MULTIATTACHMENT AND CHAINS IN ROMANIAN GERUND CLAUSES

Transcription

1 MULTIATTACHMENT AND CHAINS IN ROMANIAN GERUND CLAUSES ADRIANA TODEA * ABSTRACT. This paper uses the Relational Grammar account of clitic behaviour to identify functional characteristics of Romanian gerund forms. Such insights on how reflexive clitics are items of verb morphology that mark patterns of clause-internal functional operations are used to give a Generative Grammar account of the presence of the agreement-with-the-object phrase (AgroP) in the functional domain of gerund clauses. The paper explores as well the assumption that pronominal clitics, as they signal the -features of objects, are actually agreement heads. Key words: clitic behaviour, reflexive clitics, functional characteristic Examples [1] and [2] displays the Relational Grammar (RG) distinction between unaccusatives and unergatives: a speria [to frighten] is treated as an unaccusative with optional transitivity, whereas a teme [to fear] is an unergative with optional transitivity. In examples [2a,b] both verbs appear in pseudoreflexive constructions. According to RG, the argument of the unaccusative predicate undergoes retroherent advancemnent (or unaccusative advancement) in order to satisfy the Final 1 Law: Every clause must have a subject in the final stratum. The multiattachment displayed in a non-initial stratum is morphologically marked by the reflexive clitic. The argument of the unergative verb undergoes a retroherent antipassive, that is a retroherent demotion to the 2 (DO) relation. (Blake, pp 29-42) Babe-Bolyai University, Cluj-Napoca, Romania. atodea@yahoo.com

2 ADRIANA TODEA The examples in [2] and [3] show that the Romanian Presumptive displays the (perfect) participle in Perfect Presumptive and the gerund (present participle) in Present Presumptive. The two forms create an aspectual contrast of the perfective vs. imperfective type. The RG analysis of [2] and [3] interprets both participle and gerund as chomeur predicates in predicate unions (La Fauci, pp. 4-5), which is also confirmed by the raising, irrespective of the syntactic type of the initial predicate, of the reflexive clitic se (Davis and Rosen 1988). [3a]Se vor fi temut ei de cîini, (dar au mers înainte.) cl-refl.acc.3 rd pl will be feared they by/of dogs, They might have feared the dogs, (but they went on) [3b]Se vor fi speriat ei de cîini, (dar au mers înainte.) cl-refl.acc.3 rd pl will be frightened they by/of dogs, They might have been afraid of the dogs, (but they went on) [3c]Se vor fi speriind ei uor de cîini, (dar de gini nu le e fric.) cl-refl.acc.3 rd pl will be frightening they easily by/of dogs, They might easily get scared of dogs, (but they are not afraid of hens) [3d]Se vor fi temînd ei de cîini, (dar vor merge înainte.) cl-refl.acc.3 rd pl will be fearing they of dogs, They might fear dogs, but they will go on. 210

3 MULTIATTACHMENT AND CHAINS IN ROMANIAN GERUND CLAUSES Gerunds complementing verbs of perception, as in the examples in [4], are not predicate chomeurs, but gerund clauses. As they cannot advance to the subject relation in passive constructions, we can assume that gerund clauses in such positions, although initial DO, are put into chomage by the ascension of their inner argument under the Relational Succession Law: A nominal promoted by an ascension rule assumes the grammatical relation borne by the host out of which it ascends (Blake, p. 94). From this point of view they are similar to Romanian supine clauses (Todea, ). Gerund complementing verbs of perception have a clear imperfective aspectual feature, as the contrastive examples gerund vs. participle show and also the comparative finite object clauses constructions in [4] and [5]. An interesting issue is whether the participles in [5a,b,c] are predicates in chomeur participial clauses, or predicate chomeurs in predicate unions in the main clauses. As chomeur participial clauses are marked by the chomeur marker de in Romanian (see Todea), we prefer the predicate union analysis of [5 a,b,c] participial constructions. 211

4 ADRIANA TODEA Such gerunds as in [6c,d] have been interpreted as IOs in the main clause (Neamu, p.388), but by comparing them with the chomeur participle clauses in [6a,d] (initial subjects put into chomage by the retroherent unaccusative advancement of the arguments of the two unaccusative main clause predicates), they seem to be rather oblique clauses with an imperfective aspectual feature. 212

5 MULTIATTACHMENT AND CHAINS IN ROMANIAN GERUND CLAUSES Examples [7a,b] show a retroherent unaccusative advancement of the DO of an unaccusative-with-optional-transitivity predicate. 213

6 ADRIANA TODEA [7c,d] display imperfective gerund clauses complementing verbs of perception, which are also pseudoreflexives due to unaccusative retroherent advancement [7a], and respectively, the possessive reevaluated to IO relation in the higher clause as a result of nominal union (Blake, pp ). [7e,f] show perfective oblique gerund clauses with pseudoreflexivity produced by the same mechanisms which are at work in [7c,d]. 214 [7e] Vînzîndu-se florile, (florresele au plecat acas.) selling cl-refl.acc.3 rd sg?/pl? flowers-the, Having sold the flowers, (the flower girls went home.) [7f] Vînzîndu-i florile, (florresele au plecat acas.) selling cl-refl.dat.3 rd pl flowers-the, Having sold their flowers, (the flower girls went home.) [7g] Florile fiind vîndute, (florresele au plecat acas.) Flowers-the being sold, As their flowers had been sold, (the flower girls went home.) [7h] shows the topicalization of the predication in the main clause. The participle clause fails to display the pseudo reflexive clitic.

7 MULTIATTACHMENT AND CHAINS IN ROMANIAN GERUND CLAUSES Conclusions: RG analysis shows that the Romanian -ind, whether rendering the perfective or the imperfective aspect, in predicate unions or in gerund clauses, retains the pseudoreflexivity generated by the syntactic type of the initial predication (the lexical verb) the participle can appear in reflexive constructions only as a predicate chomeur in a predicate union. Chomeur participle clauses (the supine) lack reflexive clitics. The gerund clause must contain a functional feature that allows the realization of clitics, whereas participial clauses lack such a feature. 215

8 Powered by TCPDF ( ADRIANA TODEA Proposal for a Generative Grammar interpretation of reflexivity (true or pseudo): The functional phrase proposed to host the reflexive clitic is AgroP. The Romanian gerund has been long thought to render some agreement feature, as in traditional Romanian analyses there has been a long debate on whether the gerund is a personal or a non-personal mood/ form (Hazi, ). In [8] we propose two structures (one a true, the other a pseudo reflexive generated by an unaccusative verb) in which the VP shell complements the Agro functional head. We also propose a (Spec-vP, sister-of-v) Equi-NP Deletion type of chain for the structure displaying true reflexivity, and a chain generated by Spec-VP to Spec-vP NP-movement for the unaccusative structure (Radford, ) We propose a merger between the lexical verb and the reflexive clitic under the Agro head, as the verb undergoes V-movement. The NP in spec-vp moves from the VP shell into the functional domain, of which the first landing position is spec-agrop. The clitic checks the -features [number, person, gender] of the nominal in spec-agrop. Assuming that the reflexive clitic has the [+anaphor] referential feature, Binding theory checks as the reflexive clitic is bound by the NP in Spec-AgroP in its local domain. From the fact that the gerund clause allows the realization of clitics, whereas participial clauses (supine ones) fail to preserve them, we can conclude that, in Romanian, gerund clauses display an agreement with the object phrase in their functional domain, whereas participial clauses do not. 216 BIBLIOGRAPHY 1. Avram, Larisa (2004) An Aspectual Analysis of Gerunds 2. Blake, Barry J. (1990) Relational Grammar, Routledge, London & New York 3. Davies, William and Carol Rosen (1988) Unions as Multi-predicate clauses, Language 64: Gramatica Academiei (1963) Editura Academiei, Bucureti 5. Hazi, tefan (1997) Predicativitatea: Determinare contextual analitic, Editura Dacia, Cluj- Napoca 6. Neamu, G. G. (1999) Teoria i practica analizei gramaticale, Editura Excelsior, Cluj- Napoca 7. Perlmutter, David (1989) Multiattachment and the Unaccusative Hypothesis: The Perfect Auxiliary in Italian, Probus 1.1: Perlmutter, David and Paul Postal (1984) Some Proposed Laws of Basic Clause Sructure, Studies in Relational Grammar 1, University of Chicago Press 9. Radford, Andrew (1999) Syntax. A minimalist introduction, Cambridge University Press 10. Rosen, Carol (1984) The Interface between Semantic Roles and Initial Grammatical Relations, in Perlmutter and Rosen (eds.), studies in Relational Grammar 2, Uchi Press 11. Todea, Adriana (2004) The Romanian Supine Complementing Adjectives, Adverbs, verbs, Modals, and Copulas in Studia Universitatis Babe-Bolyai. Philologia, no.4/2004, Babes-Bolyai University