Abstract
This paper deals with the diachrony of complementizer omission (C-omission) in some Italian clauses. C-omission is restricted to clauses with [-realis] mood in Old as well as in Modern Italian, and to some types of declarative clauses in Modern Florentine (Cocchi & Poletto, 2005). This phenomenon is instead much more pervasive in the Renaissance period (Wanner 1981, Scorretti 1991) and invests basically all types of subordinate clauses. The present study concentrates on C-omission in Renaissance Italian relative clauses, which is attested in both subject and non-subject extractions. There is a subject/non-subject asymmetry in the frequency of C-omission in relative clauses, which is claimed to result from the combination of an active vs. inactive distinction that characterizes both Old and Renaissance Italian, and the loss of V-to-C. The active vs. inactive distinction is attributed to the presence of a strong (*) feature on the low-phase head, v*, in both Old and Renaissance Italian, while the loss of (*) in CP determines the loss of V-to-C in Renaissance Italian only. The argument is corroborated by further comparative facts from Old Occitan and Old French, as well as by a contrast with Old Portuguese and Old Spanish.
Highlights
This paper deals with the diachrony of complementizer omission (C-omission) in some Italian clauses
In Renaissance Italian relative clauses, this asymmetry is visible in C-omission: the recoverability requirement that is imposed on FinP for the extraction of agentive external argument (EA) is formally satisfied in the morphology by merging an overt C-head, whereas this requirement does not hold for inactive subjects, C-omission can apply in this case, as is illustrated in (i), (ii), (27) and (28) above
The answer to b) follows straightforwardly from the analysis presented in section 3, according to which C-omission in relative clauses depends on the combination of two factors: i) an active vs. inactive distinction in the argument structure, whereby C-omission is possible in the presence of inactive and morphologically non-prominent (i.e. [-masculine]) antecedents, and ii) syncretism between the relative C-form and the declarative complementizer, which are both unmarked for case
Summary
In Renaissance Italian relative clauses, this asymmetry is visible in C-omission: the recoverability requirement that is imposed on FinP for the extraction of agentive EAs is formally satisfied in the morphology by merging an overt C-head (che), whereas this requirement does not hold for inactive subjects, C-omission can apply in this case, as is illustrated in (i), (ii), (27) and (28) above.. In Renaissance Italian relative clauses, this asymmetry is visible in C-omission: the recoverability requirement that is imposed on FinP for the extraction of agentive EAs is formally satisfied in the morphology by merging an overt C-head (che), whereas this requirement does not hold for inactive subjects, C-omission can apply in this case, as is illustrated in (i), (ii), (27) and (28) above.25 In this sense, the 0-1 alternation that corresponds to the possibility vs the impossibility of C-omission in Renaissance Italian mirrors the alternation that is attested between que/che and qui/chi forms in other Old Italo-Romance varieties (cf above). This remains to a large extent an unexplored field, for the moment
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
