Eva Engels

Scandinavian object shift and optimality theory

PART I: OBJECT SHIFT 1. Introduction 2. Object Shift 3. Optimality Theory 4. An Optimality Theory Analysis of Object Shift 5. Conclusion PART II: OBJECT SHIFT IN REMNANT VP-TOPICALISATION CONSTRUCTIONS 6. Introduction 7. V -Topicalisation vs. Remnant VP-topicalisation 8. Object Shift and Remnant VP-topicalisation in Optimality Theory 9. Conclusion

An Optimality-Theoretic Analysis of Scandinavian Object Shift and Remnant VP-Topicalisation

Holmberg (1997, 1999) assumes that Holmbergs generalisation (HG) is derivational, prohibiting Object Shift (OS) across an intervening non-adverbial element at any point in the derivation. Counterexamples to this hypothesis are given in Fox & Pesetsky (2005) which show that remnant VP-topicalisations are possible in Scandinavian as long as the VP-internal order relations are maintained. Extending the empirical basis concerning remnant VP-topicalisations, we argue that HG and the restrictions on object stranding result from the same, more general condition on order preservation. Considering this condition to be violable and to interact with various constraints on movement in an Optimality-theoretic fashion, we suggest an account for various asymmetries in the interaction between remnant VP-topicalisations and both OS and other movement operations (especially subject raising) as to their order preserving characteristics and stranding abilities.

Object Shift and remnant VP-topicalisation: Danish and Swedish verb particles and 'let'-causatives

On the basis of an examination of remnant VP-topicalisation constructions, this paper argues for an order preservation analysis of Scandinavian Object Shift. Extending the empirical database, we account for the phenomena in an Optimality Theoretic framework. The paper focusses on two particular constructions in Danish and Swedish, namely particle verb constructions and causative constructions with Danish lade and Swedish l˚ ata ‘let’. It is shown how differences in the VP-internal object position give rise to mirror image sequences concerning Object Shift in connection with verb second (V ◦ -to-I ◦ -to-C ◦ movement) and with remnant VP-topicalisation.

Optimizing Adverb Positions

Adverb positions vary within a single language as well as across diverse languages. Based on the study of adverbs in English, French and German, this monograph shows that the distribution of adverbs is influenced by various factors at distinct levels of linguistic representation – comprising semantics, syntax, phonology and information structure –, which interact in determining adverb positions. The results of the investigation are formulated within the theoretical framework of Optimality Theory, which captures the complex interaction of these factors by hierarchically ranked constraints, deriving cross-linguistic variation of adverb positions by differences in the language-specific constraint hierarchies. The book is divided into two parts: While Part I examines adverb positions in general, Part II investigates under which circumstances an adverb may attach to a phonetically empty constituent in the languages under discussion. The book appeals to a linguistic audience interested in Germanic and Romance languages as well as in theoretical syntax in general.

Microvariation in object positions: Negative Shift in Scandinavian

In the Scandinavian languages, sentential negation must be licensed outside VP, necessitating leftward movement of negative objects, Negative Shift (NegS). While string-vacuous NegS is possible in all Scandinavian varieties, there is a fair amount of cross-linguistic variation as to non-string-vacuous NegS. In particular, the varieties contrast in which constituents can be crossed by NegS and whether or not crossing of a certain constituent requires the presence of an intervening verb. The paper discusses which difficulties for syntactic analysis arise from the variation as to the applicability of NegS and why other movement operations do not display such a range of variation.

Preposition stranding versus pied-piping: Negative Shift of prepositional complements in dialects of Faroese

In Faroese, Negative Shift of a prepositional complement is subject to variation across dialects, as well as to variation across speakers of the same dialect as regards preposition stranding and pied-piping. In particular, Negative Shift of a prepositional complement is possible for all speakers in the presence of a main verb in situ , stranding the preposition. Only if the main verb undergoes finite verb movement does dialectal and inter-speaker variation arise. In Icelandic, in contrast, the choice between preposition stranding and pied-piping during Negative Shift seems to be independent of verb position and to be lexically determined by the verb-preposition combination instead. These asymmetries will be accounted for within Fox and Pesetskys (2003, 2005) cyclic linearization model, which requires non-string-vacuous movement to proceed through the left edge of Spell-out domains, deriving cross-linguistic variation as to Negative Shift from differences in the availability of these left-edge positions. Thereby, pied-piping is considered a last resort strategy, possible only if the prepositional complement cannot undergo Negative Shift on its own due to the unavailability of the relevant left-edge position.

Object Shift and Remnant VP-Topicalisation in Optimality Theory

This chapter shows how object shift in remnant VP-topicalisation constructions can be accounted for in the optimality-theoretical analysis of object shift set out in Part I of the book. Sections 8.2–8.7 discuss various asymmetries related to object shift during remnant topicalisation: between object shift of a DO and object shift of an IO (section 8.2), between Danish and Swedish particle verb and let-constructions (sections 8.3 and 8.4), between stranding of a subject and stranding of an object (section 8.6), and between remnant topicalisation out of a main clause and remnant topicalisation out of an embedded clause (section 8.7). In addition, the excursus in section 8.5 shows that object shift is not only order preserving but also clause-bound.

An Optimality Theory Analysis of Object Shift

This chapter presents an account of the observed phenomena in terms of the interaction between violable constraints. Taking object shift to be triggered by the constraint Shift, it is shown how differences in its ranking relative to Stay and StayBranch can account for variation as to the syntactic complexity of the constituents that may undergo object shift (section 4.1) as well as variation as to the obligatoriness of object shift (section 4.2). Section 4.3 lays out how much less variation is actually predicted by the analysis than might be expected, given the free interaction of the three constraints. Section 4.4 adds a further constraint (StayBranchNoCase) in order to account for differences in object shift of arguments and object shift of adverbials in Icelandic. Section 4.5 accounts for Holmberg’s generalisation by introducing the constraint Order Preservation , which predicts object shift not only to be blocked by a verb in situ but also by other intervening VP-internal constituents. Finally, section 4.6 shows how the linear conception of Order Preservation allows an analysis of Continental West Germanic scrambling along the same lines.

V°-Topicalisation vs Remnant VP-Topicalisation

This chapter argues in favour of a remnant VP-topicalisation approach, rejecting Holmberg’s (1997, 1999) V°-topicalisation approach on empirical grounds in section 7.1. Section 7.2 presents Fox and Pesetsky’s (2003, 2005a,b) cyclic linearisation approach to object shift, which radically differs from other types of (A- and A-bar-) movement, such as wh-movement or subject raising, in that object shift may not result in a reversal of the order of elements. This fact is captured by simply positing that most movements, but crucially not object shift, have to proceed successively cyclically via the left edge of VP in their analysis. Furthermore, section 7.2 also shows Fox and Pesetsky’s approach to make incorrect predictions as to remnant VP-topicalisation in constructions with an auxiliary verb in situ.