Cover not available
Part of
Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 13: Selected papers from ‘Going Romance’ 29, Nijmegen
Edited by Janine Berns, Haike Jacobs and Dominique Nouveau
[Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 13] 2018
► pp. 5–20

The spurious vs. dative problem

| University of the Basque Country

In this paper I bring new arguments against the morphological analysis of the Spurious Se Rule in Spanish (Bonet 1991, Nevins 2007, 2012, among others). I show that both the dative clitic le and the spurious clitic se differ syntactically. These facts strongly argue against the existence of a morphological rule (i.e. impoverishment) mapping the dative clitic into the spurious one, leaving its syntax unaffected.

Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Morphological SpuSe rule (Nevins 2007, 2012)
  • 3.The spurious vs. dative problem
    • 3.1Bare plurals
    • 3.2The non-existence of ethical spurious se clitics
      • 3.2.1The double object construction hypothesis
    • 3.3Spurious ≠ dative
      • 3.3.1Weak cross-over repairs
      • 3.3.2Principle C effects with post-verbal subjects
    • 3.4Binominal sendos in Spanish (Bosque 1992)
  • 4.Spurious-se is just reflexive-se
    • 4.1Vehicle change (Fiengo & May 1994)
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgments
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 13 July 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/rllt.13.02alc
References
Alcaraz, Alejo
2016 “The Obviation Agreement Effect”. In Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 10: Selected papers from ‘Going Romance’ 28, ed. by Ernestina Carilho, Alexandra Fiéis, Maria Lobo and Sandra Pereira, 1–22. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baker, Mark
1988 Incorporation: A Theory of Grammatical Function Changing. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Béjar, Susana
2003 Phi-syntax: A Theory of Agreement. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
Bonet, M. Eulàlia
1991 Morphology after Syntax: Pronominal Clitics in Romance. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Bosque, Ignacio
1992 “Anáforas distributivas: La gramática de sendos”. Miscellanea antverpiensia: Homenaje al vigesimo aniversario del Instituto de Estudios Hispanicos de la Universidad de Amberes: 59–92.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam
1965 Aspects of Theory of Syntax. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
1981 Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
1995 “Categories and Transformations”. The Minimalist Program, 219–394.Google Scholar
2000 “Minimalist Inquiries: The Framework”. In Step by Step: Essays on Minimalist Syntax in Honor of Howard Lasnik, ed. by Roger Martin, David Michaels and Juan Uriagereka, 89–155. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Demonte, Violeta
1995 “Dative Alternation in Spanish”. International Journal of Latin and Romance Linguistics 7 (1): 5–30.Google Scholar
den Dikken, Marcel
1995 “Binding, Expletives and Levels”. Linguistic Inquiry 26: 347–354.Google Scholar
Embick, David and Rolf Noyer
2001 “Movement Operations after Syntax”. Linguistic Inquiry 32 (4): 555–595. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2007 “Distributed Morphology and the Syntax/Morphology Interface”. In The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Interfaces, ed. by Gillian Ramchand and Charles Reiss, 289–324. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Halle, Morris, and Alec Marantz
1993 “Distributed Morphology and the Pieces of Inflection”, In The View from Building 20, ed. by Ken Hale and Samuel J. Keyser, 111–176. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Fernández Soriano, Olga
1989 “Strong Pronouns in Null-subject Languages and the Avoid Pronoun Principle”. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 11: 228–239.Google Scholar
Fiengo, Robert, and Robert May
1994 Indices and Identity. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Jaeggli, Osvaldo
1982 Topics in Romance Syntax. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Lasnik, Howard
1999 “On Feature Strength: Three Minimalist Approaches to Overt Movement”. Linguistic Inquiry 30 (2): 197–217. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Manzini, Maria Rita, and Leonardo Maria Savoia
2005 I dialetti italiani e romanci: morfosintassi generativa (Vol. 1). Alessandria: Edizioni dell’Orso.Google Scholar
Nevins, Andrew
2007 “The Representation of Third-person and its Consequences for Person-case Effects”. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 25: 273–313. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012 “Haplological Dissimilation at Distinct Stages of Exponence”. In The Morphology and Phonology of Exponence, ed. by Jochen Trommer, 84–116. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Noyer, R.
2001 “Clitic Sequences in Nunggubuyu and PF Convergence”. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 19 (4): 751–826. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ordóñez, Francisco
2000 The Clausal Structure of Spanish: a Comparative Perspective. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Ormazabal, Javier, and Juan Romero
2013 “Object Clitics, Agreement and Dialectal Variation”. International Journal of Latin and Romance Linguistics 25 (2): 301–344.Google Scholar
Larson, Richard K.
1988 “On the Double Object Construction”. Linguistic Inquiry 19 (3): 335–391.Google Scholar
Panagiotidis, Phoevos, and Stavroula Tsiplakou
2006 “An A-binding Asymmetry in Null Subject Languages and its Significance for Universal Grammar”. Linguistic Inquiry 37 (1): 167–177. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Perlmutter, David M.
1968 Deep and Surface Structure Constraints in Syntax. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Preminger, Omer
2014 Agreement and its Failures. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009 “Breaking Agreements: Distinguishing Agreement and Clitic Doubling by their Failures”. Linguistic Inquiry 40 (4): 619–666. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Torrego, Esther
1995 “From Argumental to Non-argumental Pronouns: Spanish doubled reflexives”. Probus 7 (2): 221–241. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 3 other publications

Faust, Noam
2023. Avoidance of Unintended Repetition. In The Wiley Blackwell Companion to Morphology, ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Fábregas, Antonio
2021. SE in Spanish. Borealis – An International Journal of Hispanic Linguistics 10:2 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Rezac, Milan
2024. The rise and fall of a person-case constraint in Breton. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 22 april 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.