A Syntactic Analysis of the Subject Clitic "a" in the Friulian Variety of Campone

Jan Casalicchio,Vania Masutti

doi:10.5565/rev/isogloss.15

Abstract

This article presents a syntactic analysis of the third subject clitic a in Camponese, a heretofore unstudied Friulian variety. Following Poletto's (2000) map of subject clitics, we argue that it bears [+third person] features, and is, in fact, the spell-out of the functional head Subj°, located in the highest projection of TP (following Rizzi & Shlonsky 2007).In the first part of the article, we offer a detailed description of the distribution and syntactic properties of the subject clitic a, identifying its position in relation to the other elements that occur in the CP and TP. In the second part we discuss two proposals put forward to account for split clitics like a-l in the related variety of Forni di Sotto, where a and l are held to be part of a single clitic al (Manzini & Savoia 2009, Calabrese & Pescarini 2014). We show that such an account is incompatible with the case of Campone, where the clitics a and l are clearly separate: l is a [uφ]-clitic (Roberts 2010) and is located lower in the TP than the clitic a. We conclude with an analysis, which proposes the integration of Poletto's (2000) typology with a fifth type, corresponding to the clitic a of Campone

Highlights

We will investigate the syntactic properties of the third person subject clitic, which appears to include two independent morphemes, forming a clitic cluster: the higher component of the cluster is the clitic a, which co-occurs with a lower clitic which has distinct outcomes for gender and number
Note that an account along these lines does not seem to distinguish between different types of clitics, unlike Poletto's (2000). In their analysis of the data of Forni di Sotto, the authors follow Halle & Harris' (2005) analysis of metathesis and reduplication, arguing that the various orders found in this variety (30)-(31) are the result of a morphological metathesis rule. They agree with Manzini & Savoia (2009) in assuming that the underlying forms of the subject clitic are al, ai and as; in their account, these clitics are subject to a morphological rule of fission, which splits them into two separate forms: the higher [+/-third person] clitic and the lower φ-clitic
We compared the data of Campone with those of Forni di Sotto, in order to determine whether Manzini & Savoia's (2009) or Calabrese & Pescarini's (2014) analyses could be extended to Campone

Summary

General description of the subject clitic a in the variety of Campone

Note that in the interrogative paradigm the enclitic a is related to a lower clitic l/i/s in passive contexts, too: In this respect, unaccusative verbs differ from unergatives, where the clitic cluster a l is used with indefinite post-verbal subjects:. Lui a no l pos gì, si lour a s lu / *a lu s tormentan da sta a chiasa he a not SCL can go, if they a SCL him / a him SCL bother to stay at home 'He cannot go out, if they keep on repeating him to stay at home' *A ier l'ha clamat tiò fì a yesterday SCL has called your son In this respect, Camponese differs from the western Friulian variety of Forni di Sotto (PN), where the negation and dative or accusative clitics can appear between the higher a and the lower part of the subject clitic (see infra):. The projection intended to host the clitic a is higher than all the other clitics in both Campone and Forni di Sotto, while its position is unclear in central Friulian.

Previous analyses of Friulian subject clitics

The syntactic distribution of the clitic a in the structure

Analysis of the subject clitic a in Campone

Conclusions