Abstract
<p>I show that core implicit subjects in Spanish (i.e., the ones that occur with analytical passives, impersonal <em>se</em>, and causatives) can be derived from a theory under which absence of <em>Merge</em> in external subject position is a possible syntactic output. Core implicit arguments then have no syntactic representation (<em>pace</em> Landau 2010). Absence of <em>Merge</em> can make to arise two different scenarios: (i) a conflict at the interfaces, which requires the implementation of some repair strategy, (ii) no conflict at the interfaces; i.e., a legitimate object at the interfaces. The first scenario is illustrated with reference to the so-called impersonal <em>se</em> in Spanish, and the second one with reference to analytical passives. The proposed system is able to capture a set of very intricate facts that does not have a satisfactory solution hitherto. Crucially, this particular view on implicit arguments, together with a purely syntactic theory of argument structure, derives the full distribution of impersonals and reflexives in <em>hacer</em> ‘to make’ causative contexts. Finally, it is shown that the arbitrary readings that the two scenarios above described display have a different source: whereas impersonal <em>se</em> requires (costly) default computation at the interface, arbitrary interpretations in analytical passives are calculated at the <em>v</em>P level. </p>
Highlights
IntroductionFor reasons that should be more or less evident (at least from a philosophical point of view), the claim that some (non-perceptible) object exists requires more justification than the claim that some (non-perceptible) object does not
For reasons that should be more or less evident, the claim that some object exists requires more justification than the claim that some object does not
A clitic is inserted at PF through the same mechanism we have previously described in connection with impersonal se to satisfy the non-discharged [D] feature on v
Summary
For reasons that should be more or less evident (at least from a philosophical point of view), the claim that some (non-perceptible) object exists requires more justification than the claim that some (non-perceptible) object does not. This system dispenses entirely with voice features and operations of argument reduction of any sort It only invokes well-established constraints on the way in which Merge and Agree proceed and some restrictions on thematic interpretation that follow from general conditions on syntactic computation (activity and locality). The fact that generic contexts, for instance, favor the establishment of A-dependencies that are otherwise impossible has been in the center of the debate on passives (Jaeggli 1986, Baker, Johnson & Roberts 1989, and Landau 2010), implicit objects (Rizzi 1986 and subsequent works), impersonal se in generic environments (D’Alessandro 2007) and null generics in partial pro-drop languages (see Holmberg 2010 and Saab 2012 for a recent view), among related constructions across languages.. Before closing the discussion on causatives, let me explore a last important prediction related to the syntax of ECM constructions
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 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 callMore From: Borealis – An International Journal of Hispanic Linguistics
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
