Cecilia PolettoOV and VO in Romance: the special status of Quantifiers

1. Introduction

Basic assumptions:

Kayne’s (1994) Antysimmetry: no head-final constituents, no rightward movement. Belletti (2004): low left periphery on the vP edge is active in Italian. Giusti (2006), Cinque (2005): the DP also displays a complex left periphery.

The Old Italian left peripehery:

Old Italian is well-known for being a V2-like language where some but not all of the V2 correlates are respected: OV displays subject inversion, and an asymmetry between main and embedded clauses which manifests itself in the pro drop system and in the positioning of object clitics. However, it tolerates V3 and even V* constructions.

In OI main clauses the inflected verb obligatorily raises up to the left periphery (Benincà (2006)) at least to Focus/OperatorP, where it yields subject inversion.

Topics can be iterated in front of Focus/OperatorP. The verb moves further up to TopicP when a) SpecFocus is empty and b) there is a null or a

lexically realized Topic to be licensed. (1)[Force C°[Relwh C°]/Frame [ScSett] [HT] C°TOPIC[LD] [LI] C°Focus[FocusI ][FocusII ]/[Interrwh ] C°[FinP C° ]

General question:

OI is not only a V2-like language, it also displays OV in the vP layer and PP fronting in the DP. How are these phenomena related?

Hypotheses:

Phases are built in a parallel fashion, so that when a given FP is merged, it always has the same properties independently from the phase it is inserted in: Old Italian Focus/OperatorP always displays the same properties in the CP, vP, and DP phase.

This triggers V2, the possibility of OV orders and DP internal scrambling in the different phases.

Old Italian does not need to be explained assuming that speakers had two grammars to account for word order alternations. The hypothesis that speakers have competence of more than one grammar is probably unavoidable, but it should not serve as an alibi not to investigate more detailed patterns.

1.2. An appetizer: Modern Friulian OV

In modern Friulian only the direct object can be found in front of the past participle. A resultative/stative interpretation is obligatory (while this is not the case in Old Italian)

although these are not adjectival forms (see (2b):

1

(2) a. O ai lis sigaretis dismenteadis I have the cigarettes.pl forgotten.pl

b. E ai simpri li sigaretis fumadis da to pariI have always the cigarettes smoked by your father‘All the cigarettes I have are smoked by your father’

when the object is preverbal, past participle agreement is obligatory, when the object is postverbal, agreement is optional.

(3) a. O ai dismenteadis lis sigaretisb. O ai dismentea:t lis sigaretis

I have forgotten.sg the cigarettes.plc. *O ai lis sigaretis dismentea:t

‘I have forgotten the cigarettes’

2. Old Italian OV1

Factoring out V2 where the object occurs in first position in front of the inflected verb, i.e considering only compound tenses, the amount of OV orders ranges from 15% to 49% depending on the text. This has not gone unnoticed and is generally interpreted as an influence of the Latin grammar. This would mean that OI writers had two grammars, a VO and an OV one.

Are we sure that Old Italian is VO? Let us try the general typological tests:

A. the order of the arguments is direct object indirect object like in modern Italian

(4) a. tenea un savio greco in pregione kept.3sg a wise Greek in prison‘He kept a wise Greek man in prison’

(Novellino, p 125, r. 6) b. fece menare il destriere al campo

let.3sg lead the horse to-the field‘He had the horse lead to the field’ (Novellino, p.126, r. 13)

c. Molto onoroe la donna nel partoA lot honoured.3sg the woman in-the childbirth‘He preized the woman during the birth’ (Novellino, p. 234, r. 7)

d. Torquato, consolo di Roma, fece per iustizia tagliare Torquato, consul of Rome, had.3sg for justice cutla testa al figliuolo the head to-the son

‘T., consul in Rome, had someone cut the head off to his son in order to do justice’ (F.V.F., p. 113, r. 2-3 )

B. OI has preposition and no postpositions. (see (4) above)

C. auxiliaries (modals and causative verbs) are located in front of past participles

(5) a. Nel mal che tu hai non t’avrebbe lasciato B.G. 16, 51 All data are taken from the OVI data base available online at the following website: http://www.lib.uchicago.edu/efts/ARTFL/projects/OVI/pwrest/search.form.html

2

In.the sickness that you have not you would leave‘She would not leave you suffering’

b. Da che m’hai chiesto consiglio in ciò,... B.G. 26, 2since that me have asked advice in this‘Since you have asked me for advice’

c. La quale non potea avere luogo in voi B.G. 16, 1who not could have place in you‘which could not take place inside you’

However, being Old Italian a V2 language with stylistic fronting, we have to factor out cases in which the past participle has moved to the C domain in front of the auxiliary, as the following one (Franco (2009): 117 shows that they are subject to specific conditions):

(6) almeno quello che detto è __ non è inutile a sapere at.least which that said is not is useless to know.INF‘At least what is said isn’t useless to know’ FR, 72, 25

Notice that these cases have to be interpreted as stylistic fronting and not as real verb final structures, as shown by examples like the following:

(7) quello che scritto si truova delli stati mondani M. Villani,Cronica, 9, 15 what that written is found of the state wordly‘What has been written about the wordly states’

2.1 OV orders

They cannot be all interpreted as resultative structures like modern Friulian:

(8) a. i nimici avessero già il passo pigliato the enemies had.subj.3pl already the pace taken

(BG, Or., p. 88, r. 15)b. ch'egli avea il maleficio commesso

that he had.3sg the crime committed(BG, F. di rett., p. 31, r. 12-13)

c. dice che poi àe molto de ben fatto in guerra et in pace. says that then has a lot of good done in war and in peace

(BL, Rett., p. 26, r. 22)d. il quale da che ebbe tutto Egitto vinto…

whom since had.3sg all Egypt won…(BG, Or., p. 83, r. 15)

(8c) shows that the phenomenon we are dealing with is not what is usually considered as verb final, but is some sort of scrambling of the object, because the past participle is not in clause final position and the auxiliary is before the past participles even in relative clauses, where there is clearly no V2, ((8d)).

Notice that virtually any other argument (or verbal modifier) can be scrambled over the past participle: in this sense, this phenomenon is different from the one seen in modern Friulian, where it is only the object that can occur in front of the past participle.

(9) a. Ed essendo dell' unico guernimento già ispogliato3

and being of-the only ornament already stripped(BG, Or., p. 411, r. 1)

b. quello che per uso è già dagli antichi servatowhat that usually is already from-the ancients kept

(BG, Veg., p. 108, r. 25-26)c. Non crederei che fosse per voi rotto.

not would-believe.1sg that was by you broken(Fiore., p. 442, r. 11)

d. ch'elli è a fine venuto that he is to end come

(10) a. e holla già molte volte letta nella Bibbiaand have-it already many times read in-the bible

(BG, VeV, p. 15, r. 22) b. a quelli che sono già avanti iti

to those that are already forward gone(Tes. volg. p. c350, r. 2)

c. da tutta la gente sarai scarso tenuto of all the people will-be.2sg poorly considered

(BL, Tes., v. 1561 ) d. Poi lo fece fuori trarre

that him made.3sg outside take(Novellino, p. 158, rr. 6-7)

e. il cavaliere era molto bene costumatothe knight was so well educated

(Novellino, p. 311, r. 3)f. Quand' ebbero così ordinato

when had.3pl so ordered(Novellino, p. 349, r. 1)

You can also have more than one element in front of the past participle:

(11) d’esser [da Dio] [del ben] guiderdonato B.G. 63, 10To be from God of the good well repaid‘to be well repaid from God for the good

(12) e quando m’ebbe [di Religione] [e delle sue parti] [così] mostrato, B.G. 63, 11And when me had of Religion and of its parts so shown‘and after she had told me about religion and about its parts’

Given that: a) the phenomenon is apparently optionalb) any XP can be moved in front of the past participlec) multiple movement is possible

I propose that the phenomenon has to be treated as scrambling to a low left periphery (see Belletti (2004)) containing Focus and Topic positions, because it has all the properties of left peripheral movement in Italian:

They are not sensitive to the thematic-role of the moved element (if any), movement to Focus/Topic is apparently ‘optional’ and in Italian you can move more than one XP to the left (as it is the case for multiple left

dislocations or combinations of one Focus and left dislocation(s) in the CP area)4

In the case of the direct object, we can find optional agreement with a postposed object, but as soon as the object is located in front of the past participle, it triggers agreement:

(13) a. quando egli avea già fatti molti miracoliwhen he had.3sg already done+pl many miracles.pl

(Tes. volg. p. a258, vv. 3-4)b. E quando il notaio ha letta la proposta dinanzi a' consiglieri

and when the notare has read.f the proposal.f to the counselors(Tes. volg. p. d335, v. 17)

c c' ha rifiutata la nobile città di Giadres et ha that has refused.fem the noble city.fem of Giadres and has

preso li marchi (Novellino, p. 133, r. 3) taken.m the money.pl

Egerland’s generalizations:

(14) Past participle agreement is obligatory with the OV order, not with the VO order

(15) When past participial agreement is reduced (and finally lost), OV is reduced (and finally lost) as well

If OV orders are simply a residue of the Latin grammar, why do they integrate into the agreement system of the past participle in such a coherent way?

The Friulian OV is not due to the influence of Latin, but still it maintains the same restriction: hence the restriction (and OV) is grammar internal, and not due to a different grammar.

The case of obligatory Past Participle Agreement with OV can be interpreted as an instance of Guasti and Rizzi’s (2003) generalization: movement requires the highest overt Agreement pattern possible in the language, Agree does not necessarily do so.

The analysis

In OI the past participle must raise to Op° (like the inflected verb raises to Focus in the CP) The can be Object- raising to SpecOp, though this is not obligatory (like in the CP V1 cases) Past Participle agreement is triggered by spec-head in the AspP projection.

Derivation of obligatory past participle agreement with OV: (16)

[CP che [AgrS [SpecAgrS egli] [AgrS° avea] [OpP [SpecOp il maleficioj] [Op° commessoi] [ASpP [SpecAsp tj] [Asp° ti] …[VP [V° ti] [tj]]]]] ]

Movement of the object to Op requires passing through AspP where agreement is triggered--> Movement of the object to Op triggers OV and obligatory agreement.

Derivation of optional past participle agreement with VO: the object can move to SpecAsp or stay put (like preverbal and postverbal subjects in the TP).

5

(17) a.[CP quando [AgrS [SpecAgrS il notaio] [AgrS° ha] [OpP [Op° letto] [AspP [SpecAspO ] [AspO ti] …[VP [V° ti] [la

proposta]]]]]]

b. [CP quando [AgrS [SpecAgrS il notaio] [AgrS° ha] [OpP [Op° lettai] [AspP [SpecAsp la propostaj] [Asp° ti] …[VP

[V° ti] [tj]]]]]]

2. 2 OV is not a unitary phenomenon: Quantified objects

Looking at the distribution of quantified objects, we see that they do not differ from definite DPs in terms of distribution:

(18) a. e poi ch' elli àe tutto questo trovato per lo suo pensameand then that he has all this found for his own thinking

(BL, Rett. p. 74)b. quale da che ebbe tutto Egitto vinto

since that had.3sg all Egypt won(BG, Orosio., p. 83, r. 15)

(19) a. àe insegnato per tutto il libro insine a questo luogohas taught for all the book until to this place

(BL, Rett.p. 140)b. à(n)no ve(n)duto tutto i loro podere

have.3pl sold all the their property(Doc. fior., p.226)

c. e hannovi messo tutto loro ingegno e forza and have-there put all their intelligence and force

(BG, Orosio p.24)

One interesting observation is that when the quantifier is followed by a relative clause, it is never in OV order. This seems the opposite phenomenon with respect to heavy NP-shift.

(20) a. e ffue fatto tutto e ccioe che lo ree comandoeand was done all that that the king required.3sg

(Trist. Ricc. p. 25)b. bene servita di tutto cioe ch'ella comanda

well served of everything that that she requires(Trist. Ricc. p.136)

We have to admit that Old Italian is different from Icelandic, as Icelandic allows for OV orders only with quantifiers and quantified DPs, not with definite DPs.

(21) a. Strákarnir höfðu hent miklu grjóti í bílana.

The boys had thrown a lot of stones to the cars

b. Strákarnir höfðu miklu grjóti hent í bílana.

(Svenonius 2000: 261)

2.3 Bare Quantifiers6

Is it really true that there is no distinction between QPs and DPs?

Bare quantifiers behave differently. I will exemplify the case in point with the QP tutto ‘everything’. If the QP is the direct object (and therefore it is not selected by any preposition), it must raise higher than the past participle:

(22) a e come l'à tutto perduto. Fiore di rett... (p.75)And how it has all lost

b Ànne tutto paghato, Doc. fior., 1 (p.395)Have all paid

c cui si vuol ben tutto dare, Monte Andrea ... (p.269)to whom one wants well all give

If the QP is selected by a preposition, it is also generally found as OV, This means that the system is different from modern French and the effect cannot be due to

weakness/clitichood.

(23) a s'i' mi fosse al tutto a tte gradato, Fiore, XIII (p.86)If I had to everything to you adapted

b Anzi t'avrà del tutto rifusato, Fiore, XIII (p.112)rather you (he) will-have at all refused

c Che sia per tutto detto, Detto d'Amore... (p.485)that is for all said

One further interesting observation is that the quantifier is always postparticipial when it is modified by a relative clause

(24) a. e ffue fatto tutto e ccioe che lo ree comandoe

and was done all that that the king required.3sg (Trist. Ricc. p. 25)

b. bene servita di tutto cioe ch'ella comanda

well served of everything that that she requires (Trist. Ricc. p.136)

(25) A summary of the findings

7

Notice also that apparently the position for bare QPs is to the left of the one where scrambling lands:

(26) Vedemmo che fue tutta in quattro parti divisa B.G. 56, 9Saw that was all in four parts split‘We saw that it had been split in four parts’

This peculiar distribution of the bare quantifier tutto might be due too the fact that it also has an adverbial reading.

2.4 The quantifier tutti

The quantifier tutti ‘everybody/all’ cannot be interpreted as an adverb, but still behaves in the way we have already identified for tutto: when the QP is modified by a DP, it can either occur left or right of the past participle:

(27) a. e dove avea tutti i lor beni fatti seguestrare (Marchionne di Coppi, 1385)and wher had all their good made confiscate

b. E di questo uno exemplo si puote intendere tutti i somiglianti. (B. Latini, 1261)and of this one example one can see all the similar (ones)

The same pattern observed with tutto is also found when the bare quantifier is modified by a relative clause, in this case the QP always appears in post-verbal position, as tutto does:

(28) de’ quali tempi, e de’ fatti che intervennero, hanno fatto menzione tuttiof.the which times and of.the facts that happened.3pl have.3pl made mention allquelli, che di storie hanno scrittothose that of stories have.3pl written (Pagani 6)

The bare quantifier on the contrary is found, as expected, always before the past participle:

8

(29) a. Il Demonio ci avea tutti presi

the Devil us had.3sg all taken

‘The Devil took all of us’ (SV 279)

b. ma parve che fussero tutti vinti con lui

but seemed.3sg that were.3pl all won with him

‘it seemed that they were all won with him’ (Pagani 135)

Hence, we can conclude that bare quantifiers are consistently located before the past participle, while complex quantified expressions are not. This is neither due to morphosyntactic weakness nor to the fact that QPs exploit their adverbial position even when they are arguments.

Proposal: Universal bare quantifiers move to an adverbial position in the aspectual field. The difference between modern and Old Italian is due to past participle movement, which obscures in modern Italian the movement of the bare quantifier.

(30) past.part. [AspP [tutto/(tout)]...[vP [Topic][Focus] past.part. [VP past participle] [quantified expressions]…]]

Modern Italian Old Italian

(French)

Bare quantifiers are not paired to a null DP but to a null classifier, which remains stranded in the vP edge while the bare Q moves further out of the vP.

(31) a. [ComplAsp... [vP [VP [QP tutto [ClassP THING ]→ movement of the whole QP with the classifier to the edge of vP

b. [ComplAsp... [vP [QP tutto [ClassP THING ] past participle [VP [QP tutto [ClassP THING ]→ movement of the QP to ComplAsp leaving the Classifier behind in the vP-edge

c. [ComplAsp [QP tutto]... [vP [QP tutto [ClassP THING ] past participle [VP [QP tutto [ClassP

THING ]

This explains why the movement of bare Qs is obligatory and not optional and why they always occur in front of all other scrambled elements.

3. The DP structure

Hypothesis: The Old Italian (OI) DP/PP has the same “V2-like properties” found in the CP and in

the vP area.

3.1 PP scrambling as movement to the DP left periphery

9

Old Italian seems at first sight generally similar to modern Italian as it regularly displays the order

noun-PP,2

(32) e a Seleuco, figliuolo d' Antioco, ee data la segnoria dell' oste. (B. G. Or. 181)

And to S. son of A. had given the power of the control of the army

Although this is by far the most widespread option, as noted by Giorgi (2010), OI also displays

some striking cases of prenominal PPs, as the following cases show:

(33) a. Facestilo tu per dare di me esemplo alle genti? (B.G. 2,1)

Did.it you for give of me example to the people?

b. coloro che son oggi e che per innanzi nasceranno possano avere verace fede e di Dio

those who are today and who in future will.be.born can have real faith and of God

perfetto intendimento (B.G. 69, 17)

perfect understanding

c. Morte villana, di pietà nemica, di dolor madre antica3

Death villain, of mercy enemy, of sorrow mother ancient

‘You, villain death, you are the enemy of mercy and the ancient mother of sorrow’

(VN 30)

(34) a. per una porta che vi è intalglato di marmo uno angelo (Doc. Fior.113, 11)

through a door that there is carved of marble an angel

b. gli altri c'han d'amor neente. (Ch. Davanzati, 11, 14)

the others who have of love nothing

c. nei cor’ villan’ d’amore un gelo (Dante Vita Nuova 98, 4)4

in.the hearts villain of love a frost

I propose that the derivation for these cases is the following:

2 Several of the cases I present here are no real complement of the Noun, some authors assume that Nouns do not actually have a thematic grid, except for deverbal nouns. For my argument about scrambling to go through I actually do not need to assume that all Nouns have a thematic grid, but only that there are PPs internal to the DP, even though they are predicative PPs and not real arguments. 3 This case without a determiner is clearly definite, here Dante refers to a personification of Death. 4 This example is in the part in poetry of the work, however all the other examples are not.

10

(35) [DP [SpecDP [PP di dolor] ] D° defD [ KonP [ dP [AgrP [SpecAgrP ].[madre] [ADjP antica][[NP [madre] [PP di

dolor] ]..]

V2 like configuration: This explains

A. Why the PP is at the very beginning of the constituent, as it is moved to SpecDP

B. It also explains the following descriptive generalization:

(36) When a PP is preposed in front of the N, the N never has a definite determiner

there is no definite article, given that usually when SpecDP is occupied D° cannot be

realized.

Assumption: indefinite determiners occupy the lower d° position like infinitival complementizers

occupy Fin°.

C. The cases (impossible in modern Italian) in which the PP can move further on out of the DP:

(37) E [delle genti del mondo] quetare una parte, (B.G. 78, 9)

And of.the people of.the world calm one part

3.2 Movement of PP to the PP edge

(38) a. Ma molte genti di religione mettono a’ buoi innanzi il carro…

but many people of religion put.3pl to.the oxen before the wagon

‘Many priests put the cart before the oxen…’ (Paternostro 101)

b. Ballata, i’ voi che tu ritrovi Amore, / e con lui vade a madonna davante…

Ballad I want.1sg that you find.2sg love and with him go.2sg to my-lady before

‘Ballad, I want that you find Love and with him go before my lady…’ (VN 46)

c. E come fue a te presso, cosí è a tutti coloro che voglion te seguitare…

and how was to you besides so is to all those that want.3pl you follow.inf

‘And as it was besides you, so it is besides all those that want to follow you…’

(VeV 99)

11

(39) a. lungi di Gerusalemme bene cinque leghe

away from G. well five miles

‘A good five miles away from Gerusalem’ (San Gradale 40)

b. presso a tre miglia alla cittade

close to three miles to.the city

‘three miles close to the city’ (Pagani 247)

One more interesting argument is constituted by the fact that preposed PPs can have an

indefinite article or a quantifier and the preposed PP is always located in front of them,

showing that the movement is really to the edge of the whole phase, which also includes the

QP:

(40) a. Chi d’infamia d’alcuna macula si sozza

who of infamy of any spot himself gets.dirty

‘who becomes dirty of any blemish of infamy’ (VeV 29)

b. appresso la morte di questa donna alquanti die avvenne cosa…5

after the death of this woman several days happened.3sg thing

‘several days after the death of this woman it happened that…’ (VN 33)

c. Dipo’ la destruzione di Troia anni CCCCXIV

after the distruction of T. years 414

‘414 years after the destruction of Troy’ (Pagani 72)

(41) [ [[PP [P° di [DP infamia] [ [P° di [DP alcuna macola] [PP[P° di [PP infamia]]]

3.3 Movement to the left periphery of the DP: prenominal adjectives

Cinque (1994) proposes that the DP internal structure is made up by several functional

projections whose specifiers are occupied by different classes of adjectives,

Cinque (2005), (2009): displacement of the entire NP to all the specifiers of the various

functional projections in the IP-like space of the DP6 or of successively higher XPs into

higher specifiers giving rise to what is called “snowballing movement” and thus reversing

the order of the adjectives as shown in (42).

(42)

5 I report this example from Andreose (2010:623) who notices that the phenomenon of PP preposing is found inside DPs indicating a time interval. He does not explicitly say that all these cases include a quantifier, but this is always the case.6 I will follow here Giusti (2006), who proposes that the highest projection in the IP-like space of the DP is a NumberP.

12

whereas in prenominal position the adjective receives only one interpretation, which corresponds

to individual level, non-restrictive and absolute reading, in postnominal position it can have two

interpretations: the same of the adjective in prenominal position, or another interpretation,

corresponding to stage level, restrictive and relative reading.

(43) Le noiose lezioni di Ferrari se le ricordano tutti.

The boring lessons of Ferrari refl - obj. pron remember all

a. ‘Ferrari’s lessons were all boring and all remember them’

(44) Le lezioni noiose di Ferrari se le ricordano tutti.

The lessons boring of Ferrari refl - obj. pron remember all

a. ‘Ferrari’s lessons were all boring and all remember them’

b.‘all remember those lesson of Ferrari’s which were boring (but not all were so)’

absolute / relative

In Romance restrictive adjectives can only be postnominal because there is movement of

the whole FP containing the noun and non restrictive adjectives to the Spec of the

highest position in the DP, a movement which leaves the restrictive adjectives, which in

their basic order are the highest, as shown by languages like English, in a postnominal

position:

13

(45)

In what follows I will claim that this movement does not necessarily apply in OI because of

the V2-like property of the Noun.

the V2 property of the DP should block FP movement to SpecDP, therefore restrictive

adjectives should be prenominal in OI.

(46) a. S’era svegliato nel destrutto cuore

refl was awaken in.the ruined heart

‘It arose in the in the painful heart’ (VN 141)

b. avendo per anticho tempo grande nimistade

having for old time great enmity

‘being enemies from old times’ (CF 97)

c. di vendichare la ricievuta onta

to avenge.inf the received shame

‘to avenge the shame received’ (Distruzione di Troia 164)

(47) [DP [D°.il ][. TopP.[distrutto] [OpP ] [ dP cuore [AgrP cuore... [NP [N cuore ] ]]]]]

A. An argument in favour of a leftward movement analysis of the adjective is the fact that in

some cases the adjective has a PP complement which is left stranded on the right side of the

head noun:

14

(48) a. Se io pensava di volere cercare una comune via di costoro

if I thought.1sg of want.inf look.for.inf a common way of them

‘If I thought about finding a common way with them’ (VN 53)

b. e ciò non è propia natura di cavallo

and this not is own nature of horse

‘and this is not in a horse’s nature’ (Nov. II, 128)

Further extraction out of the DP which is not allowed in modern Italian:

B. Extraction of molto out of the AdjP:

(49) a. Molto fue cotesto a dire grande ardimento

very was this to say.inf big courage

‘It was very great courage to say that’ (VeV 99)

b. Molto sono male partiti

very are badly separated

‘They are sorted very badly’ (VeV 44)

c. Molto fece il re Pelleus grande festa al nepote

very made.3sg the king P. big feast to.the nephew

‘The king P. made a very big feast for the nephew’ (Distruzione di Troia 157)

C. Extraction of solamente

(50) a. Che solamente vi faremo cadere co le pettora de’ nostri cavalli

that only you will.make fall.inf with the breasts of our horses

‘We will overthrow you with only the chests of our horses’ (VeV 96)

3.4 Movement to the TP-like space

One other striking case of DP-internal preposing of genitive pronouns is the one noted by Vanelli

(2010) exemplified here by the following sentences:7

(51) a. Al costui tempo

7 The prenominal position is not the only one with an element like costui, on the contrary this position is rather limited in relation to the postnominal one. However, what is interesting here is that the possibility of having costui in prenominal position exists, while it does not in modern Italian.

15

to.the of.whom time

‘In his time’ (CF 90)

b. la colui vittoria

the him.there victory

‘his victory’ (Ligario 181)

This construction cannot be assimilated to PP fronting examined in section 2 for the following

reasons:

a) in PP fronting there is no deletion of the preposition

b) all types of prepositions can be fronted, not only elements introduced by di

c) in this case there is clearly no incompatibility with the definite determiner, which appears on the

left of the moved possessive pronoun, contrary to what happens for PP fronting.

It cannot be assimilated to Topic-like movement of AdjP either because

a) there is only XP that can be moved, namely the possessive argument

b) the possessive argument loses its preposition

(52) [DP [D° il] [TopicP...[OpP ] [ dP [AgrP [PossP [DP costui]...[Agr tempo [NP [N tempo [DP costui]] ]]]]]

These are cases of structural genitive where case is assigned structurally to the Possessive

element moved to the specifier of the projection where the N sits.

This analysis also provides us with the means to capture further cases of structural genitive

which do not only concern pronouns that were originally noted by Longobardi (1991) and

that are also found in the OVI corpus: :8

(53) a. in casa i Frescobaldi

in home the F.

‘in Frescobaldis’ home’ (GVillani b77)

b. In casa gl’Orciolini

in home the O.

‘In Orciolinis’ home’ (CF 126)

(54) [DP [casa] [TopicP.[OpP ] [ dP [AgrP [DP gli Orciolini]...[Agr casa [NP [N casa [DP gli Orciolini]] ]]]]]8 There are examples of this construction with casa with the prepositions da, ‚from‘ di,‘of a , ‚to/at‘ in ‚in.

16

Further cases of movement of the head noun higher than the structural genitive are:

(55) a. La figluola Guidi Tinaçi d’Aliana…

the daughter Guido T. of A.

‘The daughter of Guido Tinazzi of Agliana…’ (Streda 221)

b. le rede Guiglelmo Gitti…

the heirs Guglielmo Gitti

‘the heirs of G.G.’ (Streda 243)

(54) [DP [la] [TopicP.[OpP ] [ dP [figliola] [PossP [DP Guidi Tinaci d’Aliana]...[AgrP figliola [NP [N figliola

[DP Guidi Tinaci d’Aliana]] ]]]]]

There are at least three types of movements in the DP area that have gone lost:

the movement of a PP to the highest position in the DP yielding scrambling as well as the

non occurrence of a definite determiner,

the movement of adjectives (or portions of the adjectival structure) to a left peripheral

position lower than SpecDP. They keep their original interpretation and can be either

restrictive or non restrictive,

the movement of a genitive phrase to a specifier located most probably in the IP-like area of

the DP, a position which licenses genitive case and thus prevents the occurrence of the

preposition di ‘of’.

All three movements have disappeared in modern Italian. Moreover:

N° to d° (or alternatively NP to dP) allows restrictive adjectives to occur in a prenominal

position avoiding “snowballing” movement of an XP including the noun because

snowballing is blocked by the V2 property of the noun in OI.

Conclusion

17

The change from OV to VO is a very complex phenomenon, where the type of object influences the choice.

However, there is no need to postulate competing grammars to account for the change. All cases can be generated inside a single grammar, provided the following factors are taken into account

there exists a left periphery at the edge of each phase. the properties of functional heads are established independently from the phase they are

in. This means that in the C, v and D left periphery it is possible to move elements that today are not moved and the lexical head can to the left periphery of the C, v and D phase, if this head is empty.

there are dedicated positions for a) quantifiers in the low IP area; b) possessive elements in the high IP-like area of the DP.

References

Benincà, Paola (2006). “A Detailed Map of the Left Periphery of Medieval Romance”. In Zanuttini, Raffaella, Héctor Campos, Elena Herburger and Paul Portner (eds.) Negation, Tense and Clausal Architecture: Cross-linguistics Investigations. Georgetown University Press.

Belletti, Adriana (2004). “Aspects of the low IP area”. In The Structure of CP and IP, L.Rizzi (ed)., Oxford, Oxford University Press, 51.Cinque, Guglielmo (1994). “On the Evidence of Partial N-movement in the Romance DP”. In Cinque, Guglielmo et al. (eds.) Paths towards Universal Grammar. Georgetown University Press.Cinque, Guglielmo (1999). Adverbs and Functional Heads. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Cinque, Guglielmo (2005). “Deriving Greenberg’s Universal 20 and its Exceptions”. Linguistic Inquiry 36. 315-332.Cinque, Guglielmo (2005). “The Fundamental Left-Right Asymmetry of Natural Languages” in

S.Scalise; E.Magni; A.Bisetto (eds).;, Universals of Language Today., Dordrecht, Springer, p.165-p.184

Giorgi Alessandra (2010). About the Speaker:Towards a Syntax of Indexicality, Oxford, Oxford University Press, vol. 28.

Giusti, Giuliana 2006. ‘Parallels in Clausal and Nominal Pheriphery’. In M.- Frascarelli (ed.) Phases of Interpretation. Studies in Generative Grammar vol 91. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 163-186.

Kayne, Richard 1994. The Antisymmetry of Syntax. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press. Longobardi, Giuseppe (1994). “Reference and Proper Names”. In: Linguistic Inquiry 25, 609-665.Paoli, Sandra (1997) Agreement: a Relational Property or a Functional Projection? Evidence from

Part Participle Agreement in Friulian. Master thesis. University of York.Poletto, Cecilia. 2006. ‘Parallel Phases: a study on the high and low left periphery of Old Italian’. In

Phases of Interpretation. Mara Frascarelli (ed). Studies in Generative Grammar vol. 91 Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 261-294.

Rizzi, Luigi (1997). “The Fine Structure of the Left Periphery”. In Liliane Haegeman, ed., Elements of Grammar, Dordrecht ,Kluwer, 281-337.

Svenonius P. (2000), "Quantifier Movement in Icelandic". In: Svenonius P. (2000) (ed.), The Derivation of VO and OV, Amsterdam: Benjamins, 255-292

18