Cover not available
Article published In:
A micro-perspective on Verb Second in Romance and Germanic
Edited by Christine Meklenborg Salvesen
[Linguistic Variation 19:1] 2019
► pp. 82–117

On the left periphery of three languages of Northern Italy

New insights into the typology of relaxed V2

| Sapienza University, Rome
Through a focus on the properties of subject-finite verb inversion and XP fronting in three relaxed V2 languages, namely Cimbrian, Ladin and Mòcheno, this paper aims to widen and refine our understanding of relaxed V2 languages, i.e. languages in which the V2 property should be understood in a technical sense as obligatory V-to-C movement, not as a simple description referring to linearisation (Benincà 2006, 2013; Ledgeway 2016). It will be shown that inversion differs across relaxed V2 languages in two ways. In a first subtype, inversion is not associated with any marked pragmatic interpretation of the lexical subject and the subject appears in an A position in the IP area: this type is instantiated by Old Italian (Benincà 2006, Poletto 2014). A second option, instantiated by the languages considered in this paper, is that the lexical subject receives a pragmatically marked interpretation which is encoded in a Functional Projection (FP) in the vP periphery (Belletti 2004, Poletto 2006). This paper confirms that V3/V4 word orders involve the presence of a double articulation for foci and wh-elements, which appear in different positions in the CP layer in relaxed V2 languages (Poletto 2002, Wolfe 2015 a,b). It also contributes to our understanding of the syntax of topics in relaxed V2 languages by showing that (i) topics can be moved to CP and (ii) the movement option is not restricted to main clauses lacking an XP in the left periphery; it also occurs in interrogative clauses (unlike in the relaxed V2 varieties considered in Walkden 2014, 2015).
Keywords: Relativised Minimality, linear restriction, multiple access to CP, movement of the finite verb, Early Romance
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.On the typology of V2 languages
    • 2.1Germanic and Romance V2
    • 2.2On Germanic inversion in Mòcheno, Ladin and Cimbrian
  • 3.Multiple access to the left periphery in Mòcheno, Ladin and Cimbrian
    • 3.1Fronting of verb arguments in main declarative clauses
      • 3.1.1Co-occurrence of given arguments
      • 3.1.2Co-occurrence of given and new/contrasted arguments
    • 3.2Wh- main interrogative clauses
    • 3.3Interim summary
  • 4.Proposed analysis
    • 4.1Tenets of the analysis
    • 4.2Proposed analysis
      • 4.2.1Main declarative clauses with fronted topics
      • 4.2.2Main interrogative clauses
      • 4.2.3Main declarative clauses with a fronted focus
  • 5.Conclusions
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 24 September 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lv.16005.cog
References (116)
References
Abels, Klaus. 2012. The Italian Left Periphery: A View from Locality. Linguistic Inquiry. 43 (2). 229–254. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Adams, Marianne. 1987. Old French, Null Subjects and Verb Second Phenomena. PhD dissertation, UCLA.Google Scholar
Backer, Mark. 1985. The mirror principle and morphosyntactic explanation. Linguistic Inquiry 161. 373–415.Google Scholar
Bech, Kristin & Christine Meckleborg-Salvesen. 2014. Preverbal word order in Old English and Old French. In Kristin Bech & Kristine Gunn Eide (eds.), Information Structure and Syntactic Change in Germanic and Romance Languages, 233–269. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Belletti, Adriana. 2004. Aspects of the low IP Area. In Luigi Rizzi (ed.), The Structure of CP and IP. The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, Volume 21, 16–51. New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Benincà, Paola. 2013. Caratteristiche del V2 romanzo. Lingue romanze antiche, ladino dolomitico e portoghese. In Ermenegildo Bidese & Federica Cognola (eds.) Introduzione alla linguistica del mòcheno, 65–84. Turin: Rosenberg &Sellier.Google Scholar
. 2006. A detailed map of the left periphery of Medieval Romance. In: Zanuttini et al. (eds.), Crosslinguistic research in Syntax and Semantics, 53–86. Washington.Google Scholar
. 2001. The position of Topic and Focus in the left periphery. In Guglielmo Cinque & Giampaolo Salvi (eds.), Current Studies in Italian Syntax: Essays Offered to Lorenzo Renzi, 39–64. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
. 1995. Complement clitics in medieval Romance: The Tobler-Mussafia law. In Adrian Battye & Ian Roberts (eds), Clause Structure and Language Change, 325–344. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
. 1994. La variazione sintattica. Bologna: Il Mulino.Google Scholar
. 1984. Un’ipotesi sulla sintassi delle lingue romanze medievali. Quaderni Patavini di Linguistica 41: 3–19. Reprinted in Benincà, Paola. 1994. La Variazione Sintattica, 177–194. Bologna: Il Mulino.Google Scholar
Benincà, Paola & Cecilia Poletto. 2004. Topic, Focus and V2. In Luigi, Rizzi (ed.), The Structure of CP and IP. The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, Vol. 21, 52–75. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Besten, Hans den. 1983. On the interaction of root transformations and lexical delective rules. In Werner Abraham (ed.), On Formal Syntax of the Westgermania, 47–131. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biberauer, Theresa. 2003. Verb Second (V2) in Afrikaans: A Minimalist Investigation of Word Order Variation. PhD Thesis. University of Cambridge, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Biberauer, Theresa, Ian Roberts. 2015. Rethinking Formal Hierarchies: A Proposed Unification. In: Ur Shlonsky (Ed.), Beyond Functional Sequence, 295–313. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biberauer, Theresa & Ans van Kemenade. 2011. Subject positions and information-structural diversification in the history of English. Catalan Journal of Linguistics. 101, 17–69. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bidese, Ermenegildo. 2008. Die diachronische Syntax des Zimbrischen. Tübingen: Günter Narr.Google Scholar
. 2011. Das Zimbrische von Giazza: Zeugnisse und Quellen aus einer deutschen Sprachinsel in Oberitalien. Übersetzungen, Hörbeispiele und Bildmaterial zu den von Bruno Schweizer gesammelten Erzählungen / Il Cimbro di Giazza: testimonianze e fonti da un’isola linguistica tedesca in Norditalia. I racconti di Bruno Schweizer con traduzioni, esempi sonori e materiali visivi, Innsbruck: Studien Verlag.Google Scholar
Bidese, Ermenegildo & Alessandra Tomaselli. 2018. Developing pro-drop: the case of Cimbrian. In Federica Cognola & Jan Casalicchio (eds.), Understanding null-subjects. A synchronic and diachronic perspective, 52–69. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bidese, Ermenegildo, Andrea, Padovan & Alessandra Tomaselli. 2012. A binary system of complementizers in Cimbrian relative clauses. In: Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax. Vol. 901, Lund: Lund University. 1–20.Google Scholar
Bidese, Ermenegildo & Alessandra Tomaselli. 2005. Formen der “Herausstellung” und Verlust der V2-Restriktion im Zimbrischen. In Ermenegildo Bidese, John Down & Thomas Stolz (eds), Das Zimbrische zwischen Germanisch und Romanisch, 71–92. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
. 2010. Diachronic Development in Isolation: The Loss of V2 Phenomena in Cimbrian. Linguistische Berichte. 2101. 209–228.Google Scholar
Bidese, Ermenegildo, Federica Cognola & Andrea Padovan. 2012. Zu einer neuen Verb-Zweit- Typologie in den germanischen Sprachen. In Peter Anreiter, Ivo Hajan & Manfred Kienpointner (eds.), In Simplicitate Complexitas. Festgabe für Barbara Stefan zum 70. Geburtstag, 69–86. Wien: Praesens Verlag.Google Scholar
Bidese, Ermenegildo, Andrea Padovan & Alessandra Tomaselli. 2012. A binary system of complementizers in Cimbrian relative causes. Working papers in Scandinavian syntax. 901, 1–20.Google Scholar
. 2013. Linguistische Berichte. Sonderheft 191, 47–58.Google Scholar
Bošković, Želikjo. 2002. On multiple wh-fronting. Linguistic Inquiry 331. 351–383. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brandtler, Johan. 2014. Review of Federica Cognola’s Syntactic Variation and Verb Second: A German Dialect in Northern Italy. Nordic Journal of Linguistics, 371. 107–111. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Branigan, Philip. 1996. Verb second and the A bar Status of Subjects. Studia Linguistica 501. 50–79. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brody, Michael. 2000. Mirror theory. Linguistic Inquiry 311. 29–56. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Büring, Daniel. 1999. “Topic”. In Focus – Linguistic Cognitive and Computational Perspectives, P. Bosch and R.v.der Sand (eds), 142–165. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cardinaletti, Anna & Starke, Michal. 1999. The typology of structural deficiency: A case study of three classes of pronouns. In Henk van Riemsdijk (ed.), Clitics in the Languages of Europe. Empirical Approaches to Language Typology, 145–233. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Casalicchio, Jan & Federica Cognola. 2018. V2 and (micro)-variation in two Rhaeto-Romance varieties of Northern Italy. In Roberta D’Alessandro & Diego Pescarini (eds.), Advances in Italian Dialectology, 72–106. Leiden: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Casalicchio, Jan & Federica, Cognola. 2016. On a case of syntactic microvariation in Rhaeto-romance: The verb second rule. Handout of the talk given the Workshop ‘Formal approaches to Romance microvariation’, 49th Annual meeting of the Societas Linguistica Europaea, Naples, 31 August – 3 September 2016.
Casalicchio, Jan & Federica Cognola. 2015. On the left periphery of relaxed V2 languages: A comparison between Rhaetoromance and Mòcheno. Talk given at X CIDSM Conference, Leiden.
Chomsky, Noam. 2001. Derivation by phase. In Michael Kenstowicz (ed.), Ken Hale: a life in language, 1–53. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
. 1982. Some concepts and consequences of the theory of Government and Binding. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
. 1973. Conditions on Transformations. In Stephen R. Anderson & Paul Kiparsky (eds.), A Festschrift for Morris Halle, 232–286. New York: Holt, Reinhart and Winston.Google Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo. 1990. Types of A’-Dependencies. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
. 1999. Adverbs and Functional Heads. Oxford/New York: OUP.Google Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo & Luigi Rizzi. 2010. Mapping Spatial PPs: An Introduction. In Guglielmo Cinque & Luigi Rizzi (eds.), Mapping Spatial PPs. The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, Volume 61, 3–25. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cognola, Federica. (2019). On the classification of Mòcheno and Cimbrian within the typology of V2 languages. Relaxed or reduced V2 languages? In Francesco Costantini (ed.), Syntactic Variation: the View from the German-Language Islands in Northeast Italy, 83–106. Udine: Forum.Google Scholar
. 2016. On asymmetric pro-drop in Old High German and Old Italian. Talk given at the Workshop on Asymmetries between main and embedded clauses, Oslo, 23–24 June 2016.
. 2015. How to define relaxed V2 languages and how to distinguish them from non-V2 languages: A reply to Brandtler. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 38(1). 93–100. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2014. On asymmetric PRO-DROP in Mòcheno. Pinning down the role of contact in the maintenance of a root-embedded asymmetry. Stuf – Language Typology and Universals- Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung, 67:4. 511–532.Google Scholar
. 2013a. Syntactic Variation and Verb Second. A German Dialect in Northern Italy. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013b. Limits of syntactic variation and Universal Grammar. V2, OV/VO and subject pronouns in Mòcheno. Linguistische Berichte. Sonderheft 191, 59–83.Google Scholar
. 2011. Acquisizione Plurilingue e Bilinguismo Sbilanciato. Uno Studio sulla Sintassi dei Bambini Mòcheni in Età Prescolare. Padova: Unipress.Google Scholar
Cognola, Federica & Manuela Moroni. 2018. Die Kodierung der Informationsstruktur im Fersentalerischen: Die Syntax-Prosodie-Schnittstelle. Germanistische Linguistik – Sonderheft, 79–115.Google Scholar
Cognola, Federica & Roland, Hinterhölzl. 2016. On the interaction between V2, subjects and wh-movement in a comparative perspective. Talk given at the 22. Germanic Linguistics Annual Conference, University of Iceland, 20–22 May 2016.
Dell’Aquila, Vittorio & Gabriele, Iannaccaro. 2006. Surveys Ladins. Usi linguistici nelle valli Ladine. Trento: Pubblicazioni della Regione Trentino-Alto Adige/Suedtirol.Google Scholar
Fontana, Joseph. 1993. Phrase Structure and the Syntax of Clitics in the History of Spanish. University of Pennsylvania PhD dissertation.Google Scholar
Frascarelli, Mara. 2000. The Syntax-Phonology Interface in Focus and Topic Constructions in Italian. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Frascarelli, Mara & Roland Hinterhölzl. 2007. Types of topics in German and Italian. In Kerstin Schwabe & Susanne Winkler (eds.), On Information Structure. Meaning and Form, 87–116. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Friedmann, Naama, Adriana Belletti & Luigi Rizzi. 2009. Relativized relatives: Types of intervention in the acquisition of A-bar dependencies. Lingua 1191: 67–88. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gallmann, Peter, Heidi Siller-Rungaldier & Horst Sitta. 2013. Sprachen im Vergleich: Deutsch – Ladinisch – Italienisch. Bozen: Istitut Pedagogich Ladin.Google Scholar
Garraffa, Maria & Nino Grillo. 2008. Canonicity effects as grammatical phenomena. Journal of Neurolinguistics 211. 177–197. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Givón, Talmy. 1983. “Topic Continuity in Discourse: An Introduction”. In Topic Continuity in Discourse: A Quantitative Crosslanguage Study, Talmy Givón (ed), 5–41. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grewendorf, Günther & Cecilia Poletto. 2010. Hidden verb second: The case of Cimbrian. In Michael Putnam (ed.), Studies on German-Language Islands, 301–346. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Grillo, Nino. 2009. Generalized minimality: Feature impoverishment and comprehension deficits in agrammatism. Lingua 1191: 1426–1443. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane. 1997. Verb second, the split CP and null subjects in early Dutch finite clauses. GenGenP 4 (2). 133–175.Google Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane and Ciro Greco. 2018. “West Flemish V3 and the interaction of syntax and discourse.” Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 211: 1–56.Google Scholar
Hinterhölzl, Roland & Ans van Kemenade. 2012. The interaction between syntax, information structure and prosody in word order change. in Terttu Nevalainen & Elizabet Cross Traugott (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of the History of English, 803–821. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hirschbühler, Paul & Junker, Marie-Odile. 1988. Remarques sur les sujets nuls en subordonnées en ancien et en moyen francais. Revue Québécoise de Linquistique Théorique et Appliquée 7(3). 63–84.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
Holmberg, Anders & Platzack, Christer. 1995. The Role of Inflection in Scandinavian Syntax. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Kaiser, Georg. 2002a. Die Verb-Zweit-Stellung im Raetoromanischen. Ein typologischer Vergleich. Ladinia (26–27). 313–334.Google Scholar
Kaiser, Georg A. 2002b. Verbstellung und Verbstellungswandel in den romanischen Sprachen. Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kaiser, Georg A. & Michael, Zimmermann. 2011. On the decrease in subject-verb inversion in French declaratives. In Esther Rinke et al. (eds.), The development of grammar: language acquisition and diachronic change, 355–382. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kemenade, Ans van & Marit Westergaard. 2012. Syntax and Information Structure: Verb- Second variation in Middle-English. In Anneli Meurman-Solin, Maria José Lopez-Couso & Bettelou Los (eds.), Information Structure and Syntactic Change in the History of English, 87–118. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kolmer, Agnes. 2005. Subjektklitika als Kongruenzmarkierer: Ein Vergleich zwischen bairischen und alemannischen Sprachinseldialekten in Norditalien (Zimbrisch und Walserdeutsch). In: Bidese, Ermenegildo; James Dow & Thomas Stolz (eds.). Das Zimbrische zwischen Germanisch und Romanisch, 164–189. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
. 2014. Pronomen und Pronominalklitika im Cimbro. Stuttgard: Franz Steiner Verlag.Google Scholar
Kuno, Susumu. 1976. “Subject, theme, and the speaker’s empathy – A reexamination of relativization phenomena”. In Subject and Topic, C. Li (ed), 417–444. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Ledgeway, Adam. 2005. Moving through the left periphery: The dual complementizer system in the dialects of Southern Italy. Transactions of the Philological Society 103(3). 339–396. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2007. Old Neapolitan word order: some initial observations. In Anna Laura Lepschy & Arturo Tosi (eds.), Histories and Dictionaries of the Languages of Italy, 121–149. Longo, Ravenna.Google Scholar
. 2008. Satisfying V2 in early Romance: merge vs move. Journal of Linguistics. 44 (02). 437–40. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012. From Latin to Romance. Oxford/New York: OUP.Google Scholar
. 2016. Late Latin Verb Second: The Sentential Word Order of the Itinerarium Egeriae . To appear in Jaume Mateu Fantanals & Renato Oniga (eds), Generative Approaches to Latin Syntax, special issue of Catalan Journal of Linguistics.Google Scholar
Molnar, Valéria. 2001. Contrast from a contrastive perspective. In Ivana Kruijff-Korbayova and Mark Steedman (eds.), European Summer School in Logic, Language and Information 2001, 99–114.Google Scholar
Paoli, Sandra. 2005. COMP: a multi-talented category: Evidence from Romance. In Laura Brugè et al. (eds.) Contributions to the 30 Incontro di Grammatica Generativa, 185–202. Venice: Cafoscarina.Google Scholar
Poletto, Cecilia. 2014. Word Order in Old Italian. Oxford/New York: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2006. Parallel phases: A study of the high and low left periphery of Old Italian. In Phases of Interpretation [Studies in Generative Grammar 91], Mara Frascarelli (ed.), 261–294. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2002. The left periphery of a V2-Rhaetoromance dialect: A new perspective on V2 and V3. In Sjef Barbiers, Leonie Cornips & Susanne van der Kleij (eds.), Syntactic Microvariation. Proceedings of the Workshop on Syntactic Microvariation, Amsterdam, August 2000, 214–242. Amsterdam: Meertens Institute.Google Scholar
. (2000): The higher functional field. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Poletto, Cecilia & Alessandra Tomaselli. 2002. La sintassi del soggetto nullo nelle isole tedescofone del Veneto: cimbro e sappadino a confronto, in: Gianna Marcato (ed.), La dialettologia oltre il 2001, 237–252. Padova: Unipress.Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 2004. Locality and left periphery. In Adriana Belletti (ed.), Structures and Beyond. The Cartography of Syntactic Structure, Vol. 3, 223–251. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
. 2001 a. Relativized Minimality Effects. In Mark Baltin & Chris Collins (eds.), Handbook of Contemporary Syntactic Theory, 89–110. Blackwell: Oxford. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2001 b. The position of Inter(rogative)P in the left periphery of the clause. In Guglielmo Cinque & Giampaolo Salvi (eds.), Current Studies in Italian Syntax: Essays offered to Lorenzo Renzi, 287–296. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
. 1997. The fine structure of the left periphery. In Liliane Haegeman (ed.), Elements of Grammar. A Handbook of Generative Syntax, 281–337. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
. 1991 [1996]. Residual verb second and the wh-criterion. Geneva Generative Papers 2. Reprinted in Adriana Belletti & Luigi Rizzi (eds.), Parameters and Functional Heads, 63–90. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
. 1990. Relativized Minimality. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi & Giuliano Bocci. 2017. Left Periphery of the Clause: Primarily Illustrated for Italian. In Blackwell Companion to Syntax, II edition. Blackwell Publishers. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Roberts, Ian. 2004. The C-System in Brythonic Celtic languages, V2 and the EPP. In Luigi Rizzi (ed.), The Structure of CP and IP. The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, Vol. 2, 297–328. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
. 1997. Directionality and word order change in the history of English. In Ans van Kemenade & Nigel Vincent (eds.), Parameters of Morphosyntactic Change, 423–460. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. 1996. Remarks on the Old English C-system and the diachrony of V2. In Ellen Brandner & Gisella Ferraresi (eds.) Language Change and Generative Grammar, 154–167. Linguistische Berichte: Sonderheft 71. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rowley, Anthony. 2003. Liacht as de sproch: grammatica della lingua mochena. Palù del Fersina: Pubblicazioni dell’istituto mòcheno di cultura.Google Scholar
Salvesen, Christine. 2013. Topics and the Left Periphery: A comparison of Old French and Modern Germanic. In Terje Lohndal (ed.), In search of universal grammar: from Old Norse to Zoque, 131–172. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Salvesen, Christine & Kristin Bech. 2014. Postverbal subjects in Old English and Old French. Oslo Studies in Language (OSLa). 6(1). 201–228.Google Scholar
Salvi, Giampaolo. 2004. La formazione della struttura di frase romanza. Ordine delle parole e clitici dal latino alle lingue romanze antiche. Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2000. Il ladino. Schizzo linguistico Verbum 2000 (1). 151–169.Google Scholar
Sportiche, Dominique. 1996. Clitic constructions. In Johan Rooryck & Laurie Ann Zaring (eds.), Phrase Structure and the Lexicon, 213–276. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Togni, Lucia. 1990. Per un’analisi di alcuni fenomeni linguistici del dialetto della Valle del Fersina: Un confronto con la sintassi tedesca. MA thesis, University of Trento.Google Scholar
Tomaselli, Alessandra. 2010. La rilevanza del cimbro per gli studi di sintassi nel quadro teorico della grammatica generativa. In Ermenegildo Bidese (ed.), Il cimbro negli studi di linguistica, 41–59. Padova: Unipress.Google Scholar
. 1990. La sintassi del verbo finito nella lingue germaniche. Padova: Unipress.Google Scholar
Truckenbrodt, Hubert. 2006. On the semantic motivation of syntactic verb movement to C in German. Theoretical Linguistics 321: 257–306. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vance, Barbara. 1989. Null Subjects and Syntactic Change in Medieval French. PhD dissertation, Cornell University.Google Scholar
. 1997. Syntactic Change in Medieval French. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vanelli, Laura. 1987. I pronomi soggetto nei dialetti italiani settentrionali dal Medio Evo ad oggi. Medioevo Romanzo XIII1. 173–211.Google Scholar
Vikner, Sten. 1995. Verb Movement and Expletive Subjects in the Germanic Languages. Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Villata, Sandra, Luigi Rizzi & Julie Frank. 2016. Intervention effects and Relativized Minimality: New experimental evidence from graded judgments. Lingua 1791 (2016) 76–96. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Walkden, George. 2014. Syntactic Reconstruction and Proto-Germanic. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015. Verb-third in early West Germanic: A comparative perspective. In Theresa Biberauer & George Walkden (eds.), Syntax over Time: Lexical, Morphological and Information-structural Interactions, 236–248. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Westergaard, Marit. 2007. English as a mixed V2 grammar: synchronic word order inconstistencies from the perspective of first language acquisition. Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics 43(2), 107–131. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wolfe, Sam. 2015a. The nature of Old Spanish Verb Second reconsidered. Lingua 1651. 132–155. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015b. Microvariation in Old Italo-Romance Syntax: Evidence from Old Sardinian and Old Sicilian. Archivio glottologico italiano 100 (1), 3–36.Google Scholar
Zimmermann, Malte. ‘Discourse particles’. In Semantics (= Handbücher zur Sprach- und Kommunikationswissenschaft HSK 33.2, ed. by Klaus von Heusinger, Claudia Maienborn and Paul Portner, 2011–2038. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Zimmermann, Michael. 2015. Expletive and Referential subject pronouns in Medieval French. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Cognola, Federica & Jan Casalicchio
2023. Microvariation in the Distribution of Resumptive Pronouns in the Left Dislocation Construction in Two Tyrolean Dialects of Northern Italy. Languages 8:2 ► pp. 91 ff. DOI logo
Cognola, Federica
2022. On the role of information structure in the licensing of null subjects in Old High German. In Language Change at the Interfaces [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 275], ► pp. 123 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 8 july 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.