ezt nyomtassadki

8/8/2019 EZT NYOMTASSADKI

1/72

Pzmny Pter Katolikus Egyetem

Blcsszettudomnyi Kar

Developments in the History of the Theory of

pro-drop

Vltozsok apro-drop elmletben

BA Thesis

Written ByKeresztes Jlia

Supervisor:Tth Ildik PhD

associate professor

15 April 2010

1


2/72

I, the undersigned, Keresztes Jlia, candidate for the B.A. degree in English

Language and Literature declare herewith that the present thesis is exclusively my own

work, based on my research and only such external information as properly credited in

notes and bibliography. I declare that no unidentified and illegitimate use was made of thework of others, and no part of the thesis infringes on any person's or institution's copyright.

I also declare that no part of the thesis has been submitted in this form to any other

institution of higher education for an academic degree.

Piliscsaba, 15 April 2010

___________________________

Signature

2


3/72

Table of Contents

1 Itnroduction ............................................................................................................. 6

2 Definition of Empty Categories ...............................................................................7

2.1 Non-overt arguments in non-finite English clauses ......................................... 8

2.1.1 Non-overt subject in Italian ..................................................................... 10

2.2 Structure and interpretation ............................................................................ 11

2.2.1 The pro-drop parameter ........................................................................... 11

3 The theory of pro by Rizzi .....................................................................................12

3.1 Licensing and identification of pro .................................................................18

3.2 Identification of pro ........................................................................................ 19

3.3 Typology of pro .............................................................................................. 20

3.4 Null expletive subjects .................................................................................. 21

3.4.1 Non-arguments ........................................................................................ 21

3.4.2 Quasi arguments ...................................................................................... 22

3.4.3 Subject inversion ..................................................................................... 23

3.5 The possible appearances of pro .....................................................................24

3


4/72

4 Speas approach to null subjects ............................................................................27

4.1 Projection of AGR .......................................................................................... 27

4.2 Languages with no AGR ................................................................................ 31

4.3 Licensing and Identification Theories of Null Arguments ............................. 31

4.4 Agreement and Null Argument Licensing ..................................................... 32

4.5 Theoretic problems with the licensing condition ........................................... 36

4.5.1 Morphological Properties and Agreement Strength ................................ 37

4.5.2 The Full Paradigm Condition .................................................................. 37

4.6 Against the Identification Condition .............................................................. 39

4.6.1 Null Pleonastics in Yiddish ..................................................................... 39

4.6.2 Null Pleonastics in German ..................................................................... 41

5 Languages allowing pro in special/unique environment ....................................... 44

5.1 Typology of null arguments ........................................................................... 45

5.2 Licensing of null subjects based on agreement .............................................. 47

5.3 Identification of null subjects ......................................................................... 49

5.3.1 Theory of identification ........................................................................... 49

5.4 Identification of null subjects based on the theory of agreement and the

typology of AGR .............................................................................................................. 534


5/72

5.4.1 Null subjects with deictic AGR ............................................................... 54

5.4.2 Null subjects in partially underspecified AGR ........................................ 54

5.4.3 Null subjects in AGR lacking PERSON ................................................. 55

6 A new approach to null subjects in languages with mixed type agreement ..........56

6.1 New Analysis of null subjects with mixed agreement pattern ....................... 56

6.1.1 Modification of checking theory ............................................................. 57

6.1.2 Principle of licensing ............................................................................... 57

6.2 Omission of thematic subject ......................................................................... 58

6.2.1 General overview of Finnish syntax ........................................................ 58

6.2.2 First and Second person Subject Omission ............................................. 60

6.2.3 Overt subjects in third person .................................................................. 62

6.2.4 Non-overt subject in Embedded Clauses ................................................. 64

6.3 Null Subject patterns in Other Languages ...................................................... 66

7 Conclusion ............................................................................................................. 68

8 References ............................................................................................................. 70

5


6/72

1 Itnroduction

The identification and licensing of null elements in languages are a debated

question crosslinguistically. From the early 1980s on, several theories came to life in

order to provide a theory that is valid universally for all of the languages. The existence of

null elements is proven empirically, however, in the spirit of the Minimalist Program, one

might consider that there is no need for such elements as they are empty and besides

standing for an invisible feature or an NP whose referent in not always sufficiently

identifiable.

In this paper, I am going to present some of the essential work on null subjects. In

section 2, I am providing a summary of empty categories following Haegeman&Guron

(1999). In section 3, I am going to summarize Rizzi (1986) one of the earliest work on the

subject that is an enormous influence on the later works, as it lays out a basic theory for

licensing and identification. In section 4, I present Speas (1995) that is a theory based

partly on Rizzis ideas but with additional modifications. Afterwards in section 5, I am

going to consider Hermon&Yoon (1990), an analysis of languages with mixed-type

agreement. In section 6, Vainikka&Levy (1999) provides a new approach to mixed-type

languages.

My aim is to give an overview of existing theories on the null subject issue based

on the articles mentioned above. Each theory ofpro includes a classification of languages

as to which one of them allows the occurrence of non-overt subjects and which type of null

subject they allow (referential, non-referential, expletive). After outlining the theories I am

going to point out their problematic points and consider their valid points as well.6


7/72

2 Definition of Empty Categories

Non- overt constituents, referred to as empty categories (ec), are not associated with

phonetic content. They are, however, syntactically active that is they interact with other

constituents. There are two types of empty categories: (i) traces of movement and (ii) base-

generated empty categories. From those I am going to deal with only the second type.

Base-generated empty categories are present in the underlying structure of the

sentence. Non-overt arguments can be found in object and subject position. According to

the VP-internal Subject Hypothesis1

, empty categories in subject position originate in

[Spec, VP].

Empty Category Principle

Non-overt elements are licensed if their content can be identified.

(1) Empty Category Principle

Non-overt elements must be identified.

Non-overt elements can be identified by control or binding relation with another

overt element in the sentence, by antecedent or by agreement morphology. In the following

table I summarize the types of empty categories.

1

VP-internal subject hypothesis: subjects are base-generated in [Spec, VP].

7


8/72

PRO pro A-trace

wh, topis, focusheavy NPshift

A-trace

subject in VPpassive, raising,

unaccusativeAntecedent

obligatory

no no yes yes

Case marked no (or minimal) yes yes no

2.1 Non-overt arguments in non-finite English clauses

The subject requirement needs to be considered in connection with non-overt

subjects in English.

(2) Subject requirement2

Every sentence must have a subject.

In D-structure, the base-generated non-overt subject is the external argument of the

verb, it originates in [Spec, VP]. It moves out of the VP to [Spec, AGRP], as overt NPs,

leaving a trace behind. In [Spec, VP] the non-overt subject receives -role and moves to

the [Spec, AGRP] position to satisfy the subject requirement.

(3) [CPTo buy that book] is important.

[IPeci To[VP ti buy that book]]is important.

Non-overt external arguments of non-finite clauses which are not co-indexed with

overt NPs (as in (3)) receive arbitrary interpretation, meaning people in general. English

does not allow non-overt subjects in finite clauses.

2

Chomksys (1981, 1982) Extended Projection Principle.

8


9/72

(4) [AGRPec[TP to[VP buy a newspaper]]]

The movement of the empty category is NP-movement. The element in (4) is

referred to as PRO. PRO is the non-overt subject in English non-finite clauses. PRO does

not alternate with overt NPs. They are in complementary distribution. PRO has a pronoun-

like interpretation. It often can be paraphrased by a finite clause with pronominal subject.

(5) I wonder whether to buy a newspaper.

I wonder [CP whether[AGRP PROi to[VP ti buy a newspaper]]]

I wonder whether I should buy a newspaper.

PRO can be identified: (i) if it is controlled by an overt NP in the matrix clause or

(ii) it receives arbitrary interpretation. As PRO lacks any phonetic content it is not subject

to the Case-filter3.

Those languages that do not allow the appearance of a non-overt element in subject

position are called non-pro-drop languages (e.g.: English, French)

3 Case-filter

Every overt NP must be assigned case. (Chomsky,1981)

9


10/72

2.1.1 Non-overt subject in Italian

Non-overt subject is grammatical in finite clauses in Italian.

(6) ec compra un libro.

buy-INFL-3SG a book

Italian rich4 agreement morphology identifies the ec in (6). The empty category in (6) is

referred to aspro. Languages that allow the appearance of a non-overt element in subject

position are calledpro-drop languages (e.g.: Spanish, Hungarian, Japanese etc.)

The Italian non-overt subject is base-generated in [Spec, VP] and moves to [Spec, AGRP]

to combine with the person and number features in AGR (head).

(7) [AGRP[AGR-a[TP[VPpro compr- un libro]]]]

[AGRPproi[AGRcomprv-a[TP[VP ti tv un libro]]]]

buy-INFL-3SG a book

Non-overt subjectpro alternates with overt pronouns, though overt pronouns are

used only if one wants to express emphasis. When one does not want to emphasize

anything economy requires that a sentence contain only so many elements that are needed

to be interpretable. In other words, one should not use more words than necessary for the

sentence to have meaning.

4 Rich agreement in Taraldsen (1978) most or all members of an inflectional paradigm are

distinguished with respect to person/nu,ber specifications.

10


11/72

2.2 Structure and interpretation

The meaning of a sentence is determined by its constituents and the relations

between them. A sentence is compositional if every constituent of a sentence is

interpretable.

(8) Principle of Full Interpretation

Every symbol of the grammar must be interpreted.

2.2.1 The pro-drop parameter

We have seen that Italian allows finite clauses to have non-overt subject, pro.

Languages that allow the pronominal subject of a finite clause to be non-overt are called

pro-drop languages.

(9) pro-drop parameter

The parameter that distinguishes languages in which the subject pronoun of a finite clausemay be non-overt from those in which it cannot be non-overt is called the pro-drop

parameter.

Languages that do not allow non-overt subjects in finite clauses are called non-pro-

drop languages. According to this categorization English is a non-pro-drop language while

Italian is apro-drop language.

From the overview above the crucial thing to consider is thatpro is an empty

pronominal. It behaves like pronominal for instance, it occupies the subject position and in

some languages it can occur in object position as well. The identification and licensing of

pro needs to be further discussed as there exist various theories on the subject. After this

11


12/72

initial overview of empty categories I turn to the theories concerningpro. In the next

section I am going to discuss Rizzi(1986).

3 The theory of pro by Rizzi

In this section I summarize Rizzi (1986) and I point out where his theory needs

some more consideration. He poses the question whether the implicit arguments need to be

represented in the syntactic structure or not.

(10) a. This leads (people) to the following conclusion.

Questo conduce (la gente) alla seguente conclusion.

b. This sign cautions (people) agains avalanches.

Questo cartello mette in guardia (la gente) contro la valanghe.

c. John is always ready to please (people).

Gianni sempre pronto ad accontentare (la gente).

He proposes that one of the following representations could stand for the sentences

in (10).

(11) VP

rguV NP S ec

(12) VP

2 V S

Rizzi proposes that the structure is different in English and in Italian with respect to

the language specific licensing and identification requirements. He refers to Chomskys

12


13/72

(1981,1982) Projection Principle which would suggest that the empty category in (11) gets

theta-role from the lexical verb, similarly to arbitrary PRO.

(13) Categorial structure reflects thematic structure at all syntactic level.

The examples in (10) contain verbs like lead, caution andplease. The sentences receive

generic interpretation if they are in generic time. In these subclauses the subject position is

filled by a generic pronoun, PRO. It is also true for the Italian examples. However, the

structural representations of the Italian sentences differ from the English ones as objectpro

is an available option in Italian while in English it is not. Rizzi gives five pieces of

evidence for the difference between English and Italian: (i) control, (ii) binding, (iii)

adjunct small clauses, (iv) argument small clauses and (v) productivity. From these I

discuss the first three in more detail.

First, he considers the control relations in the two languages he examines.

(14) a. This leads people to the following conclusion.

b. This leads to the following conclusion.

c. This leads people [PRO to conclude what follows.].

d.*This leads [PRO to conclude what follows].

He explains the ungrammaticality of (14d) as a result of Bachs (1979)

generalization:

(15) In object control structures the object NP must be structurally represented.

As this generalization states, it is not possible for an English sentence to have an

unrepresented object in the construction thus it follows that the English structure for (14d)

is (12). The corresponding sentences in Italian are the following:

13


14/72

(16) a. Questo conduce la gente alle seguente conclusione.

this lead-3PL the people to-the following conclusion

This leads people to the following conclusion.

b. Questo conduce _____ alla seguente conclusione.

this lead-3PL to-the following conclusion

c. Questo conduce la gente a [PRO concludere quanto segue].

this lead-3PL the people to conclude as follows

d. Questo conduce ____ a [PRO concludere quanto segue].

this lead-3PL conclude as follows

As we can see, the Italian sentences are all grammatical. The reason is that generic

time always allows the object controller to be phonetically missing in Italian. In that type

of sentences objectpro receives arbitrary interpretation which always refers to plural in

Italian.

Second, he considers binding. In Italian, objectpro can be the antecedent of the

anaphor, se stessi if it has arbitrary interpretation. This is not an option in English since

the corresponding verbs do not allow missing understood objects.

(17) La buona musica reconcilia ____ con se stessi.

the good music reconcile-3SG with oneself

Good music reconciles with oneself.

Then he turns to his third argument, adjunct small clauses where the small clause

lacks a subject. This is possible in Italian but not in English. He refers to Williams

14


15/72

Predicate Principle (1983) that states that the predicate needs a structurally represented

subject. In Italian this problem can be solved by inserting an understood missing object,

which is not an available option for English.

(18) a. Un dottore serio visita ____ nudi

a doctor serious visit-3SG nude (+pl)

A serious doctor visits ____ nude (+pl).

b. Di solito, Gianni fotografa _____ seduti.

in genera Gianni photograph-3SG seated

In general, Gianni photographs seated.

c. Di solito, quell famoso pittore ritrae ____ vestiti di bianco.

in general, that famous painter portray-3SG dressed(+pl) in white

In general, that famous painter portrays ____ dressed(+pl) in white.

After this brief discussion of the differences between the two observed languages

Rizzi gives a possible explanation for the English null object issue. He proposes that the

way to avoid the projection of a null object in representation is to assume that the verbs

theta-role is not saturated in the traditional way through syntax but it is given in the lexicon

before it enters syntactic derivation or could affect the Projection Principle. If the

understood object has its theta-role already saturated before it enters any level of syntax

then it does not project the slot for its object and arbitrary interpretation is associated with

it immediately. Rizzi sets up a criterion for these kinds of verbs.

15


16/72

(19) Assign arb to the direct -role.

(20) Categorial structure reflects lexically unsaturated thematic structure at all syntactic level.

With the first rule given in (19) and the second observation given in (20) he accounts

for the English data. He does not, however, exclude the option that the theta-role can be

saturated in syntax.

In the second section he turns to the Italian null object, first, he discusses its

syntactic status then the identification of such an element. He always refers to arbitrary

interpretation, and he concludes thatpro is a collection of semantic features [+human,

plural5, +generic etc.]. He considers the possibility that the empty category is an operator-

variable but he discards.6

The interpretation of null object shares three basic properties of arbitrary PRO:

[+human, +generic, +plural]. Generic time accounts for the sentence [+generic] feature. If

those sentences are put to specific time reference they become ungrammatical. Besides

baring the feature [+plural] the null object carries number and gender specifications (phi-

features) as it can be seen on the reflexive. The [+human] feature is clearly shown in (21a):

(21) a. It is unclear [how [PRO to roll down the hill]].

b. Certe innovazioni teniche rendono [pro pi efficienti].

5 The number specification varies from language to language and, according to Rizzi, probably

number specifications are set in a parameter.

6 This view is discarded because overt operators do not allow the appearance of any other operator.

Mixed analyses is not an available explanation, either.

16


17/72

certain innovations technical render-3PL more efficient

Certain technical innovations render [pro more efficient].

PRO gets the arbitrary interpretation from the implicit experiencer ofunclearthat

cannot be other than human. However, thepro in (21b) is an intrinsic property of arbitrary

interpretation as its necessary human interpretation cannot be treated as an inherent

property of a controller.

17


18/72

3.1 Licensing and identification of pro

Licensing Content recoverytraces/variables ECP A/ chain with

antecedent/operatorPRO ungoverned environment arb interpretation or

controllerpro (subject and object) strong Agreement strong Agreement

Concerning the licensing condition ofpro, itis allowed in V-governed position in

Italian but not in English, as licensing is connected to language specific properties of

licensing of a head. Identification, traditionally connected to strong agreement features,

however, he makes modifications with respect topro found in Italian. The theory of null

element is completed with two specifications: a) the conditions that formally license the

null element and b)and how the null element can receive content (phi-features) from

another element. The formal licensing of null elements (PRO and traces/variable) are

connected to some kind of control (antecedent orarb, A/ chain with antecedent/operator).

As forpro, the licensing can be defined as follows:

(22) pro is governed by X0y

According to this parameterpro can be licensed locally by an X head ofy type that

varies among languages from maximally restrictive setting (no head licensespro) to

maximally liberal setting (every head licenses pro).

18


19/72

(23) pro is Case-marked by X0y

Forpro to be licensed case has to be assigned to it. Thereforepro cannot occur in

passive sentences, as the passive past participle loses its Case-assigning ability.

3.2 Identification of pro

The identification ofpro is related to binding relations. For an empty category to be

licit it must match the specification of a designated binder. Thus pro in subject position is

identified by rich agreement features. Rizzi modifies this as follows:

(24) Let X be the licensing head of an occurrence ofpro: thenpro has the grammatical

specification of the features on X co-indexed with it.

In this respect, head binding is an abstract equivalent of control and A/ chain

formation. Hencepro in subject position gets phi-features from its binder resulting in the

referential property of this empty pronoun7.

When discussing the English data, Rizzi refers back to (24) as it identifies the null

subjects in English. It is lexically governed and therefore it does not affect the Projection

Principle. However, in the lexicon it is part of the theta-grid this way pro cannot gain

identification from the phi-feature on the verb and that is when rule (24) applies. Rizzi

proposes the following:

7 In Italian there is an exception whenpro cannot function as a referential pronoun in tensed

clauses; in impersonal si sentences it gets arbitrary non-referential interpretation:

(i) proarb siarb dorme troppo.

People sleep too much.

19


20/72

(25) theory of pro that consist of

a. i. licensing scema (19) containing a parameter; and

ii. convention (24) for the recovery of the content ofpro

b. a rule of arbitrary interpretation that is unordered with respect to the

Projection Principle.

3.3 Typology of pro

In Rizzi theorypro is defined by licensing and identification:

(26) pro:

c. licensing: through government/Case assignment by a head belonging

to a language-specific set of licensers

d. identification: non-standard binding by the licensing head (and the

features on it)

(27) Infl-licensedpro:

e. No occurrence ofpro (English)

f. pro as a non-argument (German)

g. pro as a non-argument and quasi argument (Yiddish)

h. pro as a non-argument, quasi-argument and referential argument

(Italian)

(Rizzi 1986:)

20


21/72

Every grammatical system sets up their own constructions wherepro can appear.

3.4 Null expletive subjects

An expletive is a pronominal without any semantic content. Expletive pronouns can be

found in the following environments: (i) extraposed sentential subjects (ii) postverbal

subject NPs (iii) atmospheric (temporal) predicates.

3.4.1 Non-arguments

As for non-arguments, Rizzi proposes two possible representations.

(28) VP 2

V NP g pro

(29) VP 2 V SC

2NP pred

g pro

Expletivepro in small clauses exists in Italian as the verb licenses it. However, in

English it is not possible as it has no content or theta-role therefore the projection of a

completely empty phrase violates the Projection Principle. Expletivepro can occur in the

subject position of a small clause.

(30) Gianni ritiene [proprobabile [che Mario venga]].

Gianni believe-3SG likely that Mario come-3SG

Gianni believes likely that Mario comes.

The non-overt subject is governed and Case-marked by the main verb but it is not -

marked. Thuspro cannot have arb interpretation or any other content since it has no theta-

21


22/72

role. Thepro in (30) functions as an expletive. However, the structure is grammatical with

pro behaving like an expletive. The same structure is impossible in English. Only the

insertion of an overt expletive would render the sentence grammatical.

3.4.2 Quasi arguments

Quasi-arguments are expletives that occur as subjects of weather verbs. Chomsky gives the

following classification for expletives:

(31) Chomsky (1981):

Non-argument: an expletive constructed with an extraposed sentential predicate

Quasi-argument: an expletive subject of a weather predicate

In Italian atmospheric predicates must have an expletivepro in subject position whereas in

English weather predicates need an overt expletive in subject position. Quasi-arguments are

similar to referential arguments with respect to their ability to act as controllers.

(32) Iti rained for days without [PROi stopping].

Now consider the following pair of sentences wherepro occurs as the subject of

temporal sentence:

(33) pro presto.

be-3SG early

(It) is early

(34) *Considero [propresto].

consider-1SG early.

I consider (it) early.

22


23/72

(33) is grammatical aspro is the subject of the main clause and functions as an quasi-

argument whereas in (34)pro is the subject of the small clause where it is not theta-marked by

the governing verb.

3.4.3 Subject inversion

When subject inversion appears the expletive in preverbal subject position is a non-argument

thus expletivepro in V-governed environment is possible as in (35b).

(35) a.Ritengo [suo fratello pi intelligente].

believe-1SG his brother more intellingent

I believe his brother more intelligent.

b. Ritengo [____ pi intelligente suo fratello].

believe-1SG more intelligent his brother

I believe more intelligent his brother.

In English this construction is not available as shown in (36a), however, there are sentences

where a similar option can occur:

(36) a. * I consider [ec desirable [that John wins]].

b. I consider [ec desirable [the perspective that john wins]].

In example (36b) the subject NP is extraposed but it is more like heavy NP shift. In the

case of sentences with lighter subject NPs the construction, exemplified in (36b) is not

allowed. Rizzi speculates that there could be a construction where an empty category occurs

in the subject position of a small clause that is governed by the main verb as in (37).

(37) I consider [eci desirable] NPi.

23


24/72

In this construction ec can be a trace or a variable governed by the main verb and

bound by the right-peripheral NP. The sentence in (37), however, cannot be the representation

of (36a).

Although, the occurrence of expletivepro is restricted in modern English, or it does

not exist at all, in earlier times expletivepro was the part of the English language. Old

English, Middle English and Early Modern English allowed arbitrary null objects and

expletive itwas optional.

3.5 The possible appearances of pro

In epistemic construction all relevant appearances ofpro can be observed in Italian. If

an epistemic verb selects a tensed clause as complement then pro can function as non-

argument, quasi-argument and referential argument as well.

(38) a. Ritengo [chepro sia simpatico].

believe-1SG that be-3SG nice

I believe that (he) is nice.

b. Ritengo [chepro sia troppo tardi per S].

believe-1SG that be-3SG too late for S

I believe that (it) is too late for S

c. Ritengo [chepro sia probabile che S].

believe-1SG that be-3SG likely that S

I believe that (it) is likely that S

There is a construction, however, that never allowspro to appear. It is the construction

with the complementizer di. If the subclause begins with di then in the subject position

24


25/72

PRO can stand exclusively, otherwise the sentence is ungrammatical. In this constructionpro

cannot be licensed due to the lack of Case.

(39) Ritengo [di PRO essere simpatico].

believe-1SG to be-INF nice

I believe to be nice./I believe that I am nice.

Epistemic verbs can select small clause complements with expletivepro in the subject

positions. In this case,pro can only function as a non-argument aspro cannot get a theta-role

from the licensing head as in (40c). In (40c)pro does not need person specifications.

(40) a. *Ritengo [pro simpatico].

believe-1SG nice

I believe (him) nice.

b. *Ritengo [pro troppo tardi che S].

believe-1SG too late for S

I believe (it) too late for S

c. Ritengo [pro probabile che S].

believe-1SG likely that S

I believe (it) likely that S

The last construction wherepro can occur is in marked infinitival construction.

Content recovery is related to strong AGR features (phi-features), in this case abstract AGR

features are situated in INFL where they combine with the auxiliary and move to COMP

position. This waypro is identified as in (41b,c). In this constructionpro functions as a quasi-

argument or a non-argument.

25


26/72

(41) a. *Ritengo [esserepro simpatico].

believe-1SG be-INF nice

I believe to be (he) nice.

b. Ritengo [esserepro troppo tardi per S].

believe-1SG be INF too late for S

I believe to be (it) too late for S.

c. Ritengo [esserepro probabile che S].

believe-1SG be-INF likely that S

I believe to be (it) likely that S.

In (41)pro does not need either person or number specifications. The analysis of

cross-linguistic cases that Rizzi proposes is speculatory. Rizzi proposes that person and

number specifications (phi-features) are indispensable for identifying of overt and non-overt

elements of syntax. Content recovery is connected to the richness of agreement through

binding relation with a designated head. Different grammatical systems of different languages

can choose to how much extent they want to use the given phi-features. Together with the

varying use of phi-features varies the occurrence ofpro as an expletive, a quasi-argument or a

referential argument.

26


27/72

constructions. Along his theory ofpro he classifies languages according to their ability to

license and identifypro. In Rizzis systempro can be identified by a binder or agreement

morpheme. His theory is a good starting point from which otherpro theories developed. He

ground his argument is mainly Italian data and gives an account for the licensing and

identification ofpro. However, his system is speculatory concerning the identification ofpro

with respect to expletivepro. In the following sections I am going to present further theories

concerning the licensing and indentification ofpro.

4 Speas approach to null subjects

In this section I am going to discuss Speas (1995), a theory of null elements developed

partly as a critic of Rizzis (1986) theory ofpro-drop. It deals with the null arguments in

languages and reconsiders the theory ofpro presented by Rizzi. Speas starts out from earlier

theories ofpro-drop and develops her own system.

4.1 Projection of AGR

Earlier theories ofpro propose that the occurrence ofpro is connected to licensing

conditions. Speas argues that there is no distinct licensing condition, rather, the occurrence of

pro is regulated by economy principles. She refers to various generalizations about null

subjects throughout her article. Traditionally, the position of null subjects is [Spec, AGRP].

Jaeggli & Safir (1989) sets up a generalization concerning null subjects.

(42) Jaeggli and Safir (1989)

Null subjects can occur in the context of either very rich or no agreement at all.

27


28/72

have no person/number agreement at all. Languages like English have only some residual

agreement so they are unable to license null subjects. Agreement morphemes on verbs have

no independent interpretation whereas Tense and Aspect morphemes do. Therefore, languages

like Japanese or Chinese where there is no agreement can license pro. Agreement can be

base-generated on the verb or in [AGR] and therefore head its own projection, depending on

the strength of agreement. Rohrbacher (1992,1993) proposes that strong agreement

morphemes have their own lexical entries while weak agreement morphemes do not.

(43) Rochbachers generalization:

Strong morphemes have individual lexical entries.

Weak morphemes do not have individual lexical entries.

This way agreement morphemes head the AGR projection in languages with strong

agreement whereas weak agreement morphology is part of the inflectional paradigm and

morphemes enter syntax on the verb hence AGRP is empty.

(44) a. Strong AGR:AGRP

2DP AGR 2

AGR VP-af

b. Weak agreement:AGRP

uAGR

ru AGR VP g

V+af

Speas gives the following descriptive generalization:

28


29/72

(45) a. A language has null subjects if AGR is base-generated with a morpheme

in it.

b. A language cannot have null subjects if AGR is base-generated on the

Verb.

c. A language has null subjects if it has no AGR. (Speas 1995:6)

Along with this generalization Speas sets up the following Principle of Economy:

(46) Project XP only if XP has content.

This principle of economy describes that the projection of AGRP can be licensed in

two ways: either by the morpheme base-generated under AGR in languages with strong

agreement, or in languages with weak agreement, where the AGR head is empty something

else must move to the [Spec, AGRP] position. It can be referential NPs or pleonastics,

however, if it remains empty it violates the Principle of Economy. Speas considers it to be

more of a constraint on representation. XP cannot be projected if both the specifier and the

head are empty. There must be some definition for the content of XP. Speas introduces a

definition of content as follows:

(47) A node has content if and only if X dominates a distinct phonological matrix or a distinct

semantic matrix.

In this sense traces count as contentful elements as they mark the place of an overt

constituent that has occupied that place earlier in the derivation. This constraint of

economy allows only such construction where all projections are filled prior to spellout.

In languages where agreement morphemes are base-generated on the verb the

specifier of AGRP must be filled by an element to give content to AGRP before spellout. If

29


30/72

agreement morphemes are base-generated in AGR the specifier position can remain empty

and the null subject base-generated VP-internally8- need not move out of the VP. This

way the specifier of AGRP remains empty. However, it remains empty only until spellout

whenpro moves there to enter into the spec-head relation that is necessary for the features

to be checked. If this is correct than there could in principle be constructions where pro

stays in the VP and [spec, AGRP] is occupied by another element. These constructions are,

however, ungrammatical as in Speas analysispro has no phi-features on its own so it has

to receive them from the agreement morpheme in AGR.

8

VP-internal hypothesis

30


31/72

4.2 Languages with no AGR

Speas proposes that AGRP is only relevant in languages where there is some

agreement- it may be residual as well. However, in languages where there is no agreement

at all, AGRP is not projected at any syntactic level. Nevertheless, she claims that there are

functional heads in languages like Japanese or Chinese as well. There are Tense and

Aspect projections but no AGRP. The lack of AGRP does not mean that those languages

lack agreement relations entirely. Speas adopts Chomskys theory that states that structural

Case must be represented at LF in a spec-head relation.

In her analysis Speas proposes that there are three types of languages:

(48) Type A: Morpheme heads AGRP, spec may be empty

Type B: Morpheme is attached to V, spec must be filled

Type C: No AGR Projection

This classification of languages is in line with the Extended Projection Principle as

languages with weak agreement must have [Spec, AGRP] filled in order to satisfy EPP.

Languages with strong agreement have the agreement morpheme base-generated in the

head position of AGRP giving content to the projection. As a result of this proposal pro

does not need a special licensing condition.

4.3 Licensing and Identification Theories of Null Arguments

Speas considers some aspects of the existing theories of licensing and identification

of null arguments that are problematic from a theoretical and an empirical aspect as well.

There are three types of problems: (i) unexplained relationship between agreement and

licensing, (ii) Licensing Condition is connected to an arbitrarily selected Licensing Head

31


32/72

and (iii) licensing and identification of null arguments rely too much on the relationship

between the levels of Grammar.

Speas questions that the null argument parameter is really deeply rooted in some

principles of Grammar in connection with (iii). First, one might consider whether the

phenomenon of subject omission is a language specific feature or there are universal

properties that can account for the phenomenon.

The possibility of omitting the subject of a finite clause is not an isolated property

ofpro-drop languages. This property might imply other properties of a language such as

postposing the subject or the lack of overt pleonastic.

4.4 Agreement and Null Argument Licensing

In the 1980s the traditional view was that licensing of a null subject is connected to

rich agreement. However, later theories suggest that there is not a clear connection

between rich agreement and the licensing of null subjects. The empirical observation was

that in languages with seemingly rich agreement, like German, referential null subject are

not allowed whereas in languages with no person/number agreement allow referential null

subjects (Japanese, Chinese, Thai). Speas goes back to Rizzi(1986), where Rizzi sets up a

theory ofpro. In that theory,pro is identified but not licensed through agreement.

(49) Rizzis theory ofpro:

i. pro is formally licensed through a designated head

j. pro has grammatical feature from its licensing head coindexed with

it.

32


33/72

Rizzi, in his system accounts for subject and objectpro as well. In his system

content identification and formal licensing are treated separately.

Jaeggli&Safir (1989) sets up the Null subject parameter and introduce the

Morphological Uniformity Condition.

(50) a. The Null Subject Parameter

Null subjects are permitted in all and only languages with morphologically uniform

inflectional paradigms.

b. Morphological Uniformity

An inflectional Paradigm P in a language L is morphologically uniform if and only if P has

only underived inflectional forms or only derived inflectional forms.

(Jaeggli&Safir 1989:29-30)

With this proposal they account for all the three types of languages. Languages like

Italian and Spanish are morphologically uniform as the inflectional paradigm contains a

33


34/72

stem plus an affix at each person and number. Languages like English are not

morphologically uniform as the inflectional paradigm includes forms that are identical to

the bare stem. Languages like Japanese and Chinese are morphologically uniform as there

is no inflectional morphology.

However appealing this proposal may seem, there are several pieces of empirical

evidence that it cannot account for all the languages that allow null subjects. 9 There are

languages like Hebrew and Finnish that allow the occurrence of null subjects in certain

cases but not in all person/number. I will come back to those languages later.

This generalization accounts for subject omission in languages like Italian and

Spanish as well as Japanese and Chinese. In the case of Italian and Spanish the agreement

morphology makes sentences interpretable without the overt subject while in languages

9 There are counter examples like Swedish. Swedish is morphologically uniform in that it has no

agreement morphology, still it does not allow null subjects. In the Grammar of Swedish one can find

evidence that it has residual agreement.

(ii) Swedish:a. throw present indicative

sg pl1st: kasta-r kasta-r2nd: kasta-r kasta-r3rd: kasta-r kasta-r

b. I dag har det kommit manga linvister hit.

today have there come many linguists hereToday there have come many linguists here.

There are other examples like the difference between European Portuguese and Brazilian

Portuguese. Both of them are morphologically uniform in Jaeggli and Safirs system, yet Brazilian

Portuguese does not allow null subjects.(Rohrbacher 1994)

Rohrbacher argues that (50) is not valid for German and Yiddish either. Both languages allow null

expletives in some contexts but not null referential subjects, although, German is uniform and Yiddish is not.

34


35/72

with no agreement there are other ways to identify the null subject. This generalization

exclude English type languages, which have impoverished agreement morphology hence

the null subject is not allowed.

There is another piece of evidence for the connection between subject omission and

agreement that comes from language acquisition. When children learn to speak they

acquire inflection at the same time when they set the null subject parameter (Hyams 1986,

Hyams and Jaeggli 1988, Deprez and Pierce 1993). Roeper and Rohrbacher(1993) found

that English speaking children constructed sentences where they omitted the subject when

they used strong or no agreement and subjects appeared when they constructed the

sentence with weak agreement.

(51) a. Where go?

b. Where dis go?

c. *Where goes?

This data implies that null arguments are licensed if there is strong or no agreement

but they are not licensed if there is weak agreement.

This view questions the validity of the Extended Projection Principle. The EPP

states that every clause must have a subject. This principle holds only for languages that

does not allow null subjects. Some linguists stipulated that inpro-drop languages a null

pleonastic must be inserted in subject position or that EPP needs to be modified in a way

that it holds true for only non-null-subject languages.

35


36/72

4.5 Theoretic problems with the licensing condition

In this section I discuss some more problems in connection with the licensing

condition of null arguments. The most controversial issue is the class of designated heads

-which licensepro- is arbitrary. In a given language INFL can be a designated head that

licensespro and through coindexation it identifies it as well. However in Rizzis system

any head can be a designated licensing head. If a null argument is in object position a verb

may be the designated licenser. Another problem with the licensing ofpro is that special

conditions and regulations need to be set up for licensing of this null element while in the

grammar there is no other pronominal element that calls for such special licensing

requirement. Ifpro is simply a pronoun then there should not be any special requirement

on its licensing.

36


37/72

4.5.1 Morphological Properties and Agreement Strength

There are two types of agreement: strong and weak. Strong agreement morphemes

may have individual lexical entries and head their own AGR projections while weak

agreement morphemes do not have individual lexical entries and are base-generated on the

verb.

4.5.2 The Full Paradigm Condition

Speas adopts Rohrbachers generalization about strong agreement morphemes

having individual lexical entries or weak morphemes not having individual lexical entries.

Rohrbacher links the property of being an individual lexical entry to the property of

triggering V-I movement. He proposes that if INFL has its own lexical entry, then it

triggers V-I movement. Thus it could license null subjects but only if it has Full Paradigm.

(52) INFL has a referential category with lexically listed affixes in exactly those

languages where regular subject-verb agreement minimally distinctively

marks all referential INFL-features such that a. and b.:

k. a. In at least one number and one tense, the person features [1st] and

[2nd] are

distinctively marked.

l. b. In at least one person of one tense the number feature [singular] is

distinctively marked. (Rohrbacher 1994:118)

37


38/72

In Rohrbachers system the main specification that is needed for a language to

allow null subjects are to have distinctively marked paradigm, it does not require overt

affixes in all person and number.

Speas claims that there are two problems with Rohrbachers system. First, it does

not differentiate between V-I movement and the licensing of null subjects. Second, it

claims that if a language has a Full Paradigm it follows that it will have individually listed

or referential affixes.

The statement that all languages with Full Paradigm have lexically listed affixes is

not valid for German and Yiddish. Both languages seem to have referential INFL

(Rohrbayhers categorization), however, they only allow expletive null subjects. German

inflection seems to be strong/distinctive. However, German does not allow for referential

subjects to be null as shown in (53).

(53) Referential null subject in German:

* Heute arbeitet.

today work-3SG

*Today works.

(54) Null pleonastic in German:

Heute wird getanzt.

today becomes danced

Today there was dancing.

(Speas adapts from Travis 1984:162)

38


39/72

This shows that German agreement is only strong enough to license null subjects

but it cannot identify them, hence referential subjects cannot be dropped.

The Full Paradigm Condition is unsatisfactory both for German and Yiddish.

Nevertheless, there are differences between the two languages with respect to which

structures allow the occurrence of null pleonatics. In German null pleonastics are allowed

only if [Spec, CP] is filled with some element otherwise the pleonastic needs to be overt. In

Yiddish it is [Spec, IP] that needs to be filled. Additional conditions are needed to account

for the German/Yiddish data. The Economy of projection principle is able to modify the

Full Paradigm condition in a way that identification conditions become unnecessary.

4.6 Against the Identification Condition

4.6.1 Null Pleonastics in Yiddish

Yiddish is classified as a language with weak AGR in Speass system which means

that [spec, IP] must be filled with a lexical element to be projected. Thus, Yiddish does not

allow null referential pronouns and in fact Yiddish does not allow for any non overt

element to occupy [spec, IP]. It follows then that null pleonastics can never occur in the

specifier position of IP, however, null pleonastics are allowed only if another element is in

[spec, IP].

(55) * Haynt leyenen ot di bikher.

today read-3PL prt those books

Today (they) read those books.

(56) a. Es kumt a kind in krom.

comes a child in store

39


40/72

A child comes into the store.

b. Ikh meyn az es kumt a kind in krom.

I think that comes a child in store

I think that a child comes into the store.

c. In krom kumt 010 a kind.

in store comes a child

d. Ikh meyn az in der krom kumt 0 a kind.

I think that in the store comes a child

I think that in the store comes a child.

e. Es geyt a regen.

goes rain

Its raining.

f. Haynt geyt 0 a regn.

today goes rain

Today its raining.

(Travis 1984:162)

Referential pronouns are not allowed to be null as shown in (55). In (56) the

examples show that in every sentence [spec, IP] is occupied. In (56a, b, e) the overt

pleonastic occupies [spec, IP] as there are no other elements to fill the specifier position. In

Yiddish agreement morphemes are base-generated on the verb, like in English, however,

[Spec, IP] is not an A-position so it does not need to be filled with a subject. Hence

adverbs, like haynttoday or PPs, like in krom in the store can occur in [Spec, IP].

10

This example is taken from Travis, 0 represents an empty category/pro.

40


41/72

Another difference between English and Yiddish is that in Yiddish the verb moves out of

the VP to AGRP while in English lexical verbs stay inside the VP.

4.6.2 Null Pleonastics in German

The standard view of the Verb-second effect in German is that it involves

movement of the inflected verb to C, along with movement of some XP to the specifier of

CP. (Safir 1985).

(57) a. Es wird getanzt.

becomes danced

There was danced.

b. *Wird getanzt.

becomes danced

(58) a. Es sind drei Kinder gekommen.

are three children come

There have come three children.

b. *Sind drei Kinder gekommen.

are three children come

(Speas 1995:45)

(57a) and (58a) are grammatical because [spec, CP] is filled with an overt

pleonastic and (57b) (58b) are ungrammatical due to the lack of an overt element. This

follows from the economy of projection principle as in German CP must be filled hence

there must be an overt element either in specifier or head position. In constructions where

41


42/72

pleonastics must be overt the predicate assigns some sort of theta-role to them, so they are

in fact quasi-arguments (cf. Rizzi 1986). These predicates include weather predicates as in

(60) and predicates that select a clause as a complement as in (59).

(59) a. Es ist klar, dass die Frau das Buch gekauft hat.

is clear that the woman the book bought has

It is clear that the woman has bought the book.

b. Heute ist es klar, dass die Frau das Buch gekauft hat.

today is clear that the woman the book bought has

Today it is clear that the women has bought the book.

c. *Heute ist klar, dass die Frau das Buch gekauft hat.

today is clear that the woman the book bought has

*Today (it) is clear that the woman has bought the book.

(60) a. Es regnet.

it rains

It is raining.

b. Heute regnet es.

today rains it

c. *Heute regnet.

today rains (Travis 1984:162)

42


43/72

German is similar to English with respect to the agreement morphemes as in

German agreement affixes are base-generated on the verb and AGRP can be projected only

if [spec, AGRP] is occupied by either a pleonastic or a referential NP.

There are, however, constructions where the pleonastic can be null.

(61) a. Es wurde gestern auf them Schiff getanzt.

it was yesterday on the ship danced

There was dancing on the ship yesterday.

b. Gestern wurde (*es) auf them Schiff getanzt.

yesterday was on the ship danced

There was dancing on the ship yesterday.

In (61), the specifier of AGRP does not need to be filled as the crucial condition in

German is that [spec, CP] be filled. Compare with (57b) where no element can appear in

CP. In the case of (61) the verb has default agreement.

Speas with her principle of economy of projection reformulates the licensing

condition ofpro. She takes into consideration more recent works on the null arguments

such as Rizzi (1986), Jaeggli&Safir (1989) and Rohrbacher (1992,1993). She argues that

43


44/72

the principle of economy of projection can account for the basic difference between

languages with strong and weak agreement. In languages with strong agreement null

subjects are allowed as the agreement morphemes have individual lexical entries, giving

content to AGR while in languages with weak agreement the morphemes are base-

generated on the verbal stem, leaving AGR contentless, forcing an overt element to occupy

[Spec, AGRP].Her theory ofpro is capable of predicting the occurrence ofpro in more

languages than it was possible for Rizzis theory. Her account is a possible solution for

German and Yiddish data. Nevertheless, there are still languages for which Speas

generalization cannot apply. She correctly predicts the occurrence ofpro in traditionalpro-

drop languages and she makes the licensing condition onpro more universal as she

connects it to the syntactic position. The appearance ofpro in languages is no longer

connected to arbitrarily selected licensing heads. Her theory is based on syntactically

licensed position forpro. However, she cannot account for languages like Hebrew and

Finnish which are similar to German and Yiddish in regard to the fact that they allow null

subject in certain constructions. In the next section I will elaborate on partial-pro-drop

languages (eg. Hebrew,Finnish).

5 Languages allowingpro in special/unique environment

Hermon and Yoon (1990) developed a new classification and system for the

licensing (and identification) ofpro. They take earlier theories as a basis for their system

(Taraldsen 1978, Rizzi 1986, Jaeggli and Safir 1989). They set up a new classification of

languages and from that they try to account for the licensing ofpro in languages like

Hebrew, Finnish, Irish etc.; those languages that allowpro in environments that the already

existing theories do not explain.

44


45/72

5.1 Typology of null arguments

Hermon and Yoon build their typology on Gilligans (1987) survey in which he

observed 100 languages from twenty different language families. They classify languages

as follows:

(62) a. Core null-subject languages: These languages have obligatory null expletives and

optional null referential pronouns.

e.g.: Italian, Spanish (languages with rich AGR)

Chinese, Korean (languages with no overt AGR)

b. Core non-null-subject languages: These languages allow neither expletive nor referential

null pronouns.

e.g.: English, French (languages with weak AGR)

Mainland Scandinavian, Dutch A

c. Restricted null-subject languages: This group consists mainly of V-2 languages which

allow null expletives in certain environments (such as in non-initial positions in main

clauses and in embedded clauses). In addition, these languages allow null optional

45


46/72

referential pronouns in certain restrictive environments.

e.g.: Old French, Bavarian (pro is allowed in main clauses with V-raising)

d. Expletive null-subject languages: These languages permit null expletives but never

allow null referential pronouns.

e.g.: Icelandic, German (V-2 languages)

Papiamentu, Duka, Guymi, Tagalog (languages with no overt verbal

morphology)

46


47/72

5.2 Licensing of null subjects based on agreement

It was in Taraldsen (1978) that an inherent connection between the richness of

agreement andpro-drop was proposed in the generative framework. Taraldsen claims that

rich agreement (specifications of person and number) can license null pronominals. Huang

(1984) modifies this proposal adding that besides rich agreement null agreement is also

capable of licensing null subjects and only mixed languages (like English) disallowpro-

drop. These theories are unable to account for three types of languages:

(63) a. Languages with rich agreement but no referentialpro-drop (like Icelandic and

German)

b. Languages with no AGR an no referentialpro-drop (like Papiamentu and Tagalog)

c. Languages with mixed/weak AGR but which allowpro-drop (Irish11)

It can be concluded from the data above that there is no direct correlation between

morphological agreement and the licensing ofpro. The correlation cannot be applied tosome languages.

Jaeggli & Safir (1989) introduces the Morphological Uniformitiy Principle12

(MUP). They argue that if a language has morphologically uniform inflectional paradigm

11 In the Irish verbal paradigm there are synthetic forms with agreement and analytic forms without

agreement but contrary to the prediction of Taraldsens theory, Irish allowspro-drop. It has referentialpro-drop with the synthetic and expletivepro-drop with the analytic forms.

(iii) Irish mixed paradigm for the verb cuir /put/:

S1: cuirim

All other persons: cuireann

(Hermon and Yoon 1990:175)

12 Jaeggli and Safirs Morphologically Uniform Principle (condition) is discussed in more detail in

the previous section.

47


48/72

then it allowspro and if the paradigm is not uniform it does not allowpro. Hermon and

Yoon suggest that MUP should be modified as follows:

(64) Uniformity is determined for a language as a whole. If a certain paradigm in the language

is non-uniform, the whole language counts as non-uniform.

This theory tries to cover every language by connecting the identification ofpro to

uniformity or the lack of it- in a languages inflectional paradigm. This way MUP is

language specific, however, it is able to account for languages like Chinese and Korean.

The problem arises in MUP when languages with mixed inflectional paradigm are

examined. Their theory of uniformity andpro-drop fails when one observes th properties

of languages like Swedish. Swedish is a language that has uniform inflectional paradigm

yet does not allow any kind ofpro-drop.

48


49/72

Hermon and Yoon consider Rizzi (1986) as well, where Rizzi proposes the

following licensing condition:

(65) pro is licensed by a Case marking licensing head X0y

He suggests that the selection of licensing heads varies from language to language.

His theory is supported, for instance, by Portuguese where the occurrence ofpro is

restricted to positions where AGR can assign Case to the empty category (Raposo 1989).

However, in order for AGR to be able to assign Case it has to receive Case from a verb in

the higher clause.

Hermon and Yoon adopt Rizzis theorynof licensing hence they deal with the

question of licensing separately but only concentrate on identification.

5.3 Identification of null subjects

Identification concerns only referentialpro since expletivepro has no content to be

identified. Thus, when Hermon and Yoon sets up their theory of identification they always

refer to referentialpro. Identification in this case means the identification of phi-features.

In connection with identification the relevant projection is AGRP and in Hermon and

Yoons system the crucial feature in AGR is PERSON.

5.3.1 Theory of identification

Hermon and Yoon posit their theory of identification within a general theory of

agreement. They claim that there is a control relation between agreement and

identification. In this system the subject NP is the controller of agreement and the

predicate/AGR/INFL is the target of control. They formulate the following principle:

49


50/72

(66) Agreement Principle:

The unification of feature structures of controller and control target must yield a fully

specified set of phi-features, which include at least person (with number and gender being

optional, depending on the language).

(Hermon and Yoon, 1990:182)

After laying down their conditions of agreement they introduce a typology of the

features associated with AGR. They propose that their typology of AGR is based on

independently observable morphosyntactic features of a given language. The four types of

AGR are the following:

(67) 1. Fully specified AGR13:

a certain verbal inflection is unambiguously marked for person (and number and gender).

e.g.: Italian, Spanish

Example for a fully specified AGR matrix:

PERSON: 3

NUMBER: SG

GENDER: M

2. Underspecified/[+pronominal] AGR:

Languages/paradigms with underspecified AGR are those in which all

inflectional forms lack overt morphological marking for PERSON. These

forms typically mark specification of other phi-features that suggests the

possible existence of a hierarchy among phi-features. A typical feature of

underspecified AGR is that it may be deictic or [+pronominal], much in the

13 Following Rizzi (1986), the crucial phi-feature is PERSON. If any member of a paradigm is

distinctively marked for person, its AGR matrix will count as fully specified.

50


51/72

manner of a pronoun, which means that it indirectly refer to a salient entity

in discourse or superordinate linguistic context.

Example for an underspecified/[+pronominal] AGR matrix:

PERSON:0

NUMBER:0

GENDER:0

3. Partially underspecified/[+anaphoric] AGR:

A matrix associated with a form that lacks a person specification while all

the other members of the paradigm are fully specified for PERSON. In this

case AGR is [+anaphoric] picking up phi-features from a matrix

antecedent14.

Example for a partially underspecified/[+anaphoric] AGR:

PERSON:0

NUMBER:SG

GENDER:M

4. AGR matrix lacking PERSON:

A paradigm as a whole or some of its members may have an AGR matrix

associated which lack a slot for PERSON altogether. The absence of

PERSON implies that no identification will be possible at all15.

14 They propose that AGR cannot be anaphoric if more than one member or all members of a

paradigm lacks PERSON, based on Papiamentu and Hebrew.

15 Examples for paradigms that lack PERSON in AGR matrix, according to Hermon and Yoon:

(iv) a. the analytic forms in Irish verbal paradigm

b. the entire verbal paradigm in Papiamentu

c. the weak paradigm in Turkish with a morphological agreement marking that is

51


52/72

Example for an AGR matrix lacking PERSON:

NUMBER:SG

GENDER:M (Hermon and Yoon 1990:184)

non-altering throughout the paradigm

d. the present tense paradigm in Hebrew

e. Equvivates in Arabic (Mohammed, 1988) (Hermon an Yoon, 1990:184)

52


53/72

5.4 Identification of null subjects based on the theory of agreement and the typology

of AGR

Identification of overt NPs and pronouns is not a difficult question after having set

up the typology above. As they allow deictic identification they will always have fully

specified features. There are two types of anaphors. The type that have phi-feature

specification (e.g.: English: himself), those fit into the agreement principle. The other type

of anaphors lack phi-features specifications (like Korean: casin) and gain phi-features from

their antecedents. Empty categories, contrary to lexical NPs, are inherently underspecified

for phi-features. Therefore null subjects need to pick up phi-features from a governing

INFL.

Null subjects in fully specified AGR

Fully specified AGR can identifypro in most null-subject languages that allowpro. There

are, however, some languages with rich agreement that does not allow all types ofpro,

like Icelandic. Hermon and Yoon suggest that the explanation lies in other constraints for

inflection which are not connected to agreement. Jaeggli&Safir (1989) provide a possible

solution by suggesting that in Verb-second languages Case-assignment is by COMP rather

than by AGR. The issue needs further research16.

16

Possible solutions are presented in my paper by Rohrbacher(1992,1993), Speas (1995).

53


54/72

5.4.1 Null subjects with deictic AGR

Null subjects can be identified by phi-features picked up from discourse or from an

antecedent NP, in languages like Chinese. However, there are languages that are not

marked for person specification and still do not allow deictic AGR (e.g.:Papiamentu).

Huang (1984) suggests a solution by inserting a null topic operator which license null

subjects (in Chinese, Vietnamese, Korean, Imbabura Quechua), thus suggesting that

languages like Chinese are in fact null-topic languages. Cole (1987) claims, however, that

Huangs conditions of being a null topic language are not true for all the languages in the

group. Imbabura Quechua does not exhibit any of the conditions that Huang sets up for

null-topic languages.

In connection with languages of this group some discourse oriented behavior can be

observed which can be explained by deictic AGR. For instance, with the exception of

Quechua, all languages in this group have reflexives that are typically long-distant boundor discourse-bound, as the reflexives has no inherent phi-features. These reflexives must

get their phi-features from a governing deictic AGR.

5.4.2 Null subjects in partially underspecified AGR

Hermon and Yoon present this type of AGR by Modern Hebrew. Hebrew allows

pro-drop in the past and future tenses in main clauses, whit the exception of the third

person. However, there can be a null referential pronoun in third person but it has to be

identified by an NP from the matrix clause.(Borer 1989)

54


55/72

(68) Rina biksha me-davidi she-igmor proi leexol.

Rina asked of-David that-finish eating

Rina asked Davidi that (hei) finish eating.

Borer claims that in this case AGR is [+anaphoric] and therefore AGR has to move

to COMP to allow binding from the clause above. Hermon and Yoon modifies this

proposal by saying that if one member of a paradigm lacks specification for person then

the whole AGR matrix becomes underspecified.

5.4.3 Null subjects in AGR lacking PERSON

The AGR matrix with no person slot will never allow referential pro-drop. The

present tense in Hebrew has number and gender specification but completely lacks person

specification. Thus the underspecified AGR matrix in Hebrew will not be able to recover

full phi-feature specifications. Neither can AGR be [+anaphoric] as the person feature is

missing as a whole.

There are languages like Papiamentu that lack AGR in the language. Papiamentu

does not have person marking, thus Papiamentu has underspecified AGR. Gilligan (1987)

claims that this language never allowspro to appear, even co-indexation with an NP from

the matrix clause cannot licensepro.

This proposal of Hermon and Yoon makes appropriate predictions about mixed

type languages. They build their theory on Rizzis and develop it in a way that is more

suitable for partialpro-drop languages. However, their theory fits better

Government/Binging Theory. Vainikka&Levy (1999) came up with a new approach to the

same issue that fits more into the Minimalist Program. In the next section I am going to

55


56/72

present that theory. The theory developed by Hermoon and Yoon gives ground to some

questions. They deal only with the identification of null subjects as they agree with Rizzi

on licensing. However, Rizzis approach to licensing proved to be too language specific.

6 A new approach to null subjects in languages with mixed type agreement

Apart from Hermon and Yoons theory ofpro in mixed agreement type languages

Vainikka and Levy (1999) provide a new approach to the licensing and identification of

pro in languages like Finnish and Hebrew. In developing their theory, they also took earlier

works on this issue a starting point (Rizzi 1986, Jaeggli and Safir 1989). They consider

Speas (1994, 1995) theory, and develop their theory in the spirit of her Principle of

Economy of Projection. They will concentrate on the connection between subject-verb

agreement and null subjects in Finnish and Hebrew. Following Rizzi/Jaeggli&Safir,

Vainikka and Levy suggest that Hebrew17 and Finnish allow null subjects in first and

second person because the agreement morphology distinctively marks them.

6.1 New Analysis of null subjects with mixed agreement pattern

Vainikka and Levy considers person features to be crucial in connection with

licensing and identification of null subjects. They make a deictic distinction between

speaker and hearer. The first person always has the specification to be the speaker and the

second person is the hearer. The third person is neither the speaker nor the hearer. In this

system the features [speaker] and [hearer] are base-generated in [Spec, VP] (in the case

of first and second person) or in [Spec, AGRP] (in the case of third person).

17

Hebrew allows null subjects only in past and future tenses.

56


57/72

6.1.1 Modification of checking theory

Chomskys (1993) Checking Theory is modified in Vainikka and Levys system.

Chomsky claims that in the VP verbs appear with inflection generated on them and N-

features are located in AGR and the subject NP and all of these elements need to check

their features. The modification in this theory is that N-features are not necessarily

associated with AGR but they can also be base generated in the subject position. Vainikka

and Levy account for the Hebrew/Finnish mixed pattern by combining the modified

Checking Theory with Vainikkas (1996) licensing principle POOL. In Checking theory

the motivation for movement is the necessity to check off ones features while in the

system they propose elements move to occupy otherwise empty positions.

6.1.2 Principle of licensing

(69) Principle of Obligatory Occupant Licensing (POOL)

In order to be licensed, both the head and the specifier of a syntacticposition must be filled

by syntactic material at some level of representation.

Both POOL and Speas Economy of Projection offers a more general licensing

principle than EPP, concerning the licensing of syntactic positions. With the formulation of

POOL Vainikka and Levy avoid the necessity for introducing a separate condition on

obligatoryness of the subject NP as POOL demands that both the specifier and the head

position be filled. POOL is in line with the Minimalist Program as it does not allow for

empty position to be projected- while in Speas system there can be positions without

content since the requirement is only that either the head or the specifier is filled.

It means that in Italian-type languages, as opposed to earlier views, the agreement

features (in the form of agreement morphology) are base-generated in [Spec, VP] and they

57


58/72

move to [Spec, AGRP] along with the verb raising to AGR. The agreement features count

as syntactic material satisfying POOL, there is no need for an overt element in this type of

languages. In English/Greman the agreement features are base-generated in AGR leaving

[Spec, AGRP] empty. POOL forces the overt subject to move to [Spec, AGRP] in all

persons. In mixed type languages (like Finnish and Hebrew) the position of agreement

features varies according to persons. In first and second person it patterns with Italian

while in third person agreement features are base-generated in AGR, like in English,

resulting in the obligatory presence of overt subjects in Finnish and Hebrew. In the

following sections I am going to present the subject omission patterns of mixed type

languages through Finnish. Finnish and Hebrew exhibit almost identical patterns in subject

omission.

6.2 Omission of thematic subject

6.2.1 General overview of Finnish syntax

Finnish is an agglutinative language with mixed word order. In declarative

sentences it exhibits SVO word order.

(70) Pekka muistaa yleens vastaukset.

Pekka-NOM remember-3SG usually answers-ACC

Pekka usually remembers the answers.

(71) Mink vastauksen Pekka muistaa aina?

which-ACC answers-ACC Pekka-NOM remember-3SG always

Which answers does Pekka always remember?

58


59/72

Finnish can be characterized as a non-verb first language rather than a V-2

language as it can be seen in the construction when another verb is topicalized or

questioned. In those cases the verb occurs in the third position. Finnish exhibits three

functional projection under CP, considering the split-INFL theory (Pollock, 1989), (i)

AGRP, (ii) NEG and (iii) TP. The finite verb raises to AGR but never to C. Vainikka

(1989) proposes that agreement morphemes are anaphors bound by an overt NP (in third

person) or the speaker/hearer feature (in first and second persons).

59


60/72

6.2.2 First and Second person Subject Omission

Usually in first and second person there is a null subject in Finnish but in third

person an overt subject is needed:

(72) a.Jn kotiin, jos pyydt kauniisti.

remain-1SG home-ILL if ask-2SG beautifully

Ill stay home if you ask nicely.

b.Kun soititte, olimme juuri kaupassa.

when call-PAST-2PL be-PAST-1PL just store-INE

When you called, we were just at the store.

c.Jukka lhtee, jos hn lyt oven.

Jukka-NOM leave-3SG if he/she-NOMfind-3SG door-ACC

Jukka will go if he finds the door.

In Finnish the verb cannot occur sentence initially, yet in (72a and b) it seems that

the verb is in initial position. However, in these sentences the subject position is filled by a

null element. In third person the verb cannot appear adjacent to the complementizer.

(73) a.Jos asiakas soittaa kaupalta, Pekan on

if customer-NOM call-3SG store-ABL Pekka-GEN be-3SG

lhdettv sinne.

leave-PARTIC there

If a customer calls from the store, Pekka has to go there.

b.Jos kaupalta soittaa asiakas, Pekan

If store/ABL call-3SG customer/NOM Pekka/GEN

60


61/72

on lhdettv sinne.

be-3SG leave-PARTIC there

If a customer calls from the store, Pekka has to leave.

c.*? Jos soittaa asiakas kaupalta, Pekan on

if call-3SG customer-NOM store-ABL Pekka-GEN be-3SG

ldhettv sinne

leave-PARTIC there

If a customer calls from the store, Pekka has to leave there.

A sentence initial verb cannot appear together with a third person subject as in

(74b) or if it does appear it cannot be separated by any other element, however, in that case

the sentence expresses emphasis or topicalization as in (75).

(74) a. Liisa pyysi heti palkankorotusta

Liisa-NOM ask-PAST-3SG immediately raise-PAR Liisa immediately asked for a raise.

b. Palkankkorotusta pyysi heti Liisa.

raise-PAR ask-PAST-3SG immediately Liisa-NOM

Lisa immediately asked for a raise.

c. *Pyysi heti Liisa palkankorotusta.

ask-PAST-3SG immediatelya Liisa-NOM raise-PAR

Liisa immediately asked for a raise.

61


62/72

(75) Pyysi Liisa palkankorotusta.

ask-PAST-3SG Liisa-NOM raise-PAR

Liisa DID ask for a raise.

In the constructions where a null subject is an available option, the null subject

element is located in [Spec, AGRP] which is shown by the impossibility of fronting any

XP shown in (76).

(76) *Kun soititte kaupassa olimme juuri

when call-PAST-2PL store-INE be-PAST-1PL just

ostamassa takkia.

buy-INF coat.

When you called, we were just at the store buying a coat.

(77) *?Palkankorotusta pyysin heti.

raise-PAR ask-PAST-1SG immediately

I asked for a raise immediately.

6.2.3 Overt subjects in third person

Unlike in first/second person, in third person an null subject cannot occupy [Spec,

AGRP] as the person feature is in AGR hence[Spec, AGRP] remains empty and an overt

subject can move there to satisfy POOL. As the specifier of AGRP is empty it can also be

filled by any XP18.This means that [Spec, AGRP] does not need to be filled with the overt

subject. The overt subject can remain in [Spec, TP] if another XP occupies [Spec, AGRP].

The specifier of AGRP needs to be filled otherwise the structure would violate POOL.

18

Similar data from Germanic languages in Bobaljik and Jonas (1996)

62


63/72

(78) a. Nopan lysi Maija lipaston alta.

die-ACC find-PAST-3SG Maija-NOM chest-GEN under

Maija found the die under the chest.

(or The die was found under the chest by Maija.)

b. AGRP2

Spec AGR g 2

NP AGR TPg g 2

nopan lysi Spec Tg 2

NP T VP g g 2 Maija t Spec V g 8 NP V NP PP g g g1 t t t NP P

g g lipaston alta

Vainikka and Levy assume that in sentences like (78) the subject raises to [Spec,

TP] where it is in spec-head agreement with the verb. In Speas account a construction like

(78) is predicted to be grammatical with a null subject contrary to fact POOL, however,

requires that the specifier be filled. Thus, Vainikka and Levy suggest that a modification

should be added to Speas principle in a way that in those cases the subject is optionally

overt.

They propose the occurrence ofpro is connected to the relationship between

agreement affixes and pronouns. In first and second person the subject can be left out when

63


64/72

the [+speaker/hearer] features are base-generated in subject position and the agreement

affixes can identify the persons.

6.2.4 Non-overt subject in Embedded Clauses

There are constructions where the third person subject can be omitted in Finnish.

(79) a.Veljeni oli niin ilionen, ettei voinut nukkua.

brother-1Px was so happy that-not-3SG could sleep-INF

My brother was so happy that he couldnt sleep.

b.Pekka sanoo emnnlle, ett hakee ruustu kellerista.

say-3SG wife-ALL that get-3SG roses-ACC cellar-ELA

Pekka says to (his) wife that he/she will get the roses from the cellar.

In (79a) veljeni my brother is the referent of the omitted subject on the embedded

clause whereas in (79b) the referent can be bothPekka and emnnlle wife as well. In

Finnish the third person subject can be null if it has a referent from the matrix clause (the

matrix subject or any other argument XP) (Heinonen,1995). The referent from the matrix

clause needs to c-command the null subject in the embedded clause.

64


65/72

(80) Veljenivaimo oli niin iloinen, ettei

brother-GEN-1Px wife-NOM was so happy that-not-3SG

voinut nukkua.

could sleep-INF

My brothers wife was so happy that she couldnt sleep.

In (10) the only possible reading is that vaimo wife is the subject of the embedded

clause as the subject position is occupied by a non-overt element preventing any other

reading. Hakulinen (1976) argues that if the complement NP is moved to a preverbal

position the sentence receives generic reading, however, if an null element occupies the

subject position then the sentence obtains embedded null subject reading. In that case the

embedded subject position contains the features of the omitted subject NP.

Vainikka and Levy claim that in the matrix clause the referent of the first and

second person null subject is identified by the immediate conversational while the referent

of the third person null subject is identified from a broader discourse context. In embedded

clauses both referents can be identified through the context of the matrix clause (Kaplan

1977, Perry 1977, Lewis 1979). This analysis of (13) is twofold: first, it shows that a null

element occupies the embedded subject position and second, there is an extended

semantic-prgmatic analysis of the matrix first/second subject to the embedded thematic

subject.

The conclusion is that the features of non-overt third person subjects are base-

generated in subject position if the determination of the referent is readily available. Even

65


66/72

though this seems to be a sufficient explanation for null subjects in Finnish, the issue of

embedded subject omission needs further consideration.

The third person features can move to [Spec, TP] but not higher.

6.3 Null Subject patterns in Other Languages

Vainikka and Levy provides a classification of languages in line with their theory

of POOL and occurrence of null subjects. They introduce two main groups: (i) languages

that allow the omission of third person subjects in matrix clauses and (ii) languages that do

not allow the omission of thematic third person subjects in matrix clauses.

(81) Group A:

Traditionalpro-drop languages (like Italian, Spanish, Chinese) with the N-features base-

generated in subject position. POOL is satisfied without an overt subject. Occurrence of an

overt subject gives emphasis to the sentence.

Group B

This group must be devided into two more groups, however, the common property of

languages in group B is that they do not allow the omission of the subject in every person.

Group B1:languages in which the agreement paradigm reveals a pronominal connection in

both first and second person,

ezt nyomtassadki

Documents