are standardly referred to as relative complementizers and relative pronouns, in Old and Modern Italian and Italian varieties and proposes a unified analysis for both types of items. It takes into account the ongoing debate regarding the categorial status of relativizers (Kayne 1975, 2008, 2010; Lehmann 1984; Manzini & Savoia 2003, 2011, among many others) and aims at showing that what we call complementizers are not C0 heads, as commonly assumed. Instead, we propose that both relative “complementizers” and “pronouns” have the same categorial status, i.e. they are wh-items and are part of the relative clause-internal head.
Keywords: syntax of relative clauses, Romance varieties, status of complementizers
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.From relative pronouns to complementizers: Old and Modern Standard Italian
  • 3.Complementizers and relative pronouns in OI varieties
    • 3.1Agreeing “complementizers”
      • 3.1.1Case and animacy on the “complementizer”: Medieval Northern Italian dialects
      • 3.1.2Case and gender on the “complementizer”: Old Neapolitan 1300–1350 (circa)
      • 3.1.3Conclusions on the agreeing “complementizers”
    • 3.2Uninflected relative pronouns
    • 3.3Conclusion ad interim
  • 4.Our proposal: Relativizers as wh-determiners
    • 4.1The derivation of restrictive RCs through the history of Italian
      • 4.1.1Theoretical argument
      • 4.1.2Further empirical arguments
    • 4.2 Che through the history of Italian
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • Databases
  • References
Published online: 1 February 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lv.16002.pol
References (70)
Databases
ASIt Atlante sintattico d’Italia. University of Padua: [URL]
OVI Opera del vocabolario italiano. University of Chicago: [URL]
References
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. (2008). Versatile cases. Journal of Linguistics 441. 565–603. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bacskai-Atkari, Julia. (2014). Cyclical change in Hungarian comparatives. Diachronica 31.4: 465–505. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2016). On the diachronic development of a Hungarian declarative complementiser. Transactions of the Philological Society 114.1: 95–116. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barbato, Marcello. (2001). Il libro viii del Plinio napoletano a cura di Giovanni Brancati. Napoli: Liguori.Google Scholar
Benincà, Paola & Guglielmo Cinque. (2010). La frase relativa. In: Renzi Lorenzo & Gian Paolo Salvi (eds.). Grammatica dell’italiano antico. Bologna: Il Mulino. Vol. I1. 469–507.Google Scholar
Bianchi, Valentina. (1999). Consequences of Antisymmetry: Headed Relative Clauses. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2011). Some notes on the ‘specificity effects’ of optional pronouns. In: Rouveret Alain (ed.). Resumptive pronouns at the interfaces. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 319–342. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cardinaletti, Anna. (1987). Aspetti sintattici dell’estraposizione della frase relativa. Rivista di grammatica generativa 121. 3–59.Google Scholar
Chierchia, Gennaro. (1998). Reference to kinds across languages. Natural Language Semantics 61: 339–405. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo. (1978). La sintassi dei pronomi relativi ‘cui’ e ‘quale’ nell’italiano contemporaneo. Rivista di grammatical generative 31. 31–126.Google Scholar
. (1982). On the theory of relative clause and markedness. The Linguistic Review 11. 247–294. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (1988). La frase relativa. In: Renzi Lorenzo (ed.). Grande grammatica italiana di consultazione. Bologna: Il Mulino. Vol 11. 443–503.Google Scholar
. (1990). Types of A’ Dependencies. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.Google Scholar
. (1999). Adverbs and Functional Heads. A Cross-linguistic Perspective. New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
. (2007). A note on linguistic theory and typology. Linguistic Typology 111. 93–106. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2008). More on the indefinite character of the Head of restrictive relatives. Rivista di grammatica generativa 331. 3–24.Google Scholar
. (2013). Typological Studies. Word Order and Relative Clause. New York/London: Routledge.Google Scholar
. (2015). Three phenomena discriminating between “raising” and “matching” relative clauses. Semantics-Syntax Interface 21. 1–27.Google Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo & Luigi Rizzi. (2010). The Cartography of Syntactic Structures”. In: Heine Bernd & Heiko Narrog (eds.). The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Analysis. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press. 51–65.Google Scholar
De Roberto, Elisa. (2008). Le proposizioni relative con antecedente in italiano antico. Ms. PhD thesis Università Roma Tre / Université Paris IV-Sorbonne.Google Scholar
Del Gobbo, Francesca. (2007). On the syntax and semantics of appositive relative clauses. In: Dehé Nicole & Yordanka Kavalova (eds.). Parentheticals. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 173–201. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fiorentino, Giuliana. (1998). Clausola relativa debole e pronome relativo in italiano. In: Ramat Paolo & Elisa Roma (eds.). Sintassi storica, Atti del XXX congresso internazionale della Società di Linguistica italiana. Pavia, 26–28 settembre 1996. Roma: Bulzoni.Google Scholar
Formentin, Vittorio. (1996). Flessione bicasuale del pronome relativo in antichi testi italiani centro-meridionali. Archivio Glottologico Italiano 811. 133–176.Google Scholar
Franco, Ludovico. (2012). Against the identity of complementizers and demonstrative pronouns. Poznań Studies in Contemporary Linguistics 48.4: 565–596.Google Scholar
Friedmann, Naama et al. (in prep). The acquisition of relative clauses in sixteen languages. Final paper of WG-3 of the European COST Action/33.
Gelderen, Elly van. (2004). Grammaticalization as economy. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2009). Renewal in the left periphery: economy and the complementiser layer. Transactions of the Philological Society 1071. 131–195. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heim, Irene & Angelika Kratzer. 1998. Semantics in Generative Grammar. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hulsey, Sarah & Uli Sauerland. (2006). Sorting out relative clauses. Natural Language Semantics 141. 111–137. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Iandolo, Antonio. (2001). Parlare e scrivere in dialetto napoletano. Napoli: Tempolungo.Google Scholar
Jensen, Frede. (1986). The syntax of Medieval Occitan. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (1990). Old French and Comparative Gallo-Romance Syntax. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kayne, Richard. (1975). French Syntax. Cambridge (Mass.): MIT Press.Google Scholar
. (1994). The Antisymmetry of Syntax. Cambridge (Mass.): MIT Press.Google Scholar
. (2008). Antisymmetry and the lexicon. Linguistic Variation Yearbook. 81: 1–31. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2010). Why isn’t This a complementizer?. In: Kayne Richard (ed.). Comparison and contrasts. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 190–227.Google Scholar
Keenan, Edward L. & Bernard Comrie. (1977). Noun Phrase Accessibility and Universal Grammar. Linguistic Inquiry 81. 63–99.Google Scholar
Klima, Edward Stephan. (1964). Studies in Diachronic Transformational Syntax. Doctoral dissertation. Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
Ledgeway, Adam. (2005). Moving through the left periphery: the dual complementiser system in the dialects of Southern Italy. Transactions of the Philological Society 103(3): 339–396. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2009). Grammatica diacronica del napoletano. Tübingen: Niemeyer Verlag. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2012). From Latin to Romance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lehmann, Christian. (1984). Der Relativsatz: Typologie seiner Strukturen, Theorie seiner Funktionen, Kompendium seiner Grammatik. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Longobardi, Giuseppe. (1994). Reference and proper names. Linguistic Inquiry 251: 609–665.Google Scholar
Manzini, Rita & Leonardo Savoia. (2003). The nature of complementizers. Rivista di Grammatica Generativa 281: 87–110.Google Scholar
. (2011). Grammatical Categories. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Noordhof, Harm. (1937). La construction relative en italien. La Haye: van Haeringen.Google Scholar
Novogrodsky, Rama & Naama Friedmann. (2006). The production of relative clauses in SLI: A window to the nature of the impairment. Advances in Speech-Language pathology 8(4): 364–375. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Obenauer, Hans-Georg. (1976). Études de syntaxe interrogative du français – Quoi, combien et le complémenteur. Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (1994). Aspects de la syntaxe A-barre. Effects d’intervention et mouvements des quantifieurs. Thèse d’Etat. Université de Paris VIII.Google Scholar
Parry, Mair. (2007). The interaction of Semantics and Syntax in the spread of relative che in Early Vernaculars of Italy. In: Bentley Delia & Adam Ledgeway (eds.). Sui dialetti italoromanzi. Saggi in onore di Nigel B. Vincent. Norfolk: Bidles. 200–219.Google Scholar
Partee, Barbara. (1973). Some transformational extensions of Montague grammar. Journal of Philosophical Logic 21: 509–534. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Poletto, Cecilia & Emanuela Sanfelici. (2014). On the nature of complementizers: insights from Italian subject relative clause. Paper presented at the 28th Symposium on Romance Linguistics, Going Romance. University of Lisbon 4–6 December.
(submitted). On the wh nature of relative che and prepositions. Annali di Ca’ Foscari.
Rizzi, Luigi. (1997). The fine structure of the left periphery. In: Haegeman Liliane (ed.). Elements of Grammar. Dordercht: Kluwer. 281–337. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi & Ur Shlonsky. (2007). Strategies of subject extraction. In: Hans Martin Gärtner & Uli Sauerland (eds.). Interfaces + Recursion = Language? Chomsky’s Minimalism and the View from Syntax-Semantics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 115–160.Google Scholar
Roberts, Ian & Anna Roussou. (2003). Syntactic change: A minimalist approach to grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rohlfs, Gerhard. (1966). Grammatica storica della lingua italiana e dei suoi dialetti. Torino: Einaudi.Google Scholar
Rooryck, Johan. (2000). A unified analysis of French interrogative and complementizer qui/que. In: Rooryck Johan (ed.). Configurations of sentential complementation. London: Routledge. Chapter 8.Google Scholar
Sanfelici, Emanuela, Caloi Irene & Cecilia Poletto. (2014). Subject Object asymmetries in relative clause: an investigation into three new empirical domains. Quaderni di lavoro ASIt, Atti della XIX Giornata di dialettologia, Padova.Google Scholar
Sanfelici, Emanuela & Cecilia Poletto. (2017). On the relative cycle: the case of P+ che relative clauses from Old to Modern Italian. Ms. Università di Padova.Google Scholar
Sauerland, Uli. (1998). The Meaning of Chains. Ph.D. dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
. (2003). Unpronounced Heads in relative Clauses. In: Schwabe Kerstin & Susanne Winkler (eds.). The Interfaces. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 205–226. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sells, Peter. (1985). Restrictive and Non-Restrictive Modification. CSLI Report: 85–28.Google Scholar
Shimoyama, Junko. (1999). Internally Headed Relative Clauses in Japanese and E-Type Anaphor. Ms. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts.Google Scholar
Šimík, Radek. (2008). The source of wh-morphology in questions and relative clauses. Proceedings of ConSOLE XV1. 273–294.Google Scholar
Sportiche, Dominique. (2011). French relative qui. Linguistic Inquiry 42(1): 83–124. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Starke, Michal. (2009). Nanosyntax: A short primer to a new approach to language. In: Svenonius Peter, Ramchand Gillian, Taraldsen Tarald & Michal Starke (eds.). Special issue on Nanosyntax. University of Tromsoe: Norway. 1–6.Google Scholar
Taraldsen, Knut T.. (2002). The Que/Qui Alternation and the Distribution of Expletives. In: Peter Svenonius (ed.). Subjects, Expletives and the EPP. New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press. 29–42.Google Scholar
Cited by (7)

Cited by seven other publications

Covarrubias Acosta, Adela
2024. De sustantivo a pronombre relativo: la historia de men en el zapoteco de San Bartolo Yautepec. Cuadernos de Lingüística de El Colegio de México 11 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Espinal, M. Teresa, Cristina Real-Puigdollers & Xavier Villalba
2024. From a movement verb to an epistemic discourse marker. Linguistic Variation 24:1 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Presotto, Giacomo & Jacopo Torregrossa
2024. Intervention and amelioration effects in the acquisition of Spanish object relative clauses: the role of word order and DOM. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 9:1 DOI logo
Sanfelici, Emanuela & Sira Rodeghiero
2024. From comparative to causal relations: the case of siccome ‘because’ in the history of Italian. Linguistics Vanguard DOI logo
Rugna, Giuseppe
2023. The Case and Finiteness Restrictions of Italian Relativeche. Probus 35:1 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Pinelli, Maria Cristina, Cecilia Poletto & Cinzia Avesani
2020. Does prosody meet syntax? A case study on standard Italian cleft sentences and left peripheral focus. The Linguistic Review 37:2 ► pp. 309 ff. DOI logo
Rinke, Esther & Elisabeth Aßmann
2017. The Syntax of Relative Clauses in European Portuguese. Extending the Determiner Hypothesis of Relativizers to Relative que. Journal of Portuguese Linguistics 16 DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 25 october 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.