This paper discusses the properties of different types of subjects occurring in postverbal position in Italian: (i) in situ focused subjects, (ii) marginalized, topic subjects, (iii) heavy subjects. The data show that postverbal subjects convey different discourse-related values. We suggest that while left-peripheral positions syntactically encode different discourse-related features (see Rizzi’s 1997 cartography of the left-periphery), the VP-internal thematic positions are compatible with different discourse-related properties. In the postverbal space, no one-to-one correlation between interpretation and syntactic structure appears to be needed. Our conclusion differs from previous work (most notably, Belletti 2001, 2004) which assumes an IP-internal articulation of discourse-related positions immediately above VP and is in line with previous analyses of some of the constructions analyzed here (Cardinaletti 2001, 2002; Brunetti 2004; Bocci 2013; Samek-Lodovici 2015). The paper also discusses new-information preverbal subjects in some varieties of Italian.
Autori: | |
Autori: | Cardinaletti, Anna |
Presenza coautori internazionali: | no |
Numero degli autori: | 1 |
Data di pubblicazione: | Being printed |
Titolo: | On different types of postverbal subjects in Italian |
Rivista: | RIVISTA DI LINGUISTICA |
Lingua: | Inglese |
Supporto: | STAMPA |
Volume: | N/D |
Revisione (peer review): | Esperti anonimi |
Parole Chiave: | Postverbal subjects; focused subjects; marginalized subjects; heavy subjects; preverbal new-information subjects |
Settore Scientifico Disciplinare: | Settore L-LIN/01 - Glottologia e Linguistica |
Abstract: | This paper discusses the properties of different types of subjects occurring in postverbal position in Italian: (i) in situ focused subjects, (ii) marginalized, topic subjects, (iii) heavy subjects. The data show that postverbal subjects convey different discourse-related values. We suggest that while left-peripheral positions syntactically encode different discourse-related features (see Rizzi’s 1997 cartography of the left-periphery), the VP-internal thematic positions are compatible with different discourse-related properties. In the postverbal space, no one-to-one correlation between interpretation and syntactic structure appears to be needed. Our conclusion differs from previous work (most notably, Belletti 2001, 2004) which assumes an IP-internal articulation of discourse-related positions immediately above VP and is in line with previous analyses of some of the constructions analyzed here (Cardinaletti 2001, 2002; Brunetti 2004; Bocci 2013; Samek-Lodovici 2015). The paper also discusses new-information preverbal subjects in some varieties of Italian. |
Appare nelle tipologie: | 2.1 Articolo su rivista |
File in questo prodotto:
File | Descrizione | Tipologia | Licenza | |
---|---|---|---|---|
5_Cardinaletti.pdf | Articolo | Documento in Pre-print | Accesso chiuso-personale | Open Access dal 31/12/2019 |