An anaphoric approach to clitic position in Spanish

PDF

Download

Open document

Flip pages

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Request accessible transcript

Transcript (if available)

Content INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6” x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. ProQuest Information and Learning 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 USA 800-521-0600 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. AN ANAPHORIC APPROACH TO CLITIC POSITION IN SPANISH by Deborah Jean Gill A Dissertation Presented to the FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (SPANISH) August 2000 Copyright 2000 Deborah Jean Gill Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. UMI Number 3018082 _ _ <g i UMI UMI Microform3018082 Copyright 2001 by Bell & Howell Information and Learning Company. All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. Bell & Howell Information and Learning Company 300 North Zeeb Road P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. UNIVERSITY O F SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA THE GRADUATE SCHOOL. UNIVERSITY PARK LOS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA 90007 This dissertation, written by Deborah Jean Gill under the direction of h.&.v....... Dissertation Committee, and approved by all its members, has been presented to and accepted by The Graduate School, in partial fulfillm ent of re quirements fo r the degree o f D O C TO R O F PH ILO SO PH Y Dean o f Graduate Studies Date ....Ah&V1 . a Q . 9 . 9 . DISSERTATION CO! Chairperson Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. In memory of my mother, Claire This dissertation is dedicated to my parents, Alfred and Claire Gill. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Acknowledgments While writing a dissertation, you always wonder whether or not the end will ever come. But, through it all, there are always those people who are going through it with you, helping in different ways. It is to all of those people I thank. Before entering USC, I knew that I wanted to obtain a doctorate in Spanish, with an emphasis in Hispanic Linguistics, but at the same time I wasn’t sure if I would be able to do it. I was told by Professor Domnita Dumitrescu of California State University, Los Angeles, “Querer es poder.” Domnita, my mentor, my friend, I thank you for always being there and believing in me. Ever since I entered USC in 1992 for my Master’s Degree until this day, my advisor and chair of my dissertation committee, Mario Saltarelli, has always believed in me. He has been a friend and has supported me through my hardest times (the death of my mother) as well as the joyous times (receiving my first job as an Assistant Professor). He has gently guided me, allowing me to make mistakes, talk them through and come to my own conclusions. Thank you, Mario, for always being there and believing in me. Another one of my committee members, and a guiding force and good friend, is Professor Ramon Araluce. He has given me the opportunity to grow both professionally and personally. Our discussions Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. iv have ranged from this dissertation and other linguistics topics to life, to civilization and culture of Spain to our philosophies on different topics. These discussions have helped me to grow both professionally and personally. Thank you, Ramon, for everything. I also would like to thank my other committee members, Professors Carmen Silva-Corvalan and William Rutherford. I appreciate the time that they have put into this committee. I owe a special note of thanks to Dr. Gayle Fiedler-Vierma. Without Gayle’s caring ear, thoughtful advice, and constant support, both emotionally and academically, I would not be where I am today. Through her encouragement of innovative teaching and opportunities to grow professionally, I believe that I have gained invaluable skills and experience that I would never have received otherwise. Gayle, you will always hold a special place in my heart. Thank you. Finally, thank you to all of my colleagues in the Department of Spanish and Portuguese. From each and every one of you I have learned something that will serve me in the future. You have all made these years in the Department memorable. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Table of Contents Page Dedication..........................................................................................................ii Acknowledgments ....................................................................................... iii List of Tables ............................................................................................. viii List of Figures...................................................................................................x Abstract ......................................................................................................... xi 1. Introduction ....................................................................................... 1 1.1 General O verview .................................................................. 1 1.2 Structure of the Dissertation............................................... 11 1.3 Purpose, goals and specific hypotheses............................ 13 1.4 Overview of the subjects, data and research methodology............................................................. 16 2. Theoretical Background................................................................. 20 2.1 Introduction........................................................................... 20 2.2 Clitic Position in Old Spanish ............................................. 21 2.2.1 Tobler-Mussafia...................................................... 21 2.2.2 G e ssn e r................................................................... 24 2.2.3 Meyer-Lubke ........................................................... 27 2.2.4 Menendez P id a l...................................................... 28 2.2.5 Leavitt....................................................................... 30 2.2.6 Keniston................................................................... 33 2.3 An Overview of Clitic Position in Double Verb Constructions ..................................................................... 38 2.3.1 Overview of Clitic Position ..................................... 38 2.3.1.1 C olburn.............................................. 38 2.3.1.2 Chenery ............................................ 40 2.3.1.3 Ramsden............................................. 42 2.3.2 Syntactic Approach to Clitic Position in Double Verb Constructions.................................................. 49 2.3.2.1 Suner ................................................. 50 2.3.2.2 R ive ro ................................................. 51 2.3.2.3 Roldan................................................. 55 2.3.2.4 Contreras .......................................... 59 2.3.3 Semantic-Pragmatic Approach to Clitic Position In Double Verb Constructions................................. 62 2.3.3.1 B a rry................................................... 62 2.3.3.2 Saltarelli ............................................ 67 2.3.3.3 M yhill................................................... 68 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. vi Page 2.4 Anaphora and Semantic/Pragmatic S tudies.................... 72 2.4.1 Anaphora ................................................................ 73 2.4.1.1 Anaphora in ge ne ral..................... 73 2.4.1.2 Pragmatically-controlled anaphora . 74 2.4.2 Informational S tatus............................................ 77 2.4.2.1 GivoniGrounding............................ 77 2.4.2.2 Givon: Topicality and Saliency .... 77 2.4.3 Topic, Focus, and S u b je ct..................................... 82 2.4.3.1 Lambrecht....................................... 82 2.4.3.2 Ochs and Schieffelin..................... 87 2.4.4 Activeness .............................................................. 89 2.4.5 Information S tructure............................................. 91 2.5 Conclusion .......................................................................... 95 3. Methodology ................................................................................... 97 3.1 Introduction.......................................................................... 97 3.2 Subjects .............................................................................. 98 3.3 Data Collection ................................................................. 101 3.3.1 Qualitative Analysis ............................................. 103 3.3.2 Quantitative Analysis ........................................... 105 3.4 Conclusions........................................................................ 111 4. Analysis of the P roblem .............................................................. 112 4.1 Finding the Limits of Position Variation........................... 113 4.2 Variation in Object Clitic Position ................................... 119 4.2.1 The Dependent and Independent Variables .... 120 4.2.1.1 Collapsing the Dependent Variable .... 120 4.2.1.2 Object clitic position and type of clause in 14th Century Spanish . . . 124 4.2.1.3 Object clitic position and verb placement in 14th Century Spanish........................................... 127 4.2.1.4 Object clitic position and coreferentiality................................. 131 4.2.1.5 Object clitic position and the finite v e rb .................................................. 133 4.2.1.6 Object clitic position and the type of object ............................................. 136 4.2.1.7 Object clitic position and the type of clitic .................................................. 144 4.2.1.8 Third Person Lo/La................................. 148 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. vii Page 4.2.1.5 Object clitic position and genre and geographical location ............................ 151 4.2.1.10 Conclusions ........................................... 154 4.2.2 Object clitic position and semantic-pragmatic observations.......................................................... 156 4.2.2.1 Information Structure .............................. 157 4.2.2.2 Discourse T o p ic ....................................... 158 4.2.2.3 Threading it all to g e th e r.......................... 166 4.3 Operationalizing the Anaphoric Test: Discourse Chains ................................................................... 167 4.3.1 Setting the Discourse Clitic Chain ...................... 172 4.3.1.1 Relationship between object clitic position and aboutness................. 173 4.3.1.2 Aboutness, clitic referent, and position of the object clitic pronoun ........... 177 4.3.1.3 Aboutness, clitic referent, clitic referent location and position of the object clitic pronoun................................... 179 4.4 Conclusions........................................................................ 185 5. General Conclusions................................................................... 187 5.1 Summary of find in gs......................................................... 187 5.2 Contribution to the fie ld ..................................................... 193 5.3 Projections for future research ........................................ 194 Bibliography............................................................................................. 195 Appendix A ............................................................................................... 202 Appendix B ............................................................................................... 203 Appendix C ............................................................................................... 213 Appendix D ............................................................................................... 214 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. viii List of Tables Page Chapter 2 Table 2.1: Myhill’s frequency of clitic climbing with different finite verbs.......................................................................... 70 Table 2.2: Summary of Myhill’s Verb G roups...................................... 71 Chapter 3 Table 3.1: Type of Spanish by Geographical Location .................... 99 Table 3.2: Relationship between the Position of the Object Clitic and Oral or Written Discourse ............................ 104 Table 3.3: Object Position Variables ................................................. 106 Table 3.4: Relationship between Object Clitic Position and Subject Expression................................................ 110 Chapter 4 Table 4.1: Finite Verbs which only take preverbal object clitics . . . 114 Table 4.2: Finite Verbs which only take postverbal object clitics .. 117 Table 4.3: Diachronic panorama of object clitic position ................ 121 Table 4.4: Relationship between object clitic position with respect to type of clause in 14th Century S panish 124 Table 4.5: Relationship between object clitic position with respect to verb placement in the 14th C entury................. 128 Table 4.6: Effect of coreferentiality on object clitic pronoun position................................................................... 131 Table 4.7: Position of object clitic pronoun with regard to finite verb ....................................................................... 133 Table 4.8: Object clitic position in relation to type of o b je c t 137 Table 4.9 Myhill’s Topicality Hierarchy for Clitic Position ............. 140 Table 4.10: Relationship between clitic and subject person controlled by po sitio n............................................ 143 Table 4.11: Object clitic position in relation to the type of clitic .... 145 Table 4.12: Coreferentiality of te (second person singular)............. 146 Table 4.13: Object clitics Lo and La with respect to position and animate/inanimate ................................................ 150 Table 4.14: Object clitic position relationship to g e n re ..................... 152 Table 4.15 Object clitic position relationship to geographic location 153 Table 4.16 Relationship between the position of the object clitic pronoun and aboutness....................................... 174 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. IX Page Table 4.17 Relationship between the clitic referent and aboutness controlled for by position of the object clitic p ro n o u n .............................................. 177 Table 4.18 Relationship between the clitic referent, clitic referent location, and aboutness (controlled by object clitic position)......................................... 182 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. List of Figures Page Figure 1: Clitic Position Possibilities..................................................... 7 Figure 2: Chafe’s Levels of Activeness ............................................ 91 Figure 3: Levels of G ram m ar............................................................. 95 Figure 4: Collaborating Chain 1 ....................................................... 164 Figure 5: Collaborating Chain 2 ....................................................... 165 Figure 6: Collaborating Chain 3 ....................................................... 166 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. xi An Anaphoric Approach To Clitic Position In Spanish This dissertation is divided into three parts. First, a corpus of data containing unstressed (clitic) object pronouns from literary texts and/or oral interviews from Spain, Spanish America, Mexico, and the United States is examined and statistically analyzed using SPSS in order to determine the positional distribution of clitics. Particular attention is given to periphrastic verb constructions (V1+V2) in which the clitic may alternatively appear before the finite (proclisis) or after the nonfinite verb (enclisis). Second, we make the claim that the proclisis/enclisis option is correlated with pragmatic properties of the discourse referent. This research hypothesis is in contrast with the null hypothesis which states that the position is in free variation. In testing the proposed hypothesis, we examine the correlation between the position of the object clitic pronoun (preverbal or postverbal) and a set of independent variables, such as referentiality, the grammatical function of the clitic (type of clitic), the grammatical function of the clitic referent, the clausal location of the clitic referent, person and animacy features, etc. Finally, integrating the results of the above correlations along with pragmatic factors related to the discourse referent, we propose two anaphoric chains: a Default (“discourse inert”) Clitic Chain and a (“discourse active”) Marked Clitic Chain. In the data at hand, the syntactic Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. distribution of (post/preverbal) clitics shows a statistical tendency to correlate with anaphoric discourse properties of these chains. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 1. INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 General Overview. In the course of the history of Spanish object clitic position has vacillated from postverbal to preverbal position, depending upon the placement of the verb in the sentence. The preverbal position is consolidated in Modern Spanish, with the exception being within the context of nonfinite verbs and the imperative forms. Examples of clitic position in Old and in Modern Spanish can be seen in (1) - (5) below: Old Spanish Preverbal Position (1) Por qe ME [non] recudes? Why ME [not] you-answer? ‘Why don’t you answer me?’1 (Gonzalo de Berceo, 293) Postverbal Position (2) A mi ofendeme el sonido. To me offends-me the sound. The sound offends me.’ (Valdes, Dialogo 368.3) 1 AII translations of examples are my own translations. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Modem Spanish Preverbal Position (3) ^Porque la ayuda quien la da? Because the help who it gives? ‘Because who gives the help [/fj? (Lope Blanch, 242) Postverbal Position (4) Dejanos solos, por favor. You-leave-us alone, please. ‘Leave us alone, please. (Vallejo, Tragaluz, 88) (5) Y no conoceras a los hombres sin tratarlos, ni a ti mismo, si no te mezclas con ellos. And no you-know to the men without treat- them, nor you yourself, if no yourself-you-mix with them. ‘And you will not know the men without dealing with them, nor yourself, if you don’t mix with them.’ (Vallejo, Tragaluz, 52) Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Besides single verb constructions, there is also variation in double verb constructions (periphrastic constructions2 ); that is, within those constructions in which there is (1) a finite verb followed immediately by a nonfinite verb, gerund, or participle, or (2) a relative pronoun or prepositional phrase which combine to form a single unit (a periphrastic phrase). Within Old Spanish, object clitic pronoun is found in three positions: (1) preverbal, (2) postverbal, and (3) intermediate (between the finite and nonfinite verbs). These positions can be seen in (6)-(8) below: Old Spanish Preverbal (6) Et la condessa et los parientes del conde se marabiilaron desto mucho, pero fizieron lo quel conde les envio mandar, et posieron por escripto todas .... (El Conde Lucanor, 151) ^ e will use the term periphrastic construction to describe a subset of a series of two verbs which functions as one clause and allow clitic movement. In order to set the boundaries for this dissertation, we will not, however, consider three verb constructions such as Quiero poderhacerio ‘I want to be able to do it’. These constructions are outside the boundaries of this dissertation, although they are interesting in themselves and will be used for future investigation. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Postverbal (7) Por riqueza, nin pobreza, nin buena andanga, nin contraria, non deve omne pararse del amor de Dios. (El Conde Lucanor, 282) Intermediate (8) Et penso muy bien del et fixo13 dar muy buenas posadas, et todo lo que ovo mester, el dio/a entenderquel plazia mucho con su venida. . .. (El Conde Lucanor, 96) However, in Modern Spanish, variation in position is found either as preverbal position or postverbal position, as seen in examples (9)-(10) below: Modem Spanish Preverbal (9) No /e puedo contestar a esa pregunta porque no lo se. 3ln Old Spanish many of the intermediate object clitic pronouns are found in apocopated form. Generally this is the dative clitic pronoun which has the apocopation of the e, but it is not unusual to find, in the literature of this time, the apocapation of the accusative clitics lo and la also. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 5 No him l-can-be-able to-answer that question because no it l-know. ‘I can’t answer him that question because I don’t know.’ (Esgueva, 20) Postverbal (10) No quiero verme en otra, porque prefiero ir andando, sin duda alguna. No l-want to-see-me in another, because l-prefer to go walking, without doubt any. ‘I don’t want to see [myself\ in another, because I prefer to go walking, without a doubt.’ (Esgueva, 5) This dissertation provides a descriptive and functional account of clitic position in periphrastic constructions in Spanish based on semantic- pragmatic discourse factors and their implications. Therefore, the research problem, research question, and our hypothesis are the following: Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 6 Research Problem: Unstressed (clitic) pronouns in Spanish appear in two syntactic positions in periphrastic constructions with degrees of variation (Discussed below in Figure 1) Research Question: Is the variation between pre- and post-verbal position predictable or free? (topic of the entire dissertation) Research Hypothesis The variation in object clitic position in Spanish is pragmatically- controlled. (Our hypothesis is an alternative to the null hypothesis4 which states that variation in object clitic position is free). (See p. 9.) The aim of this dissertation is threefold. First, we will define the syntactic contexts in which variation in the position of the object clitic pronoun is found. Figure 1 below illustrates this. 4 We use the term “null hypothesis” in accordance with statistical practice. This hypothesis, which we hope to reject, assumes no categorical distinction between enclitic and proclitic variants. For clarification of the reader, the null hypothesis here states that the correlation between the dependent variable (object clitic position) and the independent variables (see Appendix B) is random or free. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 7 Periphrastic Constructions: enclisis and proclisis [V-| finite + V2 non-finite] Clitic Positions (a) [V, + V2 Clitic] V2 -enclisis (b) [V ^Iitic + VJ V,-enclisis (Old Spanish) (c) [Clitic Vt+VJ V^proclisis Figure 1: Clitic Position Possibilities Figure 1 illustrates the three positions possible in periphrastic constructions (henceforth “alternating clitic constructions”). Alternating clitic constructions are periphrastic constructions in which the unstressed pronoun may appear cliticized either to V2 (enclitic) or V, (enclitic in Old Spanish and proclitic in Modem Spanish). The class of alternating clitic constructions are identified as a subset of V, (finite) in the periphrastic construction. (These constructions have also been termed as Clitic Climbing (Roldan 1974; Contreras 1979) and Verb Construction in Movement (Suher 1980) within theories of clitics). This dissertation is concerned with a resolution of the statistically defined variation observed in this subset of the corpus. There have been syntactic theories with regard to clitic position and the constraints that account for the position of said object clitic pronoun. There are those who propose that preverbal position is governed by a rule of clause reduction (Aissen and Perlmutter 1976, among others) and Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 8 others who believe that the position of object clitic pronouns is dependent upon a rule of Clitic Climbing (Roldan 1974, Lujan 1978, among others). Although the variation in object clitic position may be constrained by lexico-syntactic factors listed above (i.e., certain sets of verbs only allow preverbal position or syntactic rules and constraints govern the position of the object clitic), we will take the viewpoint of Suner that “[cjlitic promotion is not a well-delimited operation since one group of verbs always allows the climbing of clitics whereas another never permits this movement to take place.... [Tjhere is a third group of verbs which cannot be neatly associated with either of these classes” (Suner 1980:300-301). The “third group of verbs” of which Suner speaks is the subject of the second goal of this dissertation; that is, to examine the motivation for the variation in the position of the object clitic which is found within the same contexts. In other words, why is it, within the same series of verbs, that in some discourse contexts one finds the object clitic pronoun in preverbal position (as in Example (11)), while in other discourse contexts the object clitic pronoun is in postverbal position (Example (12)): (11) Eso actualmente no lo puedo senalar. That currently no it can-1 s-pres. point out. “That currently I can’t point it out.” (Esgueva, 87) Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 9 (12) Pero, claro, a esa hora que es la que yo puedo verfo, que es la de la noche, pues no es todos los programs, ni todos los buenos tampoco. But, of course, at that hour that Is when can- 1s-pres. See it, that is at night, well, it’s not all of the programs, nor all of the good ones either. ‘But, of course, at that hour that is when I can see it, that is at night, well, it’s not all of the programs, nor ail of the good ones either.’ (Esgueva, 204) It is the variation which is seen in examples (11) and (12) which leads us to the our central hypothesis: Hypothesis The variation in object clitic position in Spanish is pragmatically-controlled (in opposition to the null hypothesis which states that variation in object clitic position is free). In testing this hypothesis, we will show that there are semantic- pragmatic discourse factors which influence the alternation in the position of object clitics and consequently the position is not optional (free). Specific considerations will lead to the choice to place the object clitic in pre- or postverbal position. These include: foregrounding and Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 10 backgrounding (in the sense of Barry 1987), information structure (Lambrecht 1995), discourse topics (Ochs and Schieffelin 1976), and possibly, but not conclusively, the relationship between the subject person and the topic (at a discourse level) (Chafe 1976, 1994, Givon 1991, and Myhill 1989, among others). The hypothesis is refined in the course of the dissertation. Finally, the third objective of this dissertation is to demonstrate and propose an anaphoric test to predict in which position (pre- or postverbal) the object clitic pronoun will appear. Object clitic pronouns in the subset under study necessarily have a referent in the preceding discourse to which they can be linked. We will show that the correlation between the object clitic pronoun referent and the position of the object clitic pronoun is significant. Through the demonstration of the relevance of object clitic pronoun position and discourse, we will propose a default discourse reference chain in which the object clitic appears in postverbal position (taking into consideration that in Old Spanish the default position for clitics was postverbal) (Ramsden 1964). See Chapters 3 and 4 for a detailed discussion of the results and evaluation of these correlations as well as the proposal of the discourse clitic chain. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 1.2 Structure of the Dissertation. This dissertation will consist of five chapters, as well as references and appendices. The first chapter presents a general overview of the purpose of the thesis. We will also discuss briefly the purpose, goals and the central specific hypothesis put forward for consideration. Finally, this chapter will present an overview of the subjects, data and research methodology used to support our claims. Chapter 2, entitled Theoretical Background, presents the relevant literature,5 divided into subchapters. In Section 2.1, a brief, general overview of clitic position in Old as well as Modern Spanish will be given. In Section 2.2, a general overview of object clitic position with respect to periphrastic constructions will be considered. The next three sections (2.3, 2.4 and 2.5) will look closely at a syntactic approach to clitic position (2.3), a semantic-pragmatic approach to clitic position (2.4), and information structure, discourse topic and activation (2.5). Finally, Section 2.6 will summarize the most relevant portions of the previous sections. In Chapter 3, Research Methodology, we will discuss how the data was collected. We will discuss where the data came from and who the 5 As the literature within the field of clitic position is abundant, only the literature which is directly related to the present study will be discussed in the text. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 12 participants6 were (Sections 3.1-3.2). We will give a qualitative description of the analysis and explain how the quantitative analysis was carried out (3.3). The final section, Section 3.4, will be a summary of the Chapter. Chapter 4, entitled Results and Interpretation, is subdivided into three sections, each one specific to each of the goals of the dissertation. Section 4.1 will discuss the parameters in which alternating clitic constructions are found; as mentioned above, and diagramed in Figure 1 above, it is within this section where we will briefly discuss verb constructions which only allow preverbal position of the object clitic, verb constructions which only allow postverbal position of the object clitic, and finally those constructions which we call alternating clitic constructions in which the object clitic pronoun is found both in pre- and postverbal position. Section 4.2 will discuss in depth the variation found within the alternating clitic constructions and the relevance to the dependent variable of this alternation. Lastly, in Section 4.3 we will attempt to interpret the anaphoric chains which we propose to test the variation found in object clitic position. Chapter 5, entitled Discussion and Conclusions, includes a discussion of (Section 5.1) and conclusions found (Section 5.2) from the 6 The word participant is used loosely to represent the data sources of this dissertation, Le^, both the transcribed oral interviews as well as the literary thirteenth century to present-day texts which were used. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 13 results and interpretations found in Chapter 4. First, in Subsection 5.1.1, an examination of the distribution of clitic position will be discussed. Second, subsection 5.1.2 will analyze the semantic-pragmatic factors for clitic position (in particular, an analysis of the alternating clitic constructions), and, third, in Section 5.1.3 we will discuss the proposed anaphoric test for clitic position. Section 5.2 will include a summary of implications for the above findings. We will also propose further investigation into the alternating clitic constructions, including (1) a more extensive look at differences found in oral and written discourse and (2) the variation found in non native speakers of Spanish. In addition to these five chapters, this dissertation includes an in- depth reference list, as well as appendices to assist the reader. 1.3 Purpose, goals and specific hypothesis. The purpose of this investigation is to examine the factors which impact upon the decision to place an object clitic in pre- or postverbal position through the analysis of oral and written data. The three objectives to this dissertation include: 1. The distribution of object clitics in preverbal and post verbal position and relative syntactic constraints; Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 14 2. the support of the hypothesis (stated above on page 8) that the variation in object clitic position in Spanish is pragmatically-controlled in opposition to the null hypothesis which contends that variation in object clitic position is free; and 3. a proposal for an anaphoric test which will determine in which position (pre- or postverbal) the object clitic pronoun will appear. The first consideration in this dissertation is that there are contexts within which double verb constructions will or will not exhibit alternation in position of the object clitic pronoun. These include the apparent syntactic constraints such as the inability of an object clitic to cross (assuming a movement theory) a particular preposition or a particular finite verb, as in Examples (13a)-(13b) and (14a)-(14b) below: (13a) Renuncio a saludar/os. (13b) *Los renuncio a saludar. ‘I give up trying to greet them.' (Roldan 1974:132) (14a) Vine a saludar/os. (14b) Los vine a saludar. ‘I came to greet them.’ (Roldan 1974:132) Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 15 In examples (13a)-(13b) and (14a)-(14b), we see that, with the same preposition a, the object clitic pronoun did not raise to preverbal position in (13b), but is allowed to move in (14b). We will show that this property to raise is controlled by a semantic class of verbs. The second part of this dissertation is in support of the hypothesis that we are proposing: that the variation in object clitic position in Spanish is pragmatically-controlled in opposition to the null hypothesis which contends that variation in object clitic position is free. At first glance it appears that the variation in position is free, that it perhaps is a preference of the speaker/writer, and that there is no difference in the meaning (Davies 1995). However, upon further analysis and investigation, we will show that indeed there is a possible explanation for the object clitic pronoun appearing in proclitic or enclitic position. The placement of the clitic in one position or the other appears to be determined by semantic/ pragmatic factors such as information structure, discourse topic, topicality, and activation (Lambrecht 1995, Ochs and Schieffelin 1976, Givon 1991, Chafe 1994, among others). The final point of this dissertation will be to propose and demonstrate an anaphoric test based on referential discourse chains which supports the tendency to place the object clitic pronoun in preverbal position. (Variation in the position of the object clitic within the same contexts suggests that there may be some factor which distinguishes Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 16 between the two “alternating” positions.) Through an analysis of the discourse, (i.e.. the relationship between elements of a discourse topic or a number of discourse topics (Ochs 1976)), we will attempt to link anaphorically these elements and the position of the clitic. 1.4 Overview of the subjects, data and research methodology. The corpus used for this dissertation was taken from two types of sources: (1) oral transcribed interviews7 and (2) Spanish literary texts (both Peninsular and Latin American) from the Thirteenth Century to present day. All sources may be found in Appendix A to this dissertation. For the purpose of analysis, the subjects are broken down into three distinct groups: (1) spontaneous oral (the oral interviews); (2) nonspon- taneous oral (the theatre works); and (3) written texts (all other sources— poetry, prose, essays, and narrative). We have made this distinction in order to study the differences which are encountered in the position of the object clitic within groups. Variation in the position of object clitic pronouns has been widely investigated in periphrastic constructions, some using a syntactic 7 The oral transcribed interviews all come from a series done throughout the Spanish speaking world and published by individuals and individual universities in each country. We have chosen to incorporate two monolingual Spanish countries (Venezuela and Spain) and one bilingual group (the United States). The references for these works can be found in Appendix A. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 17 perspective (Suner 1980, Roldan 1974, among others) while others use a semantic and/or pragmatic perspective (Myhill 1989, Davies 1995, Barry 1987, among others). The present study considers the interface of these approaches (syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic) and provides an integrated discourse approach to object clitic position in Spanish. Raposo (1986) looks at the omission of object pronouns in Portuguese, demonstrating that the pragmatics of the discourse plays an important role in the omission of the object pronoun. He states that: The null object construction may be characterized as what Hankamer and Sag (1976) call pragmatically controlled anaphora. . . . its contents may be recoverable from the pragmatic (physical) environment, and not just from the linguistic context (usually across discourse). . . . pragmatically controlled anaphoric elements (in opposition to linguistically controlled anaphoric elements, as they show) don’t need the presence of a linguistic antecedent (either sentential or in the wider discourse) in order to be licensed: the pragmatic environment is enough to render such processes admissible. (Raposo 1986:375) Following Raposo’s argument that null object pronouns may be interpreted in Portuguese through pragmatically controlled anaphora, we propose that the placement of the object clitic pronoun in preverbal position can be defined through pragmatically controlled anaphora. In order to analyze the linguistic as well as pragmatic aspects of object clitic placement, we chose 3 volumes of oral, transcribed interviews and 14 literary texts (including Peninsular and Latin American works)— a Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. combination of poetry, prose, essays, theatre, and narratives— in order to gather our data. After marking each object clitic pronoun which appeared in the presence of a double verb construction in each text, I codified each object clitic pronoun, for a total of 8,159 tokens. Each case was coded for the dependent variable (pre- or postverbal position), along with 31 other independent variables.8 The dependent and independent variables, along with the variants for each one, are shown in Appendix B to this dissertation. Once all cases were marked, a statistical analysis was performed on the codified data. The program SPSS (Statistical Program for the Social Sciences) was used for two purposes. First, a cross tabulation was run, not with the intention of finding statistical relevance but rather to establish the variation in the corpus. The purpose was to observe principally with which finite verbs (V,) there is variation but also which finite verbs only permit preverbal object clitic position and which finite verbs only permit postverbal object clitic position. SPSS was also used to investigate the relevance of the appearance of the clitic pronoun in one position rather than another. Toward this goal, a cross tabulation was performed, omitting all verbs 8 Twenty-seven independent variables were initially coded. Four more independent variables were added in order to test the Discourse Clitic Chain which will be presented in Chapter 4. These four variables may be found in Appendix D. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 19 which did not exhibit variation in position. As a consequence, the total number of tokens was reduced from 8,159 tokens to 6,969. A Chi-Square test was run in order to test the hypotheses about the relative proportion of cases falling into each group of verbs. In addition, cross tabulations were done with respect to the dependent variable and a combination of the independent variables in order to ascertain the significance. There after, these cross tabulations will be used as part of the foundation to show that clitic position is semantically and pragmatically bound and may be predicted through discourse chains. We will discuss each of the statistical operations on the corpus in depth, along with the results, in Chapters 3 (Research and Methodology) and 4 (Results and Interpretation), respectively. In the following chapter we will discuss the pertinent literature to the present investigation. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 2. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND 20 2.1 Introduction. As stated in the previous chapter, this dissertation has a threefold purpose. Therefore, the theoretical section here will also be divided in a similar manner. In Section 2.2, we will take a general look at object clitic position, from fourteenth century Spanish to the present.9 The second part of this chapter (Section 2.3) will consider previous studies in Spanish which have dealt with the position of object clitics in general, i.e., the motivation for object clitics to appear in both pre- and postverbal position (as well as what we will call “intermediate” position in Old Spanish) within double verb constructions. We will first look at studies taking a strictly syntactic approach to clitic placement and movement and then to those studies viewing clitic position from a semantic-syntactic approach. Finally, the third objective of this dissertation is to propose an anaphoric test to predict the position in which an object clitic will appear. Therefore, Section 2.4 of this chapter will first give a definition of pragmatically-controlled anaphora and, as the proposed test is semantically/pragmatically governed, we will then look at (1) information 9 As the number of studies on clitic position in general is high, we will look at only those studies which deal with double verb constructions. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 21 structure (including grounding), (2) topicality and saliency; (3) topic, focus, and subject; (4) discourse topic; and (5) activeness. Finally, in Section 2.5, we will summarize what was discussed in the previous sections of this chapter. 2.2 Clitic Position in Old Spanish. In order to discuss object clitic position in Old Spanish, it is necessary to take into account the stages in the appearance of object clitics in early Romance. 2.2.1 Tobler-Mussafia. In the late 19th century, Adolf Tobler wrote a series of articles on unstressed pronouns with respect to Old French. He noted that the atonic pronoun does not stand in initial position in Old French, that if the verb and an object clitic pronoun begin a sentence, that pronoun always follows the verb and is enclitic. Therefore, Tobler attempted to discover a rhythmic relationship between the verb and the clitic object pronoun. He considered constructions which included single finite verbs as well as constructions with a finite verb and an infinitive (the construction which interests us here). With respect to the single finite verb, Tobler states that the pronoun leans on the verb, le^, it is proclitic when it precedes the verb and enclitic Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 22 when it follows. In the double verb construction (finite verb followed by infinitive), Tobler (1886:169) states that the atonic pronoun is enclitic on the finite verb, while he postulates proclisis in constructions in which the infinitive precedes the finite verb. Examples 15 and 16 below show these cases: Finite verb followed by infinitive (15) Vait le ferir. Infinitive followed by finite verb (16) Ferir le vait. Although Tobler (1886:186) speculates on the possibility of pronoun enclisis on the infinitive with an example like (16) above, the underlying assumptions in Tobler’s work are that the atonic pronoun object always leans on a verb and that this pronoun preferably leans on a finite verb. The verb is seen as the rhythmic center of its group. In 1886 Mussafia noted the observation of Tobler (1875) that unstressed pronouns do not stand in initial position in Old French and if an object pronoun-verb group begins a sentence, then the pronoun follows the verb and is enclitic on it. Mussafia (1886:255-61) applies Tobler’s observation to Italian, but acknowledges “that no sufficient explanation exists of why the atonic pronoun cannot stand in initial position, other than that medieval writers have ‘un fine sentimento che li faceva rifuggire dall’incominciare la proposizione.. .con un monosillabo privo di proprio Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 23 accento, e quindi di suono e di significato soverchiamente tenue’” (Anderson 1979:68). From Mussafia’s studies, coupled with Tobler’s, sprouted the Tobler-Mussafia Law which predicts four occurrences (Saltarelli 1986:348): (1) Enclisis is constant when the verb is initial in the sentence or in asyndeticaily coordinated main clauses; (2) Enclisis is almost constant in main clauses coordinated with e 'and and ma 'but; (3) Enclisis co-occurs with proclisis if the verb is the main verb in the apodosis of conditional sentences; and (4) Enclisis is used by analogy, and therefore not obligatory in dependent clauses. Saltarelli (1986:348) states: . . . the Tobler-Mussafia Law might be interpreted as follows: Old Italian texts indicate a diffusion of the unstressed pronouns from the enclitic to the proclitic position, the diffusion is in the direction moving from syntactic patterns of the type (1d) [our (4)] to patterns of the type (1b) [our (2)], the type (1a) [our (1)] not yet accessible to proclisis. In the diffusional process, the verb-second position does not replace the verb-first position, both remaining as competing syntactic paradigms. Therefore, there is a gradual shift from [VjCI] to [Cl V , ], leading to a gradual diffusion across time (Saltarelli 1986). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 24 As we see in early studies of unstressed pronoun position, the theories which address the position of the object clitic pronoun claim a correlation between the position of the atonic pronoun and the presence of a preceding element. A review of Old Spanish will reveal that this same correlation is taken into account when discussing the object clitic position in Old Spanish. 2.2.2 Gessner. Applying Tobler’s law to Old Spanish, Gessner (1893) states that the change in the position of the object clitic from postverbal position to preverbal position did not take place in Spanish until the sixteenth century. In his studies, Gessner (1893:34-46) concentrates on the relationship of the unstressed pronoun/verb grouping to the preceding element of the sentence and concludes that, according to this preceding element, the object clitic will appear in pre- or postverbal position. According to Gessner (1893:37-46), an unstressed object pronoun will appear in preverbal as opposed to “intermediate" (when appropriate) position in the following cases: 1. after a negative adverb; Nunca te ueras pobre nin te ueras mal trecho (Alex 345c) Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 25 2. in almost all cases after most other adverbs; bien las abastad, yo assi lo mando (Cid 259) 3. usually after an adverbial or prepositional phrase de buena miente la recibieron, a gran honra la recibieron (Vida de Santa Maria Egipciaca 152-153) 4. usually after the subject of the verb Hyo lo vere con el Qid si Dios me lleva alia (Cid 1435) 5. after a noun or strong pronoun object (direct or indirect) (38-39, 40-41) alco su mano diestra, la cara se santigua; ‘A ti lo gradesco, Dios, que gielo e tierra guias’ (Cid 216-217) 6. after a relative pronoun, adjective, or adverb (40) Assaz se sauieza quanta me es mester (Alex 37a) 7. after a subordinating conjunction (40) Sepas.... Que te lo gradescria si le sacasses della (Poema de Fernan Gonzalez 293a-b) Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 8. after the non-finite element (such as infinitive or past participle) of a periphrastic verbal construction (41-42, 44, 46) aun cerca o tarde el rey querer m'a por amigo (Cid 76) Gessner also establishes some instances when the object clitic pronoun will appear in postverbal position: 1. where the verb stands in initial position or is joined paratactically with the preceding element ‘Amigo,— disso/, — sepas que so de ti pagada, As me buscada onrra, non simple, ca doblada: Fecist de mi buen libro, as me bien alavada, Fecist me nueva festa que non era usada' (Berceo, Milagros 61a-d) 2. generally after a coordinating conjunction e presta/de [< prestadle] de aver, lo que sea guisado (Cid 118) 3. usually after a subordinate clause or absolute expression Por uerdat uos dezir tenedes me grant tuerto seyendo aun biuo iudgades me por muerto de buenas yentes que sodes traedes me mal conuerto (El libro de Alexandre 850a-c) Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 27 Therefore, Gessner's conclusions follow, in principle, from the theory of Tobler-Mussafia, providing more detail as to the reasons for object clitic position in Spanish. 2.2.3 Meyer-Liibke. One of the first studies of Spanish which dealt with whether or not the unstressed pronoun was originally proclitic or enclitic is that of Meyer- Liibke (1897), who postulated the original enclisis of the unstressed pronouns— clitic pronouns were postponed onto the first stressed element in the clause. He supports his theory with a claim that certain forms of the unstressed pronoun can be explained phonetically only as enclitic, whereas no forms require a hypothesis of proclitic. In the second part of his article, Meyer-Liibke (1897:327) strives to resolve the problem of the evolution from the early Romance videt me to the modern form of me videt. concluding that the change is the passage from enclisis to proclisis so that pater-me videt gives rise to pater me-videt. as does videt-me gives rise to me-videt. Furthermore, according to Meyer-Liibke, this change from enclisis to proclisis occurs in the pre-literary period and occurs not only with unstressed pronouns, but rather with all unstressed elements— prepositions, articles, conjunctions, and subject pronouns. (Meyer-Liibke 1897:327) Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 2 8 2.2.4 Menendez Pidal. A short time later, Menendez Pidal (1908) discusses the theory of Meyer-Liibke, questioning one aspect of it based upon his own findings in the Cid. Meyer-Liibke has asserted that in Romance languages, during the early textual period, that the unstressed object pronouns are enclitic, and when there is not a suitable pre-verbal element, these pronouns will proceed the verb and form enclisis with it. It is only when enclisis gives way to proclisis that weak object pronouns occupy the first position in the sentence. These two changes occur simultaneously for Meyer-Liibke— enclisis gives way to proclisis and the order Videt me becomes Me videt. (Anderson 1979:79). Thus, according to Gessner (1893:35), if both changes are simultaneous, then both take place in the sixteenth century. Using this theory as a point of departure, Menendez-Pidal points out that the rhythm of the language continues to be descending until the sixteenth century and weak pronouns still need to lean on a preceding stressed or semistressed element (1908:402), leading to the difficulties of this assumption in the Cid. where Menendez-Pidal encounters cases of pronoun anteposition and therefore of proclisis of the weak pronoun with the verb. Menendez Pidal (1908:404) also notes that after an interrogative or exclamatory pronoun, an adjective, or an adverb (direct or indirect), the unstressed object pronoun precedes the verb (examples (17)-(19)); Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 29 furthermore, an unstressed object clitic pronoun will precede the verb after a predicate complement (subject or object, adjective or noun) (examples (20)-(21)): (17) Por Castiella odiendo van los pregones, commo se va de tierra mio Qid el Campeador (Cid 287-288). (18) Vidienlo los de Alcoger, Dios, commo se alabavanl (Cid 580) (19) e los pendones mezclados, ^qui los podrie contar? (Cid 699) (20) Huebos me serie pora toda mi compana (Cid 83) (21) Si cuenta vos fore alguna al aigara, . . . (Cid 451) Lapesa (1942:152) also considers the unstressed object pronoun as enclitic and notes that this pronoun cannot be placed before a verb which follows a pause, nor after the conjunctions e or mas alone: (22) Partios de la puerta (23) Acogensele omnes de todas partes It is noted by Lapesa (1942:255) that proclisis is frequent in the Golden Age, especially after a subordinate clause: Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 30 (24) Trabando de las correas, las arrojo; y abrazando a su huesped, le dijo; y sin pedirle costa de la posada, le dejo ir (Quijote 1.3). Although the imperative, infinitive, and gerund may require a postposed pronoun in Modern Spanish, examples of preverbal pronouns are found by Lapesa in sixteenth and seventeenth century Spanish: (25) la espada me da (26) para nos despertar (27) no teneis que me cansar Lapesa (1942:255) Lapesa also observes that these object clitic pronouns lean on the participle in the compound tenses when the auxiliary verb is distant or when it is elliptical: (28) No han querido, antes atadome mucho (Santa Teresa) (29) Yo os he sustentado a vos y sacadoos de las carceles (Quevedo). Lapesa (1942:255) 2.2.5 Leavitt. Contrary to the previous ideas, Leavitt (1954:47) present a theory of original proclisis. He believes that by the period of early Romance, the whole rhythmic structure of Romance word order was proclitic in nature, Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 31 as the rhythm of the sentence stress had changed from medial stress in Latin to one of end stress in early Romance and because additional elements added to form a new sentence were moved to the stressed position at the end of the sentence. He claims that the elements preceding a medial or final verb tend to be unstressed (which is fundamental to all Romance languages) which points to the early origin of proclisis rather than to a later beginning in the thirteenth century. Therefore, Leavitt (1954:47) claims that all words of weaker stress than the verb were probably proclitic to the verb from the beginning of Romance, explaining the retention of pronoun postposition in Old Spanish in such sentences as the imperative, declarative, and interrogative by a quality of “impulsiveness,” where the speaker begins a sentence with a strongly stressed word in spite of the normal ascending rhythm. Leavitt notes the rules for pronoun postverbal position when a finite verb governs a dependent infinitive or gerund— the pronoun precedes or follows the finite verb as though this auxiliary were a simple verb (1954:214). With independent gerunds and infinitives, he claims that the pronoun clitic precedes or follows under exactly the same conditions that govern position with simple, finite verbs. With respect to reflexives, Leavitt states: “a reflexive pronoun followed any infinitive that was governed by an auxiliary verb when that Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 32 pronoun did not refer to the subject of the auxiliary verb but merely indicated a reflexive infinitive" (1954:214). Leavitt theorizes that the position of the object clitic pronoun in Old Spanish is “determined mainly by the presence or absence of medium- stressed words placed before the object pronouns” (1954:213). Leavitt proposes the following general rule for preverbal object pronoun position: The pronoun preceded the verb when the combination of pronoun plus finite verb in simple or compound tenses was itself preceded by a noun, a pronoun, an adjective, an adverb, a participle, a subordinate conjunction or a relative pronoun, or finally, by a coordinating conjunction after which elements of the previous part of the sentence were understood. (1954:213) Furthermore, the pronoun in Old Spanish usually follows the finite verb when the verb itself is the first element of the sentence (as proposed by Tobler-Mussafia) or “when any sentence element preceding the verb is followed by a pause” (Leavitt 1954:213). Leavitt notes, however, that there are gradual modifications to the above, including an increase in the use of proclitic pronouns where enclitic pronouns have usually been found (Leavitt 1954:215). He claims that the beginnings of modern proclitic usage are clearly traceable from its almost total absence in the twelfth-century Cid to the sharp increase of proclisis in poetry, starting the middle of the thirteenth century and continuing into Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 33 the first third of the fourteenth century.1 0 In prose works of the late thirteenth and early fourteenth centuries, there is considerable use of enclitic pronouns after noun or pronoun subjects, possibly due to Galician- Portuguese influence or by analogy to certain enclitic usage in poetry, and which has persisted in contemporary literary prose (Leavitt 1954:215). A second modification which Leavitt notes is the gradual increase in the use of enclitic pronouns with dependent infinitives toward the end of the thirteenth century. While the pronoun has previously been placed almost entirely before or after the finite verb, it now place with the verb whose object it is, especially when each verb retains a large part of its independent meaning (Leavitt 1954:215). He also observes a preference by the end of the thirteenth century for enclitic placement of the pronoun after an independent infinitive, whether the infinitive is preceded by a preposition or not (Leavitt 1954:216). 2.2.6 Keniston. Keniston (1938) studied the syntax of Castilian prose of the sixteenth century. Sixteenth century texts show tendencies of both Old Spanish and Modern Spanish, thus functioning as a link between the two. 1 0 We will not consider poetry within the present study. We believe that there are other factors which we do not consider here which may play an important role in the placement of the object clitic in preverbal or postverbal position. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 34 Keniston formulates rules and gives various examples relating position of object clitic pronouns to verb categories, claiming that the object pronouns, when unstressed, are attached to the verb (Keniston 1938:89). If the pronoun is enclitic, it forms a single word with the verb; when proclitic, the pronoun is separate from the verb in writing, but the pronoun and verb still form a unit. Keniston notes that when the pronoun is enclitic to another word besides the verb, the clitic may be separated from the verb by an adverb or a subject pronoun. He further claims that even in the sixteenth century the object clitic pronoun is generally enclitic and, although it is no longer separated from the verb, the object clitic pronoun is only in preverbal position when the pronoun itself is preceded by a stressed element belonging to the same “breath-group” (Keniston 1938:89). Keniston bases his theory of enclisis on the breath-group, with the pronoun as enclitic in its own breath group. He finds no difference in the principles that govern word position with regard to the type of utterance (for example, statement, question, exclamation, command, entreaty, wish), nor with regard to verbal forms (for example, infinitive, finite, or participle) (Keniston 1938:90). In his studies, Keniston divides his data into three groups: (i) where the pronoun is preverbal, (ii) where it is postverbal, and (iii) where it may either be pre- or postverbal determined Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 35 by breath-group) (Keniston 1938:90). Keniston also formulates two basic rules: (1) the pronoun follows the verb when the verb is the first stressed element in a breath group; and (2) the pronoun precedes the verb when it is itself preceded by some stressed element in its group. (Keniston 1938:90) Keniston analyzed both subject and object clitic pronouns in sixteenth century Spanish, in which clitic position corresponds to Modern Spanish placement in many ways. However, Keniston’s analysis shows some differences in sixteenth century Spanish and Modern Spanish:1 1 1. When a strongly stressed subject or object precedes the verb, the pronoun may follow the verb: (30) A mi ofendeme el sonido (Valdes, Dialogo 368.3) 2. When a preceding adverb or adverbial phrase is strongly stressed, the pronoun may follow the verb: (31) Yo las mas vezes hazia del dormido, y en la mafiana deziame el (Lazarillo 38.21) 1 1 We will include here only examples of direct and indirect object clitic pronouns. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 36 3. When a clause or absolute expression precedes the verb- pronoun groups, the pronoun may follow the verb (more likely when subject also follows the verb): (32) Cuando esto supo mi padre, nacio/e deseo de venirse (Aleman, Guzman 57.22) 4. When the verb begins a sentence or coordinated part of a sentence, the pronoun nearly always follows the verb: (33) O que los otros persiguen al neuvo caballero. . .o alaban/o por sancto (Avila, Epistolario 19.20) 5. When a verb of direct command follows a stressed element, the pronoun occasionally precedes the verb (this construction is disappearing already in the second half of the sixteenth century): (34) Primeramente ge lo agradeced (Fernandez de Cordoba, Cartas xxia) 6. The object pronoun usually follows the infinitive, although it is not uncommon to place the pronoun before the infinitive when a stressed element precedes the infinitive: Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 37 (35) Buscar los de fuera como me desasosegar con rrecaudos (Santa Teresa, Vida 11.22) 7. The object pronoun is nearly always enclitic to the present participle, although it occasionally precedes the participle when negative; the pronouns are rarely used with the past participle, but those used are enclitic to the past participle: (36) No te prometiendo esperanga de remedio (Montemayor, Diana 17r.17) 8. The general principles of pronoun position are the same with compound as with simple forms: the pronoun precedes the whole compound form when a stressed element of the sentence precedes the verb; when the compound tense begins a group or follows a pause after some other element in the sentence, the pronoun normally follows the auxiliary of the compound form; or, if the compound form is inverted in order, it follows the participle; but rarely it is found following the whole compound form, as an enclitic to the participle: (37) Elios tenian la culpa en no me haber querido creer (Cortes, Cartas 65.3) Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 38 (38) A los grandes principes hemoslos de hablar con humilidad (Guevara, Menosprecio 42.13) (Keniston 1938, cited in Anderson 1979:101-103) In this section, we have touched upon studies of clitic position in early Romance, beginning with the Tobler-Mussafia law to predict position of the object clitic pronoun, showing a gradual shift from [VjCI] to [Cl V,] leading to a gradual diffusion across time. A number of linguists applied the Tobler-Mussafia law and built upon it to give a deeper explanation (Gessner 1893; Meyer-Lubke 1897; Menendez Pidal 1908, among others), using a prosodic approach to clitic position. 2.3 An Overview of Clitic Position in Double Verb Constructions. 2.3.1 Overview of Clitic Position. 2.3.1.1 Colburn. Of closer interest to the present study is the investigation done by Colburn (1928), which is a semantic/functional approach to clitic position. Colburn studies the complementary infinitive and its object pronoun, tracing the position of the object pronoun with auxiliary and infinitive from Old Spanish to modern Spanish. According to Colburn, object pronouns in Old Spanish enjoy great freedom of position, but they are rarely Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 39 appended to a complementary infinitive which closely follows its auxiliary (Colburn 1928:424): (39) deve/o castigar a demas el juez (Fuero juzgo Vl.4.3) (40) (when negative) non lo pudo sofrir (Cronica general) However, Colburn also encounters postverbal position of the object clitic pronoun, even in Old Spanish: When the auxiliary follows: (41) dargelas queremos delant estando vos (Cid 3174) With the split future (42) empenargre/o he por lo que fore guisado (Cid 92) When the infinitive is not complementary (43) cual serie lo mejor, de ir a los moros o atender los (Cronica genera!) Although it is noted by Colburn that Spaulding (1927:343-348) claims that the postverbal position for the pronoun comes to be used more and more for complementary infinitives, even when the auxiliary is near, in the seventeenth century anteposition prevails (Colburn 1928:424). In the prose of Cervantes and Quevedo, Colbum found 54% and 63% Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. postverbal position, respectively. Both writers consistently placed the object clitic pronoun in postverbal position with the verbs haber de and frequently with poder. On the other hand, in Modern Spanish, Colburn observes postverbal position with tomara, comenzar a, ponerse a, and pensar (Colburn 1928:424). Colburn also finds that within nineteenth century prose writers, the postverbal position is used in less than twenty- five percent of the cases of object clitic pronouns, except in two cases: Baroja postposes the object pronoun clitic in approximately fifty percent of the cases with the verbs ira and poder, while Martinez Sierra postposes the object clitic pronoun in thirty-two percent of the cases with ir a and slightly less with the verbs deber, dejar, haber de, poder, querer, and volver a. 2.3.1.2 Chenery. Chenery (1904) analyzes word order in Old Spanish of object pronouns in independent clauses in his dissertation. He notes that only interpolation is studied, which he restricts to “the interpolation between an unstressed object-pronoun and its following governing verb, or another word or other words, not unstressed object-pronouns in similar constructions” (1904:1). He observes that interpolation is almost always found only in dependent clauses. He based his study on more than 50 texts, including manuscripts of Spanish writings from the thirteenth Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 41 through fifteenth centuries, as well as Galician and Portuguese texts (Chenery 1904:7). Chenery (1904:45) proposes that the usual word order of infinitive— pronoun object— modal verb to be the usual Old Spanish order. He claims that in this construction the object pronoun does not accompany the infinitive, but rather is the object of the finite or governing verb, using the situation when the phrase is negative to prove his point: (44) pagar non te lo podria (Alexandre 36.2). (Chenery 1904:45) When the negative particle is interpolated between the pronoun and the verb, Chenery claims that this interpolation occurs by analogy to two types of sentences: 1. In many sentences a juxtaposition of si and the atonic pronoun (los in this example is the normal word order (si los acorria, si los acorria su senor, si los acorria priado, si los acorria con su grant esfuerpo); 2. in many sentences the interpolated particle non and the verb are juxtaposed in normal word order (si non acorria al rey, non acorria priado, al rey non acorria). (Chenery 1904:94-96) Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 42 2.3.1.3 Ramsden. Ramsden studies the early evolution of weak-pronoun position from the point of view of their position in relation to the verb but not their internal ordering with relation to each other (1964:25). Ramsden’s studies include mainly Spanish texts and during the period 1250-1500, only Spanish texts, noting that the unstressed pronoun is different from that of the other Romance languages and with a development toward Modern Spanish. With respect to the study of medieval Spanish syntax, Ramsden notes that there are limitations in the number of texts available (limited by their geographical distribution) and a possible limitation imposed by the poetic form of the majority of the texts (Ramsden 1964:31). Although he criticizes Meyer-Lubke’s theory (1897), Ramsden admits that it is the only one to recognize the importance of the preceding element for atonic pronoun position. Ramsden discounts phonological criteria for object clitic pronoun placement. His explanation rests on the degree of union between the verb and the preceding element, stating that neither preverbal nor postverbal position is the normal one— if the verb joins closely with its preceding element, preposing is normal, while if there is no such union, then postposing is the norm. What interests us in the present study are the remarks and findings of Ramsden with respect to double verb constructions. The following is a summary of the rules for object pronoun position in Old Spanish given by Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 43 Ramsden (1964:55-103) with unstressed object clitic pronouns with finite verb parts: 1. After a relative pronoun, adjective or adverb, the weak pronoun object precedes the verb:1 2 (45) Assaz se sauieza quanta me es mester/mas tu non yes ombre que me puedas uenger (Alexandre 37ab) 2. after a subordinating conjunction the weak pronoun object precedes the verb: (46) Sepas.. ./que te lo grades?eria si le sacasses della (Fernan Gonzalez 293ab) 3. after an interrogative or exclamative pronoun, adjective or adverb (director or indirect) the weak pronoun object precedes the verb:1 3 (47) E pues faularemos de los godos como uinieron en Espanna e como la conquirieron. . ., e como se perdie la tierra, e pues como se recobro (Liber Regum 202.16-19) 1 2 Ramsden did not find any postverbal position object clitic position with regard to this rule. 1 3 No postverbal position clitics found Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 44 4. after the non-finite element (infinitive, gerund or past participle) of a periphrastic verbal construction the weak pronoun object precedes the verb: (48) Senyor, gardar nos deuem daquestes coses qe odides auem egardarnos deuem maier ment a tentacio de diable (Organya 13.33-5) 5. after a predicative complement (subject or object, adjective, or noun) the weak pronoun object precedes the verb (no examples of postposition found): (49) Por Dios de todos lo terne (Auto 18) 6. after a negative adverb the weak pronoun object precedes the verb: (50) Nunca te ueras pobre nin te ueras mal trecho (Alexandre 345c) 7. after an adverb (other than those included in 1, 3, or 6) the weak pronoun object precedes the verb in almost all cases:1 4 (51a) bien las abastad, yo assi vos lo mando (Cid 259) 1 4 Within this group, there are also some instances of postverbal position, as in example (51b) below: (51b) agora correm las tierras, desi escurralas fasta Medina (Cid 964 and 2640). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 45 8. after an adverbial or prepositional phrase the weak pronoun object usually precedes the verb:1 5 (52a) a gran honor la recibieron (SME 152-3) 9. after the subject of the verb the weak pronoun object usually precedes the verb:1 6 (53a) Hyo lo vere con el £id si Dios me lieva alia (Cid 1435) 1 5 Again, there are some instances of postverbal position within this category, in which Ramsden states that they cannot be accounted for: (52b) quando los fallo, por cuenta fizolos nonbrar (Cid 1264) 1 6 There are various examples of postverbal position within this category. Two examples are seen in (53b) and (53c) below: (53b) vos les diestes villas por arras. . ./hyo quieroles dar axuvar, ellos ivanse alabando, El rey dioles fideles /Cid 2570-1, 2757, 3593) (53c) E tu asme tollido a mi un capellano, Esti amola mucho mas que muchos cristianos, Pero elli dizielas siempre a cada dia, Sos peccados tovieronli una mala celada, Si el mal lo mandaba, el fazie/o peor (Milagros 229d, 331c, 332c, 440d, 723d) Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 46 10. after a noun or strong pronoun object (direct or indirect) the weak pronoun object precedes the verb:1 7 (54a) A ti lo gradesco, Dios, que cielo e tierra guias (Cid 216-217) 11. after a subordinate clause or absolute expression weak- pronoun postposition and weak-pronoun anteposition are both found, with postposition predominating clearly: Postverbal (55) Por uerdat uos dezir tenedes me grant tuerto Seyendo aun biuo iudgades me por muerto De buenas yentes que sodes traedes me mai conuerto (Alexandre 850a-c) Preverbal (56) Pero antes que esto fuesse les uino muitos males (Liber Reg 202.31) 12. after a coordinating conjunction the weak-pronoun object is in general placed after the verb: 1 7 Ramsden observes that in Spanish may merely duplicate the preceding noun or pronoun, and in such cases the weak pronoun will be postverbal, as in (54b) below: (54b) Todos nosotros amigos nos a denostados A mugieres et a fijos anolos auiltados (Alexandre 1465ab) Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 47 (57) e sobo/o Nabuchodonosor e fol detras e conseguiello en los pianos de Iherico e priso/o e leuo/o a Rrebletazo, en Antyocha, e fizo/o iudgar en so cort (Liber Reg 200.23-5) 13. where the verb stands in initial position or is joined paratactically with the preceding element, the weak pronoun object follows the verb: (58) Amigo,— disso/,-sepas que so de ti pagada, As me buscada onrra, non simple, ca doblada: Fecist de mi buen libro, as me bien a lavada, Fecist me nueva festa que non era usada (Milagros 61a-d) Ramsden (1964:110) divides double verb constructions (auxiliary + infinitive) into three categories: (i) before the auxiliary (lo quiero fazer), (ii) between the auxiliary and the infinitive (quiero lo fazer), and (iii) after the infinitive (quiero fazer/o). In case (ii), Ramsden agrees with Toblerthat the pronoun belong rhythmically to the auxiliary rather than to the infini tive, and thus these cases are classified as examples of weak pronoun objects with finite verb parts, just as lo quiero fazer is classified (Ramsden 1964:110). Ramsden continues by stating that lo quiero fazer and quiero lo fazer are in complementary distribution in the texts (Ramsden 1964:110). This is important for the present study as we will combine the Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 48 intermediate object clitic pronouns with the preverbal object clitic pronouns. Ramsden explains the cases of the type quiero fazerlo as being the only type in which the pronoun object is truly placed with the infinitive and thus he sees a close relationship between the auxiliary group and the infinitive (1963:110). He postulates that the relationship between an auxiliary group and a following dependent infinitive is such that a weak pronoun object placed with the infinitive always follows it. With respect to a pronoun which is between two verbs in a verbal compound (a finite verb preceded or proceeded by an infinitive, participle, or gerund), Leavitt states that “the atonic pronoun is not purely enclitic nor purely proclitic, but that the pronoun is equally as enclitic as it is proclitic (1954:212). Ramsden is important to the present study in that he has taken a syntactic, functional, and prosodic interface to the position of object clitics in Spanish. In the present study, we will also take an integrated approach to clitic position, an interface of syntax, semantics-pragmatics, and function. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 49 2.3.2 Syntactic Approach to Clitic Position in Double Verb Constructions. In this section we will discuss the major studies which have been conducted through research regarding the syntax of the verbs. In Section 2.3.2.1 we will discuss the findings of Suner (1980), who finds that clitic position is governed by the type of finite verb (i.e., the more “modal-like” the verb, the more possibility the clitic will have to appear in preverbal position). In Section 2.3.2.2 we will discuss the position of Rivero (1991) who demonstrates that object clitics function as noun phrases, and therefore their position is dependent upon constraints which affect those of noun phrases and not other particles. In Section 2.3.2.3 we will observe Roldan’s theory of clitic position, who states, in brief, that clitic position will be determined by the type of finite verb, that there are certain constraints on the double verb constructions which will compel the clitic (or clitics) to appear in either pre- or postverbal position. Section 2.3.2.4 will discuss the viewpoint of Saltarelli (1989, 1990), who, like Suner, demonstrates that clitic position will be determined by the type of verb (the more modal-like, the more likely to have clitics in preverbal position). Saltarelli also offers a notion diffusion to explain the position in which a clitic will appear. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 50 Section 2.3.2.5 discusses Contreras’s (1979) rule of clause reduction in order to explain the ability or inability of an object clitic to appear in preverbal position. 2.3.2.1 Suner. Suner (1980:300-301) examines “critically some of the most recent proposals and to show that none properly accounts for the phenomenon of Clitic Promotion in Spanish. I conclude that Clitic Promotion is not a well-delimited operation since one group of verbs always allows the climbing of clitics whereas another never permits this movement to take place." Suner (1980) divides her discussion into five parts, the first four being a discussion of the findings of others and the fifth, which we will focus on here, being her conclusions. After reviewing the hypotheses of various linguists, Suner (1980:320) states that “three semantic classes of verbs (modal/aspectual, motion, and causative verbs) over which clitics may climb” have been isolated and “two groups (‘say’ verbs and factives) which block Clitic Promotion.” However, for those verbs which do not fit into one of these categories, “no uniform explanation avails” (Suner 1980:320). The present study will attempt to show that, as Suner (1980:320) states, “[Ajlthough there is a process of Clitic Promotion in Spanish, it is not of a purely syntactic nature.” We proposed that it is a combination Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 51 of syntax with semantic/pragmatic properties which will govern the pre- or postverbal placement of the object clitic. 2.3.2.2 Rivero. Rivero (1986) “developed arguments on the basis of (a) the parallel distribution of clitics and complement NPs/PPs, and of (b) medieval doubling constructions, which differ in several respects from (reported varieties of) MSp [modern Spanish]. . . . ” (Rivero 1991:242). In her more recent study (Rivero 1991), and directly relevant to the present study, Rivero analyzes clitic climbing constructions, “based on ‘Interpolation’” (Rivero 1991:242). Interpolation refers to “the pattern where OSp [Old Spanish] clitics, unlike modern clitics, are not adjacent to V and appear to its left, preceding one or more intervening phrases, as in (1) [our (60) below]” (Rivero 1991:242): (60) Dixe que LO [yo] havia muerto ‘I said I had killed HIM’ (Rivero 1991:243) Interpolation is found more frequently in the 14th Century (Chenery 1904), but “its syntax shows similar ‘qualitative’ properties from the preliterary documents before 1250, to its rapid disappearance after the middle of the fifteenth century” (Rivero 1991:243). The intervening phrases may be Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 52 PPs (less frequent), subjects, negations, or several words forming a phrase, such as (61) below: (61) El ceruicio queS [dellas] leuantar. The service ONE would obtain from them.’ (Rivero 1991:243) Rivero (1991:242) also states that two ‘constituents’ or infinitival clauses may intervene, as in (62) and (63) below: (62) Grant derecho seria que me matases .. ., si ME [de ti non] guardase ‘Your killing me would be quite right.. ., if I did not protect MYSELF from you’ (Rivero 1991:243, example 1(c)) (63) Non vos mengue en ninguna cosa que VOS [a dezir] oviese ‘I omitted nothing of what I had to tell YOU.’ (Rivero 1991:243, example 1(d)) According to Rivero (1991:244), both matrix and independent clauses may show interpolation, “although this is rare, if they contain a CP-initial phrase for clitic support,” as in (1) direct questions or (2) with adverbials such as nunca ‘never1 , nin ‘and not’, and ya ‘already’ (Rivero 1991:245). Examples (64) and (65) below demonstrate this point: Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 53 (64) Por qe ME [non] recudes? ‘Why don’t you answer ME?’ (Rivero 1991:243, example 4(a)) (65) Nin ME [yo] pornia en tan grandes grandfas - dixo .. . ‘And I wouldn’t consider MYSELF so great - he said ...’ (Rivero 1991:243, example 5(b)) In (64) above, we find a wh-phrase in the Spec of CP position, while the adverbials in the second example function as CP-initial constituents (Rivero 1991:245). Therefore, “OSp NP focalization is not a root pattern, . . . Clitic interpolation shows no special properties in this area” (Rivero 1991:246). According to Rivero (1991:247), old clitics as NPs are canonically governed in situ, and l° canonically governs VP, so that they can adjoin to IP as assumed.. . . [I]f NP-objects can adjoin to the left by focus movement, crossing NegP and other constituents, so can clitics as NPs, if their landing site is not the first position of CP in root and nonroot contexts (Rivero 1991:247) Rivero (1991) states that old clitic climbing in Spaish appears the same as modem Spanish, but that the rules are different: [A] Clitic as phrase has two options when leaving the VP, if negation precedes the finite V or Aux. It may adjoin to I’, giving the equivalent of Climbing, as in (23) [our (66)], which looks similar to the modern pattern. Alternatively, clitics may land in an X” higher Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. than I," giving Interpolation, as the example[s] in (24) [our (67)], which are ungrammatical today. (Rivero 1991:257) (66) Dixo que a Dios non LO podria ver omne bivo ‘He said that no one could see God [HIM] while still alive.’ (Rivero 1991:257, example (23)) (67) La ventura de que SE [ninguno non] puede anparar The fortune of which no one [HIMSELF] can take.’ (Rivero 1991:258, example (24a)) However, when there is no negative, NP climbing and clitic climbing appear under identical conditions, as in examples (68) and (69) below: NP Climbing (68) Si TIERRAS ovierdes a mandar ‘If you had to manage LANDS’ (Rivero 1991:258, example (26c)) Clitic Climbing (69) Los pechos que ME aujan adar ‘The taxes that they had to give ME’ (Rivero 191:259, example (27b)) To summarize, clitics in Old Spanish can adjoin to the complement of CP through interpolation. They cannot, however, move to the spec-of Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 55 CP for two reasons: “(a) they would be CP-initial, which is impossible; and (b) they would occupy a slot reserved for operators or quantificational items, which clitics are not” (Rivero 1991:279). In order for clitics to move from an embedded clause, interpolation is used; it is here that Old and Modem Spanish differ, as interpolation is not a possibility in Modem Spanish. 2.3.2.3 Roldan. Roldan (1974) sets out various constraints on clitic placement which are pertinent to the present study. She states: The statement about clitic attachment that appears in traditional grammars is succinct: (1) a clitic must follow the verb (enclitic) if the latter is an infinitive, an affirmative imperative, or a gerund (124); (2) it must precede the verb (proclitic) otherwise, i.e. if it is indicative, subjunctive, ora negated imperative (125).. . exception (3) a clitic can neither immediately precede nor follow a past participle; it must be raised to a verb phrase above it (125). Examples (70)-(72) (from Roldan (1974:124-125)) demonstrate these three classifications, respectively: (70) Te vi hacer/o ‘I saw you do it.’ (71) Lo veo y no lo creo. ‘I see it and I don’t believe it.’ Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 56 (72) Sin haberlo visto. ‘Without having seen it.’ What is of interest to us here are the double verb constructions and the constraints which are found for the position of the object pronoun clitic. Rivero (1970) observed that “clitic promotion is blocked by the presence of an S node in the path of the clitic (Roldan 1974:131)," as seen in (73) and (74) below: (73) Quiero que sigas haciendomelos. (74) *Me los quiero que sigas haciendo. ‘I want you to go on making them for me.’ (Roldan 1974:124-125) It would appear that the clitic cannot be transported across the complementizer que but this is not the case, as can be seen in (75) and (76) below (taken from Roldan 1974:132): (75) Tenemos que hacer/o. (76) Lo tenemos que hacer. ‘We’ve got to do it.’ (Roldan 1974:124-125) Clitics can also be transported across the prepositions a, por and de, but again not always, as the examples below with the preposition a show: (77) Vine a saludarlos. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 57 (78) Los vine a saludar. (79) Renuncio a saludarlos. (80) *Los renuncio a saludar. ‘I give up trying to greet them.’ (Roldan 1974:132) As can be seen by.the above examples ((77)-(80)) at times an object clitic may be transported across a preposition and other times it may not. We will try to show that this ability to transport across a preposition or not is related to the semantics of the finite verb, that is, that finite verbs will fall along a continuum of acceptance or non-acceptance of object clitic movement. Clitics also are constrained from raising over other prepositions and other particles that might appear before two verbs, as in examples (81)-(83) below: (81) Quisiera no volver a verfe. (82) No te quisiera volver a ver. (83) *7e quisiera no volver a ver. ‘I wish I would not see you again.’ (Roldan 1974: 132-133) In examples (81)-(83), we see that it is possible to have both preverbal and postverbal object clitics as long as no other particle Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 58 interferes with the movement. Therefore, (83) is not grammatical because the adverb no constrains the movement of the object clitic pronoun. Finally, Roldan (1974) states that clitics must climb in blocks. First if there are two or more clitics attached to a lower verb, if one moves, then they all must move (examples (84)-(87)). Second, if there is one clitic pronoun on the upper verb and one on the lower verb, the object clitic on the lower verb must move up to the clitic pronoun on the upper verb in order to become “fused” with it (examples (88)-(90)). And third, if the upper object clitic pronoun moves upward before the movement of the lower clitic pronoun, then the lower clitic pronoun may not move (examples (91)-(93)). (84) Tengo que ir a pedirse/o. (85) Tengo que irselo a pedir. (86) Se lo tengo que ir a pedir. (87) *Tengo que irle a pedirlo. ‘I have to go ask him for it.’ (88) Tienes que verlo hacer/o. (89) Tienes que verselo hacer. (90) Se lo tienes que ver hacer. ‘You have to see him make it.’ (91) Tienes que verlo, hacerlot (92) Lo, tienes que ver hacer/o,. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 59 (93) *Loj tienes que ver/Oj hacer. You have to see him make it.’ (Roldan 1974: 132-133) 2.3.2.4 Contreras. Following Aissen and Perlmutter (1976), Contreras (1979) proposes a rule of “clause reduction” to explain the possibility for an object clitic to appear in preverbal position. Contreras (1979:114) notes that this rule creates a complex verb that “consists of a main verb and a subordinate verb phrase, and converts the subordinate subject into an object (accusative or dative, according to the main verb and considering dialectic variation) (my translation).” Contreras (1979:115) states that in some instances clause reduc tion is facultative, while in others it is obligatory. For example, with control verbs, clause reduction is facultative: if it doesn’t apply, then the object clitics remain in their initial position, while if there is clause reduction, then the object clitics move to preverbal position. Examples (94) and (95) below demonstrate these two conditions: Nonclause Reduction (94) Marta quiere examinar/o. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Clause Reduction (95) Marta lo quiere examinar. (Contreras 1979:115) A second instance in which clause reduction is facultative and not obligatory is under a condition of subject raising (Contreras 1979:115), as in (96) below: (96) a tiene que [Marta examinarlo]. If the subject raises, but there is no clause reduction, then the object clitic will remain in postverbal position, as in (97) below: (97) Marta, tiene que [t, examinarlo]. (97') Marta tiene que examinar/o. (Contreras 1979:115) But, on the other hand, clause reduction is applied after the subject is raised, then the object clitic will move to preverbal position, as in (98) below: (98) Marta lo tiene que examinar. (Contreras 1979:115) In contrast to these clause reductions which are facultative, Contreras (1979:115) states that perception verbs (such as verand oft) as well as causatives (for example, hacer) have obligatory clause reduction as in examples (99)-(101) below: (99) Marta hizo [Pedro llorarj. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 61 (100) Marta [vhizo llorar] a Pedro (accusative). [after clause reduction] (101) Marta lo hizo llorar. [interpretation of (121) above] (Contreras 1979:115) Contreras also states that transitive verbs may interpret the subordinate subject either as dative or accusative, as seen in (102)-(104) below: (102) Marta hizo [Pedro escribir una carta]. (103) Marta le hizo escribir una carta. (Dative) (104) Marta lo hizo escribir una carta. (Accusative) (Contreras 1979:115) Besides his general argument in favor of clause reduction, Contreras (1979) proposes five other arguments with respect to causative and perception verb sentences. As they do not directly relate to the present study, we will not discuss them here; for a detailed explanation of these arguments, see Contreras (1979). The above discussion of clitic promotion is important for the study of clitic placement in general with regard to the alternation which is found in the corpus of the present study. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 62 2.3.3 Semantic-Pragmatic Approach to Clitic Position in Double Verb Constructions We have just seen and discussed the approaches which relate to syntactic constraints to the position of object clitic position in Spanish. We argue against syntactic properties governing clitic position in “alternating clitic constructions." In this section, however, we will discuss theories which have been proposed with regard to semantic-pragmatic approaches with respect to this alternation. 2.3.3.1 Barry All of the above discussions of object clitic position in Old Spanish consider the phonological criteria and/or the relationship of the verb to other elements in the clause. Barry (1987) adopts a different approach. He considers the discourse function of the clause which includes the clitic pronoun, a study which is directly related to the present one. Before explaining Barry’s approach, it is important to note that Barry does not dispute previous studies. He states that: 1. it is true that clitic pronouns never occur in sentence-initial position; 2. it is true that pronoun fluctuation occurs only in main clauses; clitics are always preverbal in subordinate clauses; Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 63 3. clitics are always postposed onto affirmative commands and are always preverbal in negative sentences and questions; and 4. an overwhelming majority of main clause clitics are postverbal. (Barry 1987:214-215) Barry (1987) attempts to answer two questions: (i) Why is fluctuation present only in affirmative, declarative main clauses? and (ii) What is the basis for this fluctuation? The answers to these questions lie in discourse function of foregrounding and backgrounding. Therefore, before continuing, it is necessary to briefly define foregrounding and backgrounding, as they are used by Barry (1987):1 8 foregrounding tells the story; backgrounding embellishes it. That is, foregrounding tells the story, narrates the events, while backgrounding gives background information. Therefore affirmative main clauses serve as foregrounding information, while negative sentences, subordinate clauses, questions and imperatives function as backgrounding discourse. Givon (1979:51) makes a distinction between presuppositionally unmarked affirmative declarative clauses (foregrounding information) and presuppositionally marked embedded sentences, questions, negatives 1 8 We will discuss the concept of "grounding" in the next section. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 64 and imperatives (backgrounding information): “main affirmative declarative clauses present new information, while the other clause types depend on the prior presence of certain information to execute their functions. Barry (1987:215) adds that it is important to recognize that "not all main affirmative declarative clauses serve to foreground, but only a subset of these." Therefore, the principle which guides clitic placement in Thirteenth Century Spanish is the following: “A clitic pronoun precedes a finite verb unless the clause which contains it has a foregrounding function, in which case the clitic is postverbal (emphasis added)" (Barry 1987:215). It is safe to presume, then, that a clitic will appear in preverbal position if the clause that contains it has a backgrounding function, that is, it “embellishes the story.” Backgrounding is manifested in a number of ways. First, the clause can be a comment on some event in the main story line, frequently beginning with an adverb or a pronoun which makes reference to a previous event, as in example (105) from Barry (1987:216): (105) E esto les duro mas de gient annos. And this them last more than 100 years ‘And this lasted them more than 100 years.’ Next, backgrounding can be manifested as dialogue within the narrative, to embellish the main story line but not to determine it, as in (106) below: Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. (106) mas una cosa vos quiero dezir but one thing you I want to say ‘One more thing I want to say to you’ Third, backgrounding provides a larger context for the main events of the story, or provides some relevant additional information, as in (107) below: (107) et oy en dia lo mantienen seys eglesias parrochias en Toledo. and today in day it they maintain six churches parochials in Toledo. ‘And nowadays six parochial churches maintain it in Toledo.’ (Barry 1987:216) Finally, there are main clauses which do not relate the story, but rather serve as background information, therefore preposing the clitic pronoun. Barry (1987) states that the postposition of clitics in Spanish may be related to the use of subjects in Spanish and the fact that they need not always be expressed, and that they are most likely to be omitted in a narrative discourse where there is one continuing, clearly identifiable subject carrying out a series of actions (that is, foregrounded discourse) (217). However, Barry (1987) highlights two exceptions: (1) narrative function and avoidance of sentence-initial position might be in conflict; Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 66 some backgrounded clauses will be found with postposed clitics; and (2) clitics which are found in a subordinate clause carry a foregrounding function, narrating part of the story. The importance of Barry (1987) to the present study is his distinction of foregrounding (telling the story) and backgrounding (embellishing the story). Since an object clitic pronoun in postverbal position is contained within a clause that already contains foregrounding information (e.g., it is already the discourse topic), there is no need for this object clitic pronoun to appear in preverbal position, and therefore we consider it the default position. On the other hand, in a clause which contains backgrounding information will take an object clitic pronoun in preverbal position in order to keep the discourse topic salient. This preverbal position links it to its referent in the previous phrase. We will show the significance of this in Section 4.3. The present study differs from that of Barry’s. Where Barry considers the clause in which the clitic appears and the foregrounding or backgrounding information it provides, we rely on the referent of the object clitic pronoun in the previous discourse in order to account not only for Old Spanish but for Modern Spanish as well. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 67 2.3.3.2 Saltarelli. Saltarelli (1989:351) argues that "the acquisitional process is gradual, exhibiting a diffusional schedule which characterizes the often varying nature of proclisis and enclisis, both structurally and geographically.” An example of structural diffusion of the object agreement parameters are the structurally-ordered statements of the Tobler-Mussafia Law." Saltarelli (1989:358) further states that "the appearance of clitics in Romance is characterized by the acquisition of Gender and Case in the I parameters of these languages." therefore, the evolution of clitic pronouns from Latin to Romance is an interaction of subject agreement, object agreement, and cliticization are presented in two stages (Saltarelli 1989:359): Stage I: — Subject Agreement — Cliticization Rule, where V moves to I in order to acquire Subject Inflection. Cliticization, then, adjoins pronouns to V: thus unstressed pronouns appear in enclitic position with inflected as well as uninflected verbs. Proclisis is excluded.) Clitic types defined: (i) Inflected V-clitic (ii) Non-lnflected V-clitic (iii) clitic-lnflected V Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 68 Stage II: - Subject and Object Agreement — Cliticization, where V moves to I, to acquire Subject and Object Inflection: thus, proclitics are acquired as inflection. Cliticization, then, adjoins pronouns to V (or spells out case- thematic features): thus, enclitics are acquired. Enclisis is excluded with inflected verbs.) Clitic types defined: (i) clitic-inflected V (ii) Uninflected V-clitic (iii) Inflected V-clitic Stage I would exclude proclisis, while Stage II would represent early Romance, the interaction of subject and object agreement and the exclusion of clitic types which were the norm in Stage I. Stage II also describes the standard situation in contemporary Romance Languages. For the present study, Saltarelli (1986, 1989) is important in that it accounts for the shift between intermediate and preverbal position through gradual syntactic diffusion, therefore supporting the integration of the intermediate and preverbal object clitic pronouns into one group. 2.3.3.3 Myhill Myhill (1989) proposes a definition for the concept of grammaticalization: “the diachronic process through which independent Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 69 lexical items develop into grammatical morphemes” (Myhill 1989:227). Myhill (1989) illustrates the ability or inability of a clitic to appear in preverbal position. He states that there are semantic characteristics which determine if the clitic may raise or not, under certain circumstances. In each environment where the clitic can raise, the semantic traits of the verb and the pragmatic characteristics of the subject and of the clitic interact in order to determine the form. This relation between the verb, the subject and the clitic is what determines the ability to appear in preverbal position or not. The position of the clitic indicates a difference in the meaning of the sentence. Myhill (1989:231) explains: It is my contention that even in cases where native speakers may report that either form may be used, there is a distinction in meaning, although not one which is necessarily directly accessible to the intuitions of all speakers. The evidence for this distinction is that... there is a quantitative correlation between the use of each form and a certain objectively definable meaning. Myhill presents two types of evidence to endorse his hypothesis: (1) the semantic characteristics of the verbs studied, which determine if the clitic appears in preverbal position or not under certain circumstances and (2) the consequence of the first evidence, in each environment where the clitic can appear in preverbal position the semantic traits of the verb and the pragmatic characteristics of the subject and of the clitic interact in Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 70 order to determine the form used. Myhill (1989) compares his results with those of other linguistics, with respect to the function of the verb chosen. He makes the following observation: “The farther these words [verbs] drift from their original meaning and toward a more abstract meaning, the more likely CC [clitic climbing] is” (Myhill 1989:232). He illustrates this idea taking into account two factors: the type of verb and animacy. Myhill (1989:231) presents a table of frequencies of clitic climbing with different finite verbs. This table is repeated here as Table 2.1: Table 2.1 Myhill’s frequency of clitic climbing with different finite verbs CC non-CC CC% Estar ‘be’ 75 9 89% Ir (a) ‘go’ 136 45 75% Andar ‘walk’ 5 2 71% Haber (de) ‘have’ 14 7 67% Seguir ‘continue’ 8 14 36% Volver (a) ‘return’ 24 50 32% Venir (a) ‘come’ 10 1 32% Poder ‘can’ 33 145 19% Querer ‘want’ 12 78 15% Tener (que) ‘have to’ 7 39 15% Deber ‘must’ 7 55 11% Empezar (a) ‘begin’ 3 29 9% Tratar (de) ‘try’ 2 26 7% Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 71 Table 2.1 Myhill’s frequency of clitic climbing with different finite verbs CC non-CC CC% Comenzar (a) ‘begin’ 1 13 7% Acabar (de) ‘finish’ 1 15 6% While looking at the type of verb, Myhill (1989) analyzed various verb groups. Within each group, he has subcategorized the verbs and the ability to have or riot have preverbal object clitic position. Table 2.2 below summarizes those subcategories.1 9 Table 2.2 Summary of Myhill’s Verb Groups Function and Clitic Position Category Subcategory +CC -CC Modals Deber Epistemic Obligation Poder Abiilty (+CC) Root possibility Querer Try To Want Tener que Not obligation Obligation Haber Present tense Past Tense Motion Ir Progressive; Future Motion Venir Progressive Motion Estar — Progressive Locative preposition Volver — Nonmotion Motion 1 9 For examples of each of the subcategories, see Myhill (1989). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 72 Table 2.2 Summary of Myhill’s Verb Groups Function and Clitic Position Category Subcategory +CC -CC Seguir Indefinite period of time; Habitually or over irregular periods Constant Myhill’s study is important for the present study as it may function as a guideline for the division of verbs into categories and to analyze other verbs (such as other motion verbs) which fall into the same category, although they may not be as grammaticalized as the verbs analyzed by Myhill. Myhill also concentrates on the clitic at the sentence level, although he has discussed clitics at the discourse level when a clitic does not fit within his topicality hierarchy. Different than Myhill, the present study considers the discourse as a principal factor in determining the position of the object clitic pronoun. 2.4 Anaphora and Semantic/Pragmatic Studies This part of this dissertation will propose a pragmatically controlled anaphoric test for object clitic position in double verb constructions. Therefore, it is necessary to discuss, the idea of anaphor, both in transformational grammar terms as well as pragmatically controlled Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 73 anaphor (Raposo 1986). Since the test we propose will be pragmatically controlled, we will also discuss here the pertinent research related to (1) informational status; (2) topic, focus, and subject; and (3) definiteness, activeness, and center of attention. 2.4.1 Anaphora 2.4.1.1 Anaphora in general Anaphora can be defined as “a grammatical relationship in which a linguistic unit takes its interpretation from some other part of the sentence, typically from something previously expressed. . . . and distinguish cases of forwards reference as cataphora” (Crystal 1992:19) In other words, in order for an object clitic pronoun to appear, according to traditional grammars, it must have an antecedent and cannot have independent reference. According to Radford (1990:117), an “anaphor must have an appropriate c-commanding antecedent.”2 0 If an anaphor lacks an antecedent which is compatible, then the sentence is uninterpretable and ill-formed. 2 0 We will not discuss c-command in detail here. In general, c- command can be defined in the following manner: “X c-commands Y iff the first branching node dominating X dominates Y, and X does not dominate Y, nor Y dominate X.” (Radford 1990:117). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 74 2.4.1.2 Pragmatically-controlled anaphora Mey (1993) speaks of anaphora within a pragmatic context. He states that a pragmatic approach to anaphora “tries to take into account not only what the anaphorical pronoun is referring to, .. . but, beyond that, what ‘hidden dimensions’ there are in anaphorical reference; that is, what kind of value-judgements [sic] accompany a sentence- or text-anaphoric expression” (97). Mey continues: “Anaphora may not always obey the strict referential rules of grammatical theory, as in the case of the so- called ‘lazy pronouns’ and other elements with ambiguous ‘local reference,’ that everybody accepts and understands correctly because in a given context, they are unambiguous” (98). Mey gives (108) as an example: (108) He’s been in Italy many times but he still doesn’t speak the language. (Mey 1993:98) where the is a local reference marking the “language" which has not been mentioned previously. Bach (1994) also takes a pragmatic approach to anaphora. He states that “being mentioned elsewhere in a sentence is just one way of being salient" (221) and that “the fundamental issue is whether using a pronoun to refer to something mentioned elsewhere in a sentence is Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 75 anything more than a special case of using it to refer to something salient” (222). Finally, Raposo (1986) proposes that a null object can be recoverable from linguistic or pragmatic context and he takes five issues into account: (1) characterize the construction from other constructions that may superficially resemble it; (2) Huang’s analysis of Chinese; (3) variable is best characterized as a trace left by application of Move; (4) a rule of Predication of the type proposed by Chomsky; and (5) try to derive the properties of the null object from the interaction of the suggested parameter with three subcategories of the grammar. For our purposes, (1) is what is of concern to us. Hankamer and Sag (1976) propose that the null object construction may be characterized as pragmatically controlled anaphora. That is, its content may be recovered from the physical environment and not just from linguistic context The logical consequence is that pragmatically controlled anaphoric elements do not need the presence of a c-commanding Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 76 linguistic element (Inflection) in order to be licensed, as the pragmatic environment is enough to recover the interpretation of the null object. Let’s create the following situation: Two friends are out looking for a car. They are at a car dealership, talking about life, friends, etc. Then, one of them spots the car that he wants to buy, one which has not been talked about in the previous discourse, and he points and says: (109) Quiero comprar/Oj [este coche],. There is a double verb construction and the object clitic pronoun appearing before the object has been mentioned in the discourse. Because the two friends were within a physical environment (i.e., at a car dealership) which would be conducive to such a statement, where there is a car in close view of the speaker and of the hearer, the referent of the object clitic can be recovered by a “pragmatically controlled anaphora.” Therefore, an object clitic pronoun which can be found with a referent in post position would also be recoverable through the pragmatic discourse before the appearance of the object clitic pronoun (i.e., the physical environment) and then coindexed (referenced) with the proceeding referent. In Section 4.3 we will discuss the significance of the position of the object clitic with its referent. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 77 2.4.2 Informational Status 2.4.2.1 Givon: Grounding. We have already analyzed grounding in the sense of foregrounding and backgrounding in Old Spanish (Barry 1987). Here, we will briefly look at grounding in the sense of new and old information, that is, the ideas of Givon (1983). Givon characterizes old and new information as follows: “by ‘old’ one means ‘assumed by the speaker to be accessible to the hearer,’ and by ‘new’ assumed by the speaker to be inaccessible to the hearer1 (Givon 1983:897).” He states that “the chunks of old, redundant (‘topical’) information in the clause serve to ground the new information to the already-stored old information. Cognitively, they furnish the address or label for the storage locus (‘file’) in the episodic memory (899).” The notion of grounding is important for the present study. We will consider a preverbal object clitic as serving to ground the new information, while a postverbal object clitic pronoun is in the default position and does not have this grounding feature. 2.4.2.2 Givon: Topicality and Saliency. Givon (1990:907-8) divides topicality into two distinguishable components— referenf/'a/ accessibility and thematic importance. Referential accessibility is measurable through three devices: Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. ► referential distance, that is, “the number of clauses from the last occurrence of the same referent in the preceding discourse”; ► switch reference, that is, “whether the preceding clause does or does not have the same referent as an argument"; and ► potential interference, that is “the number of semantically compatible referents within the preceding one or two clauses.” (Givon 1990, cited in Chafe 1994:182) Referential distance is concerned with the number of clauses there is between the occurrence of the same referent. These referents might be, for example, first a direct or indirect object and second an object clitic pronoun which represents that direct or indirect object pronoun. Givon (1990:913) found for English that, for unstressed object clitic pronouns, that the mean referential distance measure was 1. In other words, the referent for the unstressed object clitic pronoun was generally found within the immediately preceding clause. Switch reference analyzes two clauses in order to see if one clause has the same or different referent as the previous argument. One would expect that an object clitic pronoun will have the same referent as the previous argument, especially if it is a preverbal object clitic pronoun. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 79 With regard to postverbal object clitic pronouns, as we saw in example (169) above, the object clitic pronoun le did not have a referent in the previous clause; therefore, it was a switch referent. Finally, potential interference refers to the number of referents which are the same or different in the preceding one or two clauses. If there is no change in discourse topic, then the potential interference should be minimal. However, if the discourse topic changes frequently, the potential interference is great. This is important to the present study when we are analyzing the data at both the discourse and sentence level. It is possible to have a discourse topic as well as a sentence topic (which generally will be the grammatical subject) which are in competition with each other, as in example (110) below: (110) ”Yo estoy encantado con las huertas, y todas las tardes me paseo por ellas un par de horas. Mi padre quiere llevarme a ver sus olivares, sus vinas, sus cortijos; pero nada de esto hemos visto aun. ‘I am delighted with the gardens, and every afternoon I walk through them for a couple of hours. My father wants to take me to see his olive groves, his vineyards, his farms; but we haven’t seen any of this yet.' (Pepita Jimenez, 46) Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. In example (110) we have an expressed subject in preverbal position (Mi padre) with a postverbal object clitic pronoun (me). Looking first at the expressed subject Mi padre ‘My father,’ the grammatical subject of the sentence, we note that in the previous sentence there are two references to a different grammatical subject, the first expressed with an expressed subject, Yo T, and the second instance without an expressed subject, in the clause me paseo ‘I walk'. Therefore, there is potential interference. On the other hand, with regard to the object clitic pronoun me ‘me,’ there is no other object pronoun or object clitic pronoun with which it may interfere. This me refers to the grammatical subject of the previous sentence and, therefore, could be considered to contain a “compatible referent” in that clause. Thematic importance is measured in two ways: ► topic persistence, that is, “the number of times the referent persists as argument in the subsequent ten (earlier three) clauses following the current clause”; and ► overall frequency, that is, the total number of times the same referent appears as clausal arguments in the discourse.” (Givon 1990, cited in Chafe 1994:182) In the present study we did not take into consideration the overall frequency that the referent appears as clausal arguments in the discourse. We did, however, consider topic persistence, but in a much Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 81 broader sense. Instead of counting the number of times, we analyzed is the closest argument of the referent was contained within the earlier three clauses or in the subsequent ten clauses. Our motive for considering this point was to see if the object clitic appearing in preverbal position was anchored by having a closer argument referent in previous discourse and if a postverbal object clitic pronoun would find a closer referent in the subsequent discourse, in a manner of anchoring it to that position. We will discuss the results of this test in Chapter 4 to this dissertation. We are concerned with referential distance and topic persistence in the present study. One variable which will need to be considered in the dissertation is “gradual discourse,” that is, how many clauses separate the preverbal object clitic pronoun and an earlier referent (i.e.. as a direct or indirect object pronoun, or as a proper noun in a main clause). The importance here is that, according to Givon, “a referent that was already present in the immediately preceding clause (better, intonation unit) would usually be given in the current one. Hence, its expression with an unstressed pronoun would be expected (Chafe 1994:184).” Therefore, an object clitic pronoun in preverbal position would become topical in the discourse, while a postverbal object clitic position appears in the null position and therefore not topical. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 82 2.4.3 Topic, Focus, and Subject 2.4.3.1 Lambrecht Topic and focus have been looked at by various linguists in different ways (Chafe 1976, 1994; Givon 1990; Lambrecht 1995, among others). For the present study, we will discuss Lambrecht’s approaches to topic and focus, concentrating on his definition of topic and briefly looking at focus. Lambrecht (1995) differs in his notion of topic from other linguists, stating that other linguists “often use the term ‘topic’ to refer to any ‘participant’ in a discourse (117).” In contrast, Lambrecht distinguishes between topical and non-topical participants, and uses the term “topic” for “all types of topic expression. . .and will make additional distinctions in morphosyntactic rather than pragmatic terms (118).” His characterization of “topic” is the following: A referent is interpreted as the topic of a proposition if in a given d is c o u rs e the proposition is construed as being a b o u t this referent, i.e. as expressing information which is r e le v a n t t o and which increases the addressee’s k n o w le d g e o f this referent. .. . the relation ‘topic-of expresses the pragmatic relation of aboutness which holds between a referent and a proposition with respect to a particular discourse. . . . Topic is a PRAGMATICALLY CONSTRUED SENTENCE RELATION. (Lambrecht 1995:127) Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 83 Lambrecht (1995:146) states that topics are not necessarily subjects, as can be seen in (111) below: (111) a. Pat said she was called t w ic e . b. Pat said they called her t w ic e . (Lambrecht 1995:146) where the object pronoun her in (b) is as “much of a topic expression as the subject pronoun she in (a) (146).” What is important to us is the idea that a sentence may have two topics, as can be seen in topicalization constructions. Lambrecht (1995:147) states that “topicalization construction allows us to settle another issue, i.e. the question whether a sentence can contain more than one topic. The fact that in topicalization a non-subject becomes a topic does not entail that the subject must lose its topic status in the process. Therefore, such a sentence may have two topic expressions.” An example of this is the following: (112) Why am I in an up mood? Mostly it’s a sense of relief of having finished a first draft of my thesis and feeling OK at least about the time I spent writing this. The product I feel less good about. (Lambrecht 1995:147) Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 84 The last sentence in (112) may be said to contain two topics— the product and I. The subject I is what the whole passage deals with and therefore may be considered the p rim a ry to p ic .2 1 The product, on the other hand, can be considered a s e c o n d a ry to p ic ,22 since the reader “learns as a fact about the product that the writer is not happy with it (Lambrecht 1995:147).” For the present study, the idea of a second topic is important for the pre- and postverbal object clitic positions. We will use examples (110) (repeated here as example (113) for the reader’s convenience) and (114) below to explain this importance: (113) Yo; estoy encantado con las huertas, y todas las tardes me paseo por ellas un par de horas. [Mi padre], quiere llevarmej a ver sus olivares, sus vifias, sus cortijos; pero nada de esto hemos visto aun. 0, No he salido del lugar y de las amenas huertas que le circundan. ‘I am delighted with the gardens, and every afternoon I walk through them for a couple of hours. 2 1 Lambrecht uses the term “primary topic.” In the present study, we will use the term “discourse topic” to represent this entity. “ Lambrecht uses the term “secondary topic.” In the present study, we will call this secondary topic the “sentence topic.” Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. My father wants to take me to see his olive groves, his vineyards, his farms; but we haven’t seen any of this yet. i haven’t left the place and the pleasant gardens that surrounds it.’ (Pepita Jimenez, 46) (114) Inf.: Si Pues sabe que mi papa era .. . [mi papajj. . . si nosotros le hablabamos e l.. . en ingles,, elj se hacia como no lo .. . 0j no lo, podia oir. Y teniamos que hablarle espanol a el. Inf.: Yes. Well you know that my father was. . . my father . . . if we him spoke the. .. in English, he made himself like no it... no it he could hear. And we had that to speak to him Spanish to him. ‘Inf.: Yes. Well, you know that my father was. .. my father . . . if we talked to hem the. . . in English, he would act like he didn’t ... he didn’t hear it. And we had to talk to him in Spanish.' (Lope Blanch, 223) Example (113) contains an expressed preverbal subject with a postverbal object clitic pronoun. The first sentence contains the expressed subject yo ‘I’, which sets the discourse topic, This can be seen through the ability to coindex the first occurrence of yo in the first Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 86 sentence with the postverbal object clitic pronoun is the second clause, and finally coindexing this object clitic pronoun with the null subject pronoun in the following sentence. In the second sentence, the sentence topic changes to Mi padre ‘My father1 , and the discourse topic is continued with the postverbal clitic. Then, the discourse topic is continued in the following sentence in which the sentence topic and the discourse topic again converge. In example (114) we encounter an expressed subject and a preverbal object clitic pronoun. The interviewer and the informant have been discussing the fact that youth now don’t use their Spanish because they are involved in an English environment. Therefore, the discourse topic is are the two languages, English and Spanish. But, in this particular sentence, we have a new sentence topic, mi papa ‘my father1 . Therefore, we again find two topics within one sentence, the discourse topic (language) and the sentence topic (my father). The ability for a sentence to contain two topics is important for the present study. We will show, in Chapter 4, that a postverbal object clitic referent is the default position. On the other hand, a preverbal object clitic pronoun will function to keep the discourse topic salient, where there is a new sentence topic or to ground new information by linking it to the previous referent. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 87 2.4.3.2 Ochs and Schieffelin Ochs and Schieffelin (1976) describe the steps required in order to bring a topic into the discourse and offer the reader a definition for discourse topic. First, Ochs and Schieffelin (1976:337) describe the felicity conditions between a speaker and hearer; that is, the speaker must mark “given” and “new” information syntactically. For example, a speaker will use definite articles, pseudo-cleft constructions, or anaphoric pronouns to mark “given” information, while indefinite articles and cleft constructions will be used for “new” information. Following this discussion, Ochs and Schieffelin (1976) explain discourse topic and discourse structure. The definition of discourse topic which is incorporated is: “the p ro p o s itio n (or set of propositions) about which the speaker is either providing or requesting new information” (Ochs and Schieffelin 1976:338). They continue by stating that “getting a discourse topic established may involve such basic work as securing the attention of the listener and identifying for the listener objects, individuals, ideas, etc. (Atkinson 1974) contained in the discourse topic.” In order to understand and use the above definition it is necessary to explore the definition of discourse structure which Ochs and Schieffelin are incorporating. For them, discourse is defined as “any sequence of two or more utterances produced by a single speaker or by two or more speakers who are interacting with one another (at some point in time and Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. space)” (Ochs and Schieffelin 1976:340). A stretch of discourse may have various topics which are linked through the propositional content of previous discourse, and these discourse topics may be linked in two ways: the utterances have the same discourse topic or the utterance presupposes something from the immediately preceding topic and/or the new information provided relevant to the discourse topic preceding and use it to create a new discourse topic (Ochs and Schieffelin (1976:340-341). There are two types of discourses discussed, continuous discourse and discontinuous discourse.2 3 For our purposes we will concentrate on Continuous Discourse, that is, discourse which is linked through utterances. Pertinent to the present dissertation is continuous discourse. Ochs and Schieffelin (1976:342) define continuous discourse as “stretches of discourse linked by topic collaboration and/or topic incorporation.” There are two types of continuous discourse— collaborating discourse topic and incorporating discourse topic. Collaborating discourse topics are those topics in which the utterances which are spoken match exactly the “ Discontinuous discourse is discourse “in which the discourse topics of each utterance are not linked in any obvious way" (Ochs and Schieffelin 1976:342) and this type of discourse is divided in two types, re introducing topics and introducing discourse topics. Since the purpose of this dissertation is to demonstrate the clitic position in relation to connected discourse, we will not discuss discontinuous discourse. See Ochs and Schieffelin (1976) for further information on discontinuous discourse. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 89 preceding discourse. When the discourse is sustained for two or more utterances, then the discourse is topic collaborating. This is important for the present study in order to show that the referent for the object clitic pronoun is not necessarily contained in the same sentence, but rather is part of the discourse chain with a reference either in the immediately preceding or proceeding discourse. 2.4.4 Activeness We have now seen the syntactic constraints as well as various theories on the semantic-pragmatic factors which govern the position of object clitic pronouns in Spanish. In this section we will examine activeness as described by Chafe (1994) and illustrate how activeness affects the present study. Chafe (1994) discusses information flow, following a tripartite division— A/ew, Accessible, and Given. Chafe (1994:94) states: “a new idea should not be defined as one that is being introduced into the listener’s knowledge for the first time, that it need not be brand-new to the listener." Examples (115) and (116) demonstrate this difference: (115) “. . . I talked to a lawyer last night.” (116) “... I talked to Larry last night.” (Chafe 1994:94) Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 90 In both examples, the referents a lawyer and Larry, respectively, can be regarded as new. The difference, then, is that one is unshared (a lawyer) and the other shared {Larry). Although Larry is already known to the Hearer, it is still new, as it had not been activated in the discourse previously. Activation is a vital component in Chafe’s explanation of information status. He states that u [i]t is ultimately impossible to understand the distinction between given and new information without taking consciousness into account” (Chafe 1994:72). Therefore, new for Chafe is “newly activated at this point in the conversation” (Chafe 1994:72) and given “can be characterized as already active at this point in the conversation” (Chafe 1994:72). To arrive at his tripartite distinction, Chafe adds a third category— accessible. Accessible includes information “which has been activated from a previously semiactive state” (Chafe 1994:72). Entities can occur in three states of activation: active, semiactive, or inactive, but all three states may become active within the discourse. Figure 2 below (taken from Chafe 1994:73) shows these three levels of activeness: Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 91 ti t2 active----------------------given------------------------------ > active semiactive --------------------- accessible------------------------------------ inactive --------------------- new------------------------------------------------ Figure 2 Ideas, then, can appear in three states: focal (active), peripheral (semiactive), or unconscious (inactive) (Chafe 1994:53). This is important for the present study, as we will propose that a preverbal clitic becomes focal when it is placed in preverbal position and will remain peripheral when left in postverbal position, becoming unconscious (1) when a new topic is introduced (in the case of direct objects) or (2) when the grammatical subject is brought back into focus (in the case of indirect objects). 2.4.5 information Structure Lambrecht (1995) gives us the following definition of information structure: information structure is concerned with such psychological phenomena as the speaker’s hypotheses about the hearer’s mental states, such phenomena are relevant to the linguist only inasmuch as they are reflected in g ra m m a tic a l s t r u c t u r e (morphosyntax, prosody). . . . Information structure is n o t concerned with psychological phenomena which do not have correlates in grammatical form. (Lambrecht 1995:3). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 92 Therefore, information structure, for Lambrecht, is concerned with the structure of sentences. This is of importance for the present study, as we are also concerned with the structure of sentences, but at the discourse level. Prince (1981:233) also defines information structure in a similar fashion: We may now word the basic problem as follows. From the point of view of the speaker/writer, what kinds of assump tions about the hearer/reader have a bearing on the form of the text being produced ...? From the point of view of the hearer/reader, what inferences will s/he draw on the basis of the particular form chosen? We are, therefore, n o t con cerned with what one individual may know or hypothesize about another individual’s belief-state e x c e p t insofar as that knowledge and those hypotheses affect the forms and understanding of lin g u is tic productions. Following this definition by Prince (1981), we will again use example (117). Bearing in mind what the hearer has active, that is, is the form that is being produced understandable to the hearer or not, we again see that it is necessary to place the object clitic pronoun in the third clause in preverbal position in order to keep the object the most active in the discourse. Let us analyze example (117) below: (117) Una persona que sabe volar o que quiere saber volar, y que esta tranquilo, que le gusta el aire, coge /a palanca, con dos o tres dedos, despues, cuando ya se ha acostumbrado, que no tiene... vamos, no tiene ninguna importancia el que lo Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 93 coja con la mano entera porque no se agarrota, entonces ya puede cogerlOj. (Esgueva, 9) If the object clitic pronoun is placed in postverba! position, although the sentence is still comprehensible, we postulate that this is the default structure and therefore the object clitic pronoun continues the story line, and does not add anything extra to it. On the other hand, with a preverbal object clitic pronoun, in order to link the object clitic to the its previous referent and therefore keep it topical, the object clitic pronoun will appear in preverbal position. In the present study, we are also attentive to the information structure of the sentence, i.e., the discourse pragmatics. Lambrecht (1995) notes that it is necessary to distinguish between “conversational pragmatics" (i.e., concerned with truth-conditional situations a la Grice) and “discourse pragmatics” (i.e., why one and the same meaning may be expressed by two or more sentence forms) (Lambrecht 1995:5). According to Lambrecht (1995:5), “a given sentence form and the function of the sentence in discourse is directly determined by g ra m m a tic a l c o n v e n tio n ” and “the pragmatic interpretation discourse context is determined by rules or principles of grammar, both language-specific and universal” (Lambrecht 1995:5). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 94 Information structure plays an important part in this study. It has b e e n described as “one o f t h r e e c o m p o n e n t s (o r l e v e l s) o f g ra m m a r” (Lambrecht 1995:6). Lambrecht (1995:6-7) explains that these levels are described under various names, among these being: transitivity, mood, and theme (Halliday 1967); semantic functions, syntactic functions, and pragmatic functions (Dik 1978); and the level of grammatical structure, the level of semantic structure, and the level of the organization of utterance (Danes 1966) (Lambrecht 1995:6-7). Any of the above descriptions are relevant for the present study. We will, therefore, use Danes (1966), who describes the level of the organization of the utterance as follows: [The level of the utterance] ‘makes it possible to understand how the semantic and the grammatical structures func tion in the very act of communication, i.e. at the moment they are called upon to convey some extra-linguistic reality reflected by thought and are to appear in an adequate kind of perspective’ (Firbas). Further all extra-grammatical means of organizing utterance as the minimal communica tive unit are contained at this level as well. Such means are: rhythm, intonation . .., the order of words and of clauses, some lexical devices, etc. (Emphasis added.) (Danes 1966:227) Along the same lines, Fillmore (1976) divides grammar into three levels also: syntax, semantics, and pragmatics. Figure 3 below shows the connection between these levels: Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 95 Syntax [form] Semantics [form, function] Pragmatics [form, function, setting] (Fillmore 1976:83) Figure 3 Fillmore (1976) describes this figure as follows: Syntax, in short, characterizes the grammatical forms that occur in a language, whereas semantics pairs these forms with their potential communicative functions. Pragmatics is concerned with the three-termed relation that unites (i) lin guistic form and (ii) the communicative functions that these forms are capable of serving, with (iii) the contexts or settings in which those linguistic forms can have those communicative functions. (Fillmore 1976:83) In the present study, the first level, syntax, is important with respect to the ability to or not to have object clitic pronouns appear in preverbal, postverbal or both positions. With regard to “semantics,” we will be analyzing the function an object clitic pronoun plays when it is in a particular position, and how this position is dependent upon the discourse setting (i.e., the pragmatics), which includes the position of other independent variables. 2.5 Conclusion. In the above sections, we have provided a brief historical history of clitic position in Spanish, moving from Old Spanish to Modern Spanish. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 96 We have also shown in the above sections that various theories have been proposed with respect to the position of object clitic position in Spanish. We have seen that there are certain syntactic constraints that either will account for a clitic not appearing in preverbal position or other constraints which will account for the clitic not appearing in postverbal position. In addition to the syntactic constraints analyzed, we have also contemplated theories considering semantic-pragmatic effects on object clitic position. We have described how these hypotheses influence the present study. Finally, in Section 2.4, we discussed pragmatically-controlled anaphora and the effects on the present study, as well as the role that such factors as grounding, topicality, saliency, topic, focus, discourse topic and activation play on object clitic position. We illustrate that the relationship between the syntactic and semantic-pragmatic factors will explain the results discussed and analyzed in Chapter 4 of this dissertation. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 97 3. METHODOLOGY 3.1 Introduction. This dissertation attempts to present and give a descriptive and functional explanation of clitic position in alternating clitic constructions in Spanish in relation to semantic-pragmatic discourse factors and implications. We apply a combined syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic analysis to examine the variation found in alternating clitic constructions. Our research methodology objective is to investigate the three facets presented above in Chapter 1, Section 1.3: 1. The distribution of object clitics in preverbal and postverbal position and relative syntactic constraints; 2. the support of the hypothesis (stated in Chapter 1 on page 8) that the variation in object clitic position in Spanish is pragmatically-controlled in opposition to the null hypothesis which contends that variation in object clitic position is free; and 3. a proposal for an anaphoric test which determines in which position (pre- or postverbal) the object clitic pronoun will appear. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 98 Although there have been many studies conducted with regard to the alternation in object clitic position (Myhill 1989, 1992, Davies 1995, Suner 1980, among others), a conclusive answer has not been provided and, as states Suner (1980:322) with regard to clitic promotion, .. own tentative conclusions have also been presented against a background of substantial data in anticipation of a complete (and definitive?) explanation of Clitic Promotion, a solution which, no doubt, still lies ahead of us.” We do not pretend that the present study will be the “definitive answer” to the position of object clitic pronouns in Spanish; however, we propose an integrated (syntactic, semantic, pragmatic) approach to predict object clitic pronoun placement as a contribution toward a better understanding of the apparent correlation between referential and positional properties of clitics. 3.2 Subjects. The term “subjects" or “participants” is used loosely to represent the data sources of this dissertation, which appear in Appendix A. The present study is a diachronic investigation, beginning with the Fourteenth Century and continuing to present day Spanish. Through this type of study, we will strive to show that the semantic-pragmatic factors related to the pre- or postverbal position of the object clitic pronoun is consistent across time and that it is pragmatically controlled. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 99 The data which will be utilized comes from two sources: literary texts and oral, transcribed interviews. In order to show that the phenomena which we are analyzing can be viewed in the same way for Spanish throughout the Spanish speaking world, texts were selected which were representative of the period and of the Spanish spoken in various regions. Table 3.1 shows the number of tokens found within each group. Table 3.1 Type of Spanish by Geographical Location Type of Spanish Spontaneous Nonspontaneous i/Vritten Total Geographical -ocation Jnited States 702 702 3eninsular 2483 2177 637 5297 Spanish America 326 918 302 1546 Mexico 614 614 Totals: 3511 3709 939 8159 The texts used have been divided into three main groups: (1) spontaneous speech, (2) nonspontaneous speech, and (3) written texts. These categories have been developed in order to analyze the differences (if any) that may be found with regard to the alternation in position of the object clitic pronoun. First, included within the category of spontaneous speech are the oral, transcribed interviews. The interviews that are included are part of a series of data which has been compiled for Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 100 use in investigations. We consider these interviews to be spontaneous speech since (1) the interviewer is conversing with the person while taping the conversation (all three sets of interviews include interviewer/informant exchanges), or (2) the taping is not known by the persons who are talking (a number of diatogos secretos ‘secret dialogs,’ in which two informants are taped by a hidden machine are included in the Esqueva 1981 data), and therefore it is natural language. In contrast to spontaneous speech, we consider our data which is theatre to be nonspontaneous speech; that is, it is dialogue, but it is a prepared dialogue and as such is not spontaneous. It is considered to be speech (contrasted with written) as it has been prepared with the intention of being presented orally. We make this distinction in order to observe whether nonspontaneous speech will show the same characteristics (presuming that there is a difference) as spontaneous speech or written texts. Finally, the category written texts incorporates all other texts which were not part of the spontaneous or nonspontaneous speech group. We have elected to group all texts which are not “performed,” i.e., spoken out loud at some point in time to a live audience, in one group. Our reasons for separating spontaneous and nonspontaneous speech from all written Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 101 texts is to investigate the differences between oral and written text2 4 and object clitic position. 3.3 Data collection. Once all of the data was gathered and instances marked, they were coded with regard to the dependent variable, the pre- or postverbal position of the object clitic pronoun. This study will try to establish a relationship between this position and a number of independent variables. Twenty-seven independent variables were examined. We will not discuss all of these variables in each section, and there will be a number of them that we only will consider in conjunction with other independent variables and another group that we do not consider at all, as they did not prove to be relevant after a statistical analysis was run. In order to conduct the first part of our analysis, to encounter the specific boundaries in which alternation will be found, it is necessary to only look at one independent variable in relation to the dependent variable: the finite verb. A cross tabulation will be performed and the results will be divided into (1) those verbs which only take preverbal clitics, 2 4 We are aware that poetry, or verse, has other semantic properties which may influence on object clitic position. However, we contend that, even within this written context, that object clitic pronoun position will be pragmatically-controlled and therefore may also be included within the grop of all written text. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 102 (2) those verbs in which there is variation in pre- and postverbal position, and (3) those verbs in which the object clitic pronoun only appears in postverbal position. For this section of the dissertation, we will only be interested in those verbs in which there is no variation, i.e., those verbs which only either accept preverbal position or postverbal position. The second section which we will analyze is the hypothesis that the variation in object clitic position in Spanish is pragmatically-controlled in opposition to the null hypothesis which contends that variation in object clitic position is free. In order to explore this hypothesis, we will analyze the dependent variable within the context of various independent variables, first independent of one another and then in combination. The independent variables which will be considered are: • subject/object clitic relation; type of clitic; • coreferentiality of the subject and object clitic; • type of object; negation; • genre; • origin of the data; and • the verb. An in-depth discussion of each of these analyses will be examined in Chapter 4. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 103 Finally, the third part of this dissertation, a demonstration of and proposal for an anaphoric test to predict in which position (pre- or postverbal) the object clitic will appear, will include an examination of the dependent variable with respect to: • the clitic referent; • coreferentiality; and • geographical location. Each of these independent variables will be taken into consideration in order to propose a default discourse chain, with an opposing variant. A discussion of the cross tabulations, along with the proposed default discourse chain and variant, will be discussed in detail in Chapter 4. 3.3.1 Qualitative Analysis. Once the variable positions are determined, a frequency of the pre- or postverbal position will be measured for both oral and written Spanish. It is expected that the results will be similar for both oral and written Spanish, although the frequency will be different. That is, the semantic/ pragmatic factors governing the position of the object clitic pronoun will be the same; what will vary will be (1) the number of double verb constructions; and (2) the amount of variation. The presumption taken is that if the appearance (i.e., the same variation in object clitic position, but at different percentages) proves to be the same, this will support the Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 104 hypothesis that the position of object clitic pronouns is semantically/ pragmatically governed. Table 3.2 below demonstrates the frequency in clitic position in oral and written Spanish. Table 3.2 Relationship between the Position of the Object Clitic and Oral and Written Discourse Oral Written Total % N % N% IS 3osition 3reverbal 54.4 3220 54.2 1213 54.3 4433 ntermediate 0.0 0 20.0 448 5.5 448 3ostverbal 45.6 2699 25.8 579 40.2 3278 Totals: 100 5919 100 2240100 8159 p <.000 Table 3.2 shows the relationship of the position of the object clitic pronoun to oral and written discourse, where we have combined the spontaneous and nonspontaneous groups into one (in order to keep our bivariate division). As we can see, there is a similar amount of preverbal position in the oral and written discourse. However, when the Intermediate position object clitic pronouns are recoded and placed into preverbal position,2 5 the quantity of preverbal object clitic in written 2 5 We will classify (and recode) the Intermediate position tokens as instances of preverbal position, following Ramsden (1964:110), who states that “the [intermediate] pronoun belong[sJ rhythmically to the auxiliary rather than to the infinitive, and thus these cases are classified as examples of weak pronoun objects with finite verb parts. . .. [Preverbal and Intermediate object clitic pronouns] are in complementary distribution. .. .” Therefore, the total number of tokens for the combined Preverbal/lntermediate position is 2,511 compared to 2,137 Postverbal tokens. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 105 discourse increases, to 74.2% preverba! object clitic position pronouns. This number may be a bit skewed. Part of our written data is verse, which, because of prosody, rhythm, etc., there may be other factors which bear upon the position of the object clitic. Table 3.2 is important for the present study, since it shows that there is a large variation in object clitic pronoun position (59.8% preverbal to 40.2% postverbal). There appears to be a vast amount of variation in both oral and written discourse. For our purposes, we will analyze both oral and written discourse together when we are looking at variation. 3.3.2 Quantitative Analysis After marking all of the tokens in both the literary texts as well as the oral interview transcripts, the next step was to code every object clitic pronoun (the dependent variable), regardless of its position (preverbal, intermediate, or postverbal) within these texts. I proceeded by coding linearly each of these instances with the remaining factors, that is, the independent variables, which were thought to possibly influence the variation in object clitic position. I codified a total of 8,159 tokens, broken down by genre: (1) interviews; (2) theatre; (3) prose; and (4) narratives/ verse. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 106 The dependent and independent variables, along with their variants, which were considered in this study can be found in Appendix B; an abbreviated list can be seen below in Table 3.3. Table 3.3 Object Position Variables Dependent Variable (Object Clitic Position): Preverbal Position Intermediate Position Postverbal Position Independent Variables: Subject Expression Subject/Object Relation 1 Subject/Object Relation 2 Clitic Type (First clitic) Clitic Type (Second clitic) Coreferentiality to Clitic 1 Coreferentiality to Clitic 2 Type of Object Clitic 1 Type of Object Clitic 2 Negation Verb Type (First verb) Verb Type (Second verb) Sentence Type Number of Clitics Book Type of Spanish Genre Spanish Origin Verb Placement Clitic Referent 1 Clitic Referent 2 Year of Source Education Verb (Finite) Speaker Verb (Second) Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 107 Each sentence which contained a double verb construction with an object clitic pronoun in preverbal, postverbal or intermediate position (8,159 instances) was coded. Spontaneous oral speech, nonspon taneous oral speech, and written texts have all been used previously for the study of clitic position variation in Spanish (Chenery 1904, Keniston 1938, Myhill 1989, Barry 1987, among others). We will discuss, briefly, how examples (118)-(120) below fit into the theories of Barry (1987) or Myhill (1989). Preverbal Position (118) Yo le estaba diciendo. ‘I her was telling.’ (Lope Blanch, 127) Intermediate Position (119) Et porque don Johan tovo que este exiemplo que era muy bueno, mando/o escrivir en este libro et fizo estos viessos que dizen assi: . . . ‘And since Don Johan had this example that was very good, he sent it to write [to be written] in this book and made these verses that say the following:. . . ’ (El Conde Lucanor, 115) Postverbal Position (120) Tenemos que ver/o. ‘We have to see i t ’ (Lope Blanch, 130) We will first look at example (119), as it is an example from fourteenth century Spanish, whiie the other two are Modern Spanish. As discussed previously in Chapter 2, Barry (1987) analyzes Old Spanish, Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. taking into account the discourse function of the clitic pronoun, and not disputing previous studies on the topic of pre- or postverbal position of the object clitic based on syntactic reasons. It may be said that example (180) can be explained through syntactic reasons; that is, the object clitic pronoun, if put in preverbal position, would violate the syntactic constraint put forth in earlier studies (Ramsden 1964, among others) that, “where the verb stands in initial position or is joined paratactically with the preceding element, the weak pronoun object follows the verb" (Ramsden 1964:110). As we are interested here in the semantic and/or pragmatic effects on clitic position, we will also consider Barry’s (1987) approach to clitic position. As discussed earlier in Chapter 2, Barry considers the discourse function of the clitic pronoun; that is, he considers whether or not the phrase functions as foregrounding or backgrounding. Briefly stated, foregrounding tells the story while backgrounding embellishes it (Barry 1987:214). Following Ramsden (1964), the intermediate position clitic functions as a preverbal clitic. We will consider the intermediate object clitic pronoun in example (119) to function as a preverbal object clitic pronoun. Therefore, the object clitic pronoun should be part of a clause which provides backgrounding information, rather than foregrounding. In example (119), the discourse topic is the exiempio ‘example’ that he has Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 109 that is very good. The next clause is what he does with the example mandolo escrivir ‘he sent it to be written’ and finally, the final clause talks about the verse that were made and what they said et fizo estos viessos que dizen asst ‘and made these verses that say the following.. . . ’ We see that the first clause which includes the discourse topic (the example), and the last clause, what is done with that example (verse), move the story forward and therefore carry foregrounding information. However, the phrase which includes the object pronoun lo ‘it’ serves to embellish the story, stating that he sent it to be written. This embellishes the story, that is, it gives details which are not absolutely necessary. Examples (118) and (120) (repeated below as examples (121) and (122) for the reader’s convenience) are examples of Modern Spanish. (121) Yo /e estaba diciendo. I her was telling. ‘I was telling her.’ (Lope Blanch, 127) (122) Tenemos que ver/o. ‘We have to see it.' (Lope Blanch, 130) If we look at the semantics of the verb, and following Myhill (1988:355), the preverbal clitic pronoun in (121) is expected, since progressive constructions are “the class most likely to take CC [clitic climbing],” while the postverbal clitic pronoun in (122) is also predicted, Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 110 since clitic climbing is not expected with root modality verbs (Myhill 1988:356). What we are interested in within the present study is why there is this variation, since, for example, the object clitic pronoun does not always appear in preverbal position in phrases such as (121), nor does the object clitic pronoun appear in postverbal position every time in sentences such as (122). Therefore, we are interested in ascertaining what the difference is (in addition to the enabling semantic nature of the finite verb) that might cause the variation in pre- and postverbal position. One such variable might be an implicit or explicit subject. Table 3.4 shows the relationship between the position of the object clitic pronoun with respect to subject expression: Table 3.4 Relationship between Object Clitic Position and Subject Expression Position Expressed Preverbal Expressed Postverbal Nonexpressed Totals % N% N» /o N% I S 3reverbal 53.8 1574 52.5 222 54.8 2637 54.3 4433 ntermediate 11.8 344 4.0 17 1.8 87 5.5 448 3ostverbal 34.4 1005 43.5 184 43.4 2089 40.2 3278 Totals: 100 2923 100 423 100 4813 100 8159 p < .000 Table 3.4 shows that there is significant variation in position in all cases, i.e., when there is an expressed preverbal subject, an expressed postverbal subject, and a nonexpressed subject. Through the above table, we see that there is at least a 13% difference within each category. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. I l l Therefore, although subject expression may have some or no effect on the placement of the object clitic position, it does not show a clear indication within one category to be able to explain what that influence is. Therefore, we will not consider subject expression as an independent factor in the variation in object clitic position. After coding all of the tokens, we used a statistical package SPSS (Statistics Program for the Social Sciences) to analyze the effects which the independent variables, both independently and combined, have on the position of the object clitic pronoun. We used Cross tabs in order to ascertain if there is a tendency for an object clitic to appear in one position or another, dependent upon the independent variables being analyzed. We considered there to be a tendency if the chi-square value was p<.05. 3.4 Conclusions. Through the data analyzed, it is our goal to further the study of object clitic position in double verb constructions. The next chapter will inquire into (1) the limitations on object clitic placement, (2) the variation found in double verb constructions, and (3) will offer a test to predict the position of the object clitic pronoun within double verb constructions. I will then discuss the results of (2) above and expound upon (3) with the use of examples found in my data in Chapter 5. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 112 4. ANALYSIS OF THE PROBLEM In this chapter we will present the findings and interpret the results obtained within each section. The chapter will be divided into three sections, each section treating each of the starting goals of the dissertation. In Section 4.1, we will discuss the limits on the position of the object clitic pronoun, providing a general breakdown for those verbs which permit the object clitic only in preverbal position (the extreme on one end of the continuum), and those verbs which only permit the object clitic pronoun in postverbal position (the extreme on the other end of the continuum). As our claim is that variation in the position of an object clitic position is not free but rather is governed by semantic-pragmatic factors, in Section 4.2 we will consider those verbs in which variation (no matter how little or how great) in the position of the object clitic pronoun is found. Through the use of SPSS, we will consider various independent variables (alone or in combination) which show a tendency towards being significant. We will consider such independent variables as (1) subject person, (2) subject object relation, (3) the type of clitic, (4) coreferen- tiality, (5) the type of object, (6) negation, (7) the type of Spanish, (8) the genre and (9) the Spanish origin (Peninsular, Spanish American, etc.) in order to predict which of these variables, or combination of these Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 113 variables, appear to have an effect on the position in which the object clitic appears. We will discuss how each of these conditions affect the position of the object clitic, leading us into the next section— the proposal and operationalizing of an anaphoric discourse clitic chain and its topic marked variant. Finally, in Section 4.3 we will combine the results from Section 4.2 to propose and operationalize a discourse clitic chain and its topic marked variant. In order to show statistical relevance for the proposal of this chain, we will add four new independent variables: subject person, clitic referent, clitic referent location, and “aboutness”2 6 (or “Reference”). 4.1 Finding the Limits of Position Variation. In order to find the limits of those verbs which only accept pre- or postverbal clitics, we performed a simple cross tabulation, crossing our dependent variable (position of the object clitic) by the finite verb. 2 6 “Aboutness” refers to whether or not the clause in which the clitic is found is about the grammatical subject of that same clause or if it refers to an argument in the previous discourse. (Also see Chapter 2, p. 80, for a discussion of topic and aboutness.) In Chapter 4 we will illustrate “aboutness" through the properties of preverbal position based on the nature of the object clitic referent (e.g., if the referent is in the same or a previous clause, etc.). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 114 First, Table 4.1 below shows those verbs which only accept preverbal object clitic pronouns.2 7 Table 4.1 Finite verbs which only take preverbal object clitics Object Clitic Position Total Preverbal Intermediate tocar 56 56 echar 47 47 ponerse 53 53 irse 66 66 oir 35 35 llevar 28 28 ocurrir 8 8 ayudar 41 41 ensenar 26 26 mandar 28 36 64 juntarse a 6 6 dar 26 20 46 decidir a 6 6 permitir 45 45 volverse 29 29 resistir(se) 8 8 abstener 6 6 disponer 14 14 ordenar 7 7 poner 5 5 leer 6 6 2 7 When we state that these verbs “only accept" either preverbal or postverbal object clitic pronouns, we mean that, within o u r data set, these verbs only accept pre- or postverbal object clitics. This is not to say that some other genre, or writer, or speaker will not use a clitic pronoun in the opposite position. It is believed that, even if this were the case, the verb and its object clitic would fall under the anaphoric test proposed in the next section. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 115 Table 4.1 Finite verbs which only take preverbal object clitics Object Clitic Position Total Preverbal Intermediate dedicarse 8 8 obligar 12 12 acercar d 12 reducir 6 6 negar 23 23 apresurar 6 6 desplacer 6 6 forzar 6 6 impedir 12 12 producir 6 6 prometer 10 10 excitar 6 6 proponer 6 6 rehusar 6 6 aconsejar 6 6 prepararse 12 12 acordar 6 6 ag radar 2 2 vivir 2 2 invitar a 2 2 acusar 2 2 incitar 2 2 decidir 2 2 guiar 2 2 espantar 2 2 enviar 6 6 12 salir 2 2 tornar 12 12 mostrar 2 2 sacar 2 2 Totals: 721 76 797 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Table 4.1 is a list of those verbs, of the 106 finite verbs that were coded, which only accept preverbal object clitic position. We coded all double verb constructions, including those verbs which are known to only accept one position or the other (e.g., only preverbal or only postverbal). Examples (123) and (124) illustrate the type of verbs found in Table 4.1: (123) Asi hubiera seguido largo tiempo, si no llega Antonona. Antonona la oyo gemir, antes de entrar y verla, y se precipito en la sala. Like that she would have stayed for a long time, if Antonona hadn’t arrived. Antonona her heard whimpering, before entering and seeing her, and rushed into the living room. ‘Like that she would have stayed for a long time, if Antonona hadn’t arrived. Antonona heard her whimpering, before entering and seeing her, and rushed into the living room.’ (Pepita Jimenez, 135) (124) Mary: No la conoces. Me invito a merender con ellos y se nos ha ido el tiempo. Voy a ver al nene. Mary: No her you know. Me she invited to have a snack with them and us have went the time. I am going to see the baby. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 117 ‘Mary: You don’t know her. She invited me to have a snack with them and the time passed without us knowing it. I am going to see the baby.’ (Valmy, 95) Second, Table 4.2 shows those finite verbs which only accept postverbal object clitic pronouns: Table 4.2 Finite verbs which only take postverbal object clitics Finite Verb Postverbal Totals hay que 90 90 necesitar 24 24 pasar 6 6 procurar 39 39 ser 8 8 preferir 32 32 temer 6 6 lograr 34 34 intentar 62 62 pretender 7 7 evitar 6 6 servir 6 6 correr 12 12 acertar 6 6 tardar 6 6 desear 7 7 bastar 6 6 continuar 2 2 olvidar 2 2 Totals: 361 361 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Table 4.2 lists those finite verbs within our data which only accept postverbal object clitic pronouns. The list of verbs above do not exhibit positional variation and will not be relevant to the hypothesis we are testing. They are simply reported for a full statistical account of the corpus. They are, nevertheless, grammatically interesting when we distinguish them from those in Table 4.1, which exhibit different syntactic properties. Examples (125) and (126) typify those verbs which only accept postverbal object clitic pronouns: (125) Daniel: (Con un suspiro.) Lo mejor sera decirlo de una vez. Desde hace unos veinte dias, doctor... no puedo cumplir mis deberes matrimoniales. Daniel: (With a sigh.) It better will be to say it of one time. Since some 20 days, doctor . . . no I am able to fulfill my obligations matrimonials. ‘Daniel: (With a sigh.) It will be best to just say it all at once. Since 20 days ago, doctor... I haven’t been able to fulfill my matrimonial obligations.’ (Valmy, 67) (126) El padre: (Rechaza el bocado y se levanta, irritado.) [jNo quiero mas!] jMe voy a mi casa! La madre: (Se levanta e intenta retenerlo.) [Si estas en tu casa! Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 119 El padre: (Rejects the sandwich and gets up, irritated.) [No I want more!] I am going to my house! La madre: (Gets up and tries to retain him.) If you are in your house! ‘El padre: (Rejects the sandwich and gets up, irritated.) [I don’t want any more!] I am going home! La madre: (Gets up and tries to retain him.) You are at home!’ (Tragaluz, 87) 4.2 Variation in Object Clitic Position. In this section we will discuss the variation which is found in double verb constructions but within the same context. First, we will discuss and analyze the relationship of the dependent variable to various independent variables, specifically (1) subject-object relationship, (2) the finite verb, (3) the type of clitic, (4) coreferentiality of the clitic and the subject, (5) the type of object, (6) negation, (7) genre, and (8) Spanish origin. Cross tabulations of the dependent variable will be performed with individual and a number of variables at one time in order to find which independent variables are significant. Second, we will examine pragmatic factors which, combined with the relevant semantic properties, contribute to the choice of placing an Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 120 object clitic pronoun in preverbal or postverbal position. We will propose that pragmatically-controlled anaphor plays a role in the appearance of a pre- or postverbal object clitic pronoun. Finally, after we have analyzed the semantic factors and consider pragmatic implications, we will propose an anaphoric test for variation, which will be the topic of Section 4.3 below. 4.2.1 The Dependent and Independent Variables. In previous sections we have discussed, briefly, the relationship of the dependent variable (the position of the object clitic pronoun) to some of the independent variables (e.g., subject expression). We found that subject expression could not lead to any conclusive evidence regarding the variation in object clitic pronoun appearance, although expressed preverbal subjects appear to attract the clitic. Therefore, we will not consider subject expression to have an impact on this position. 4.2.1.1 Collapsing the dependent variable In this section of the present study, we are concerned with only those instances in which variation was found. Therefore, before beginning to perform any statistical analysis, we have modified our data. First, we recoded the intermediate position object clitic pronouns, following Ramsden (1964) as preverbal object clitic pronouns. Before Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 121 performing this operation, however, we analyzed the relationship between object clitic position and 100-year periods. The result is seen in Table 4.3 below: Table 4.3 Diachronic panorama of object clitic position Century Position 1300 1500 1600 1800 1900 Totals Preverbal Count 829 202 264 86 2618 3999 % within Position 20.7% 5.1% 6.6% 2.2% 65.8% 100.0% % within Year 59.1% 61.4% 63.0% 71.1% 55.7% 57.4% Intermediate Count 184 102 131 417 % within Position 44.1% 24.5% 31.4% 100.0% % within Year 13.1% 31.0% 31.3% 6.0% Postverbal Count 390 25 24 35 2079 2553 % within Position 15.3% 1.0% .9% 1.4% 81.4% 100.0% % within Year 27.8% 7.6% 5.7% 28.9% 44.3% 36.6% Total Count 1403 329 419 121 4697 6969 % within YEAR 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% p <.000 Table 4.3 above breaks down the relationship object clitic position diachronically. We see that as we move through Old Spanish (1300- 1600), we have a steady increase of preverbal object pronouns as well as intermediate position object pronouns. Then, in the 1800s, we lose Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 122 altogether the intermediate pronouns and we again gain preverbal. It is also noted that there is a gain in postverbal position also. Looking at the data for the 1300s and that of the 1800s (where there is a complete loss of intermediate position), if we combine the intermediate object clitics with the preverbal object clitic pronouns, the figures for 1800 are similar to those for 1300. Although the results are not conclusive, they appear to support the claim that Old Spanish Inter mediate clitics are Modern Spanish preverbal clitics. Therefore, we will combine the Intermediate object clitic pronouns of Old Spanish (1300- 1600) with the preverbal object clitic pronouns in order to stay with two position, preverbal and postverbal. The predominance of preverbal object clitic pronouns in Old Spanish is not surprising. First, as was presented in the Theoretical Background section of this dissertation, in Old Spanish object clitic pronouns are always in preverbal position in subordinate clauses. Second, following Barry (1987) for Old Spanish, a clause which contains an object clitic pronoun in preverbal position serves as a backgrounding circumstance, i.e., in a position to embellish a story line. And third, the ability for a sentence to contain more than one topic allows for an object clitic pronoun to be in a position in order to stay salient in the discourse (Lambrecht 1995). Example (126) will illustrate these points. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 123 (126) Et [yOj agora esto en muy grand duda de este fecho: ca [de una parte me; temo mucho que [aquel mi enemigo me; querria enganar, et si el una vez en su poder me, toviesse, And I now I am in very great doubt of this fact: but of one part me I fear a lot that that mi enemy me wanted to dupe, and if he one time in his power me had, . . . ‘And I am now in very great doubt of this fact: but from one part I greatly fear that my enemy wanted to dupe me, and if once in his power had me, .. (Conde Lucanor, 89) In (126) we see that the first referent to the preverbal object clitic pronoun is the grammatical subject yo in the first clause. This sets the discourse topic for the passage. The second referent is a coreferential object clitic pronoun with the subject. Being in a subordinate clause, it appears in preverbal position. The object clitic pronoun referent is the one that we are interested in. It meets all three of the criteria for appearing in preverbal position: it falls within a subordinate clause, it embellishes the story, since the sentence topic has changed and therefore the clitic needs to stay within a salient position, and finally there are two topics in the sentence— the sentence topic (i.e., mi enemigo) and the discourse topic (e.g., me). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 124 Although Barry (1987) states that a clause which contains a preverbal object clitic pronoun has the object clitic in that position in order for it to embellish the story, we propose that it may have that function, but it is also used in order to link the previous clauses together in order to continue the discourse topic, that is, keep the discourse topic salient. 4.2.1.2 Object clitic position and type of clause in 14th Century In order to consider the relevance of object clitic pronouns with respect to the type of clause in 14th Century Spanish, we performed a cross tabulation of these two variables. Table 4.4 shows the results: Relationship bet with respect to type ol Table 4.4 ween object clitic position clause in 14th Century Spanish Verb Placement YEAR Position Main Clause Subordinate Clause % N % I S 1300s 3reverbal 52.6 564 100 246 Postverbal 47.4 508 0.0 C Totals 100 1072 100 246 p <.000 Table 4.4 below shows that all of the object clitic pronouns in Old Spanish within subordinate clauses are preverbal (as illustrated by example 123 above), and that there is significant amount of fluctuation in the object clitic pronoun when it is found in a main clause. Table 4.4 supports the Tobler-Mussafia law and Barry’s backgrounding, a syntactic Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. functional constraint. For the present study, we show that the preverbal object clitic position marks the topicality of an anaphoric discourse referent. As noted by Lambrecht (1995), it is possible for a sentence to have more than one topic. Therefore, in example (126) we find the clausal topic, that is aquel mi enemigo and the preposed object clitic pronoun mei which is referentially linked to the discourse topic yo, two clauses earlier and me, temo in the previous phrase. Example (127) again contains a preverbal object clitic pronoun: (127) . . . [ella] dixo a su padre et a su madre que [tales cosas le dixiera don Alvar Hanez, [que ante queria seer muerta que casar con el];. [El conde non lO ; quiso dezir esto a don Alvar Hanez, mas dixol que su fija que non avia entonge voluntad de casar. . . . [she] said to her father and to her mother that such things to him she told Don Alvar Hanez, that before wanted to be dead than to marry with him. The Count no it wanted to say this to Don Alvar Hanez, but he told him that his daughter that no had then intention of marry. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 126 \ .. [she] said to her father and mother that she had told Don Alvar Hanez such things, that she wanted to be dead rather than marry him. The Count didn’t want to say this to Don Alvar Hanez, but he told him that his daughter had no intention of marrying.’ (El Conde Lucanor, 168) First, although it has been shown in the literature (Barry 1987) that object clitics are postverbal in main clauses. Example (127) is a counterexample. Table 4.4 above shows that, within our data set, there is a vast amount of variation in pre- or postverbal position: 52.6% preverbal position in main clauses to 47.4% postverbal position in subordinate clauses. If we follow Barry (1987), we would expect the object clitic pronoun to fall in preverbal position if the object clitic pronoun is found within a clause which provides backgrounding in contrast to foregrounding. Analyzing the last two clauses of (127), we see that the last clause continues the story line, dixol que su fija que non avia entonge voluntad de casar, while the previous clause, although a main clause, embellishes the story, e.g., it isn’t necessary for the story line: El conde non to quiso decir The Count didn’t want to tell him it.’ It is possible to leave this clause out all together and still have a main idea. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Finally, we can also have competing topics; that is, we have two topics in one sentence. First, we have the sentence topic, el conde The Count’, which, being the grammatical subject, is salient. On the other hand, we have the preverbal object clitic pronoun, which is the referent of the entire previous discourse clause. In the present study, we will show that example (127) can be explained through anaphoric reference. The object clitic !Oj is anaphoric with the clause [que ante queria seer muerta que casar con el]j, hence the preverbal position of the object clitic. 4.2.1.3 Object clitic position and verb placement in 14th Century Spanish One would expect to find a large percentage of postverbal object clitic pronouns as well as intermediate position pronouns because of the syntactic/semantic constraints on position, e.g., the fact that (1) an object pronoun cannot appear in preverbal position with a sentence initial or clause initial verb and (2) subordinate clauses always contain preverbal object clitic pronouns (as seen in Table 4.4 above). Therefore, in order to examine whether or not verb placement held as being significant in Old Spanish, we analyzed the relationship between object clitic position with respect to verb placement in the 1300s (the 14th Century). Table 4.5 below shows the results of this cross tabulation. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 128 Table 4.5 Relationship between object clitic position with respect to verb placement in the 14th Century Verb Placement Year Position Noninitial Absolute Sentence or Clause Initial V o NV o h 1300s 3reverbal 51.7 524 50.0 152 ntermediate 8.1 82 50.0 152 Postverbal 40.2 408 0.0 C Totals 100 1014 100 304 p <.071 Table 4.5 shows that we coded verb placement as appearing in one of two places: (1) noninitial position or (2) (absolute) sentence or clause initial. Examples (128)-(130) demonstrate these verb positions in the sentences. Noninitial Position (128) Et por todo esto [non lo quiso dexar. And for all this no it she wanted to drop. ‘And for all of this she didn’t want to drop it.’ (El Conde Lucanor, 166) Clause Initial Position (129) El ordeno este sancto sacramento, [quisolo ordenar aviendo regebido .. . He ordered this sanction sacrament, he wanted it to order having received . . . Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. ‘He ordered this sanction sacrament, he wanted to order it having received... (El Conde Lucanor, 307) (130) . . . et comengo a jurar que [los faria matar a todos de muy crueles muertes. . . . and he began to swear that them he would kill to all of very cruel deaths . .and he began to sweat that he would kill all of them cruelly.’ (El Conde Lucanor, 269) Example (128) is an instance in which the verb is within the sentence, i.e., not sentence or clause initial. Therefore, the clitic is “free” to appear in any one of the three positions-preverbal, intermediate, or postverbal— and Table 4.4 shows this to be the case: 51.7% preverbal, 8.1% intermediate and 40.2% postverbal. On the other hand, example (129) contains a verb which is clause initial. The object clitic pronoun appears in intermediate position, therefore not violating the rule of object clitic placement in Old Spanish. Finally, example (130) is also in clause initial position and carries a preverbal object clitic pronoun. However, this position does not violate object clitic position rules. We can see that it is clause initial, but it is also a subordinate clause introduced by que ‘that’. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 130 The cross tabulation in Table 4.5 was to see whether or not verb placement is significant for 14th Century Spanish. The results do not show that verb placement has an effect on object clitic position, since p <.071 and must be below .05 in order to be significant; therefore, we will not discuss the examples above in more detail. The results which we have are not surprising. During the 13th Century, object clitic pronouns appeared in postverbal position in the main clause, what we call the default position. Table 4.3 above shows this to be the case: 41.9% preverbal, 5.8% intermediate, and 52.2% postverbal. Although there is a large number of object clitic pronouns found in preverbal position, this is not surprising, since clitics are always found in preverbal position in subordinate clauses. Our results may be a bit skewed, as the present study contains little data for 19th Century and no data for the 18th Century. It would be presumed that there would be a decrease in the amount of preverbal object clitic pronouns, as the evolution of the object clitic pronoun and therefore the fluctuation in position of the object clitic pronoun during the 16th and 17th . Further investigation, with the analysis of data for the 17th Century and more data for the 18th Century, is necessary in order to test this hypothesis. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 4.2.1.4 Object clitic pronoun position and coreferentiality To this point all of our examples have dealt with the position of object clitic pronouns which have not been coreferential with the subject of the sentence. Table 4.6 Effect of coreferentiality on object clitic pronoun position Coreferentiality Position +Coref. -Coref. Impersonal Total Preverbal Count 1053 2640 383 4076 % within POSA 25.8% 64.8% 9.4% 100.0% % within COREFA 51.3% 58.8% 89.1% 58.5% % of Total 15.1% 37.9% 5.5% 58.5% Postverbal Count 998 1848 47 2893 % within POSA 34.5% 63.9% 1.6% 100.0% % within COREFA 48.7% 41.2% 10.9% 41.5% % of Total 14.3% 26.5% .7% 41.5% Count 2051 4488 430 6969 % within POSA 29.4% 64.4% 6.2% 100.0% % within COREFA 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % of Total 29.4% 64.4% 6.2% 100.0% p <.000 Table 4.6 illustrates the distribution of the tokens in regard to coreferentiality-coreferential with the grammatical subject, not coreferential with the grammatical subject, and impersonal/passive expressions. The results of the SPSS analysis show that the relationship between object clitic pronoun position and coreferentiality is relevant. From the table above, we see that coreferential object clitic pronouns Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 132 appear in pre- and postverbal position almost equally (51.3% preverbal to 48.7% in postverbal). Within the category of noncoreferential pronouns, there is more of a variation: 58.8% preverbai and 41.2% postverbal. Finally, within the group of Impersonal/Passive constructions, the variation appears to be great: 89.1% preverbal to 10.9% postverbal.2 8 Because of the properties of the Impersonal/Passive constructions, we will not consider those cases. Example (131) below illustrates the type of construction where the clitic is coreferential with an argument in the same sentence: (131) En este caso . . . orita ses quiere retirar el juezt. In this case .. . now [himself] wants to retire the judge. ‘In this case . . . the judge wants to retire now.’ (Lope Blanch, 160) In example (131) we see that a coreferential, expressed postverbal subject appears with a preverbal clitic. As a coreferential object clitic cannot be more topical or salient in a discourse, it is not possible to say that the clitic is found in one position or another for that reason. As there is no statistical difference in the appearance of the object clitic pronoun 2 8 One would expect that within the impersonal/passive constructions that with regard to coreferentiality there would be 100% preverbal position. However, within our data set, 10.9% of these double verb constructions had postverbal clitic position due an expressed uno ‘one’ and then a postverbal object clitic pronoun, as in a phrase such as Uno puede perderse ‘One can get lost.’ Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. when it is coreferential with the grammatical subject, we will not consider coreferentiality to be a determining factor in the position of the object clitic pronoun. 4.2.1.5 Object clitic position and the finite verb. The next independent variable we observed was the position of the object clitic pronoun with respect to the finite verb. As shown in Section 4.1 above, there are syntactic constraints which prohibit the variation in position of the object clitic pronoun. After omitting those verbs which only permit pre- or postverbal object pronoun clitics, the list of 105 verbs with which we started has diminished to 29 verbs in which variation appears. A cross tabulation of the object clitic position with respect to these verbs show that there is a tendency towards this independent variable being significant. Table 4.7 below shows the results of the cross tabulation: Table 4.7 Position of object clitic pronoun with regard to finite verb Verb Preverbal Position Postverbal Position Count % of Total Count % of Tota poder 997 58.3 713 41.7 estar 381 88.0 52 12.C querer 386 40.2 575 59.E ir a 602 64.8 327 35.2 ir 213 94.7 12 5.2 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 134 Table 4.7 Position of object clitic pronoun with regard to finite verb Verb Preverbal Position Postverbal Position Count % of Total Count % of Tota pensar 2 2.7 71 97.2 echar 115 29.6 273 70.4 poner 10 32.3 21 67.7 deber 153 35.7 275 64.2 dejar 210 90.5 22 9.5 comenzar a 97 63.0 57 37.C ver 77 92.8 6 7.2 saber 22 42.3 30 57.7 volver 48 25.0 144 75.C empezar a 20 21.5 73 78.5 andar 22 64.7 12 35.2 seguir 26 92.9 2 7.1 hacer 444 98.7 6 1.2 venir a 22 26.2 62 73.5 tratar de 6 14.6 35 85.4 llegar 6 14.6 35 85.4 atrever 92 93.9 6 6.1 acabarde 43 68.3 20 31.7 convenir 12 46.2 14 53.8 sentir 6 31.6 13 68.4 parecer 12 41.4 17 58.6 quedar 15 71.4 6 28.6 terminar 7 53.8 6 46.2 haber de 30 78.9 8 21.1 p < .000 The purpose of Table 4.7 is to show that, with the 29 verbs which have variation in object clitic position, there is a tendency for these verbs to have an effect on the position of the object clitic pronoun. Although some of these verbs may be grouped into lexical-semantical classes (e.g., Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 135 motion verbs, modals, etc.), there is no apparent pattern. Examples (132)-(137) below illustrate the variation found in verbs such as those found in Table 4.7: Preverbal Position (Humilde.) i,La vuelvo a escribir? (Humble.) It [the letter] I again to write? (Humble.) Should I type it again?’ (Tragaluz, 72) Un momento.. . Lo puedo hacer hoy; mas adelante ya no podria. One moment.. It I can do today; more ahead already no I could. One moment... I can do it today; before I couldn’t.’ (Tragaluz, 104) Quiero darte un beso. I want to give you a kiss.’ (132) Encama: Encama: ’Encarna: (133) Vicente: Vicente: ‘Vicente: (134) El padre: ‘El padre: Postverbal Position (135) Encarna: Encarna: No te estoy proponiendo nada. Puede que no vuelva a decirtelo. No you I am proposing nothing. It can that no I return to say to you it. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 136 ‘Encama: I’m not proposing anything to you. It might be that I won’t say it to you again.’ (Tragaluz, 77) Ahora no puedo avisarla. Now no I can advise her. No I can’t contact her.’ (Tragaluz, 106) El queria engariarse. . . y ver claro; yo queria salvarlo... y matarlo. . . . ‘Mario: He wanted to deceive himself... and see clearly; I wanted to save him .. . and kill him. (136) Encarna: Encarna: ‘Encama: (137) Mario: (Tragaluz, 168) 4.2.1.6 Object clitic position and the type of object. We next analyzed the relationship between the object clitic pronoun and the type of object. The type of clitic was subcategorized as: (1) animate direct objects; (2) inanimate direct objects; (3) indirect object; and (4) other clitics (reflexive and ethical dative). Performing a cross tabulation of the dependent variable with the independent variable type of object, we find that this independent variable is significant. Table 4.8 below shows the relationship between these two variables. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 137 Table 4.8 Object clitic position in relation to Type of Object Position D.O. Animate D.O. Inanimate IO Other V o N V o N V o N V o 3reverbal 38.1 1388 54.4 697 58.0 889 52.1 1102 Postverbal 31.9 651 45.6 584 42.0 656 47.9 1002 100 2039 100 1281 100 1545 100 2104 p < .000 Table 4.8 illustrates the relationship between the object clitic position in relation to the type of object. As can be seen, the predominant amount of variation appears within the group of direct object animate, 68.1% preverbai, 31.9% postverbal. We note that, within the other three groups, there is a closer division between preverbal and postverbal object clitic pronoun. Examples (138)-(143) show these object pronoun types: Preverbal Position Direct Object Animate (138) Estos y otros razonamientos mas adujo Pepita para que yo aprendiese a montar a caballo, y quede tan convencido de lo util que es la equitacion para un misionero, que le prometi aprender en seguida, tomando a mi padre por maestro. These and other reasonings more alleged Pepita for that I learn to mount a horse, and I stayed so convinced of how useful that it is the equitation for a missionary, that her I promised to leam in pursue, taking to my father for teacher. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 138 These and other reasonings suggested by Pepita so that I would I learn to ride a horse, and I was so convinced of how useful equitation would be for missionary, that I promised her to learn right away, taking to my father as teacher.’ (Pepita Jimenez, 93) Direct Object inanimate (139) Mario: ^No es a mi hermano a quien se lo tendrias que proponer? Mario: No is to my brother to whom [se] it you have to propose? ‘Mario: Isn’t it my brother you should have to propose it to?’ (Tragaluz, 150) Indirect Object (140) Vicente: ^Le estas haciendo una proposition de matrimonio? Vicente: To her you are making a proposition of marriage? ‘Vicente: You are proposing to her? (Tragaluz, 143) Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 139 Postverbal Position Direct Object Animate (141) Los estudiantes salen. Elisa trata de imitarlos, pero Miguelin tira de su brazo y la obliga a sentarse. .. . The students they leave. Elisa tries to imitate them, but Miguelin takes her by the arm and makes her sit down. . . .’ (Oscuridad, 57) Direct Object Inanimate (142) Carlos: . . . Y me extrana mucho que vosotros, viejos ya en la institucion, podais dudarlo, ni por un momento. . . . Carlos: . . . And me surprise a lot that you, old already in the institution, can doubt it, nor for a moment. . . . ‘Carlos: .. . And it surprises me a lot that you, veterans in the institution, can doubt it, even for a moment. . . .’ (Tragaluz, 87) Indirect Object (143) Don Pablo: Pues hay que convencerle de que es un ser util y de que tiene abiertos todos los caminos, si se atreve. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 140 Don Pablo: Well it is necessary that to convince him of that is a human useful and of that he has open all of the walks if he dares. ‘Don Pablo: Well it is necessary to convince him that he is a useful human being and that he has all of the walks open to him if he dares [to take them].’ (Oscuridad, 67) Myhill (1992:224) presents a topicality hierarchy for CC (clitic climbing). Table 4.9 below demonstrates this hierarchy considering mainly Person in relation to subject and object clitic: Table 4.9 Myhill’s topicality hierarchy for clitic position SUBJECT % 2 1 3HS 30 CL % 2 X 1 34 3HS 22 21 30 09 23 21 X Table 4.9 illustrates the relationship between the object clitic pronoun (CL) and the grammatical subject (SUBJECT) of the discourse. Looking at the table above, we see that Myhill has classified in his hierarchy, with regard to both the CL and the SUBJECT, that 2n d person is Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 141 higher than 1s t person, which is higher than 3rd person animate, and finally 3rd person other (nonanimate singular and all plural forms) are the lowest in topicality. Table 4.9 is broken into two halves diagonally, indicated by the “X.” The “X” at each level indicates a coreferential object clitic pronoun with the subject, as in example (144) below: (144) Muchacha, ^quieresj casarte, conmigo? Young lady, you want to marry [yourself] with me? ‘Young lady, do you want to marry me? (Pepita Jimenez, 50) In (144) we find a second person object clitic pronoun which is coreferential with the grammatical subject. Therefore, on the topicality scale in Table 4.9, we would look at the “2" in the first column of numbers next to clitic and then the “2" across the top with regard to SUBJECT, and find that there is an “X” in the topicality for that particular combination. As Table 4.8 illustrated above, when a clitic pronoun is coreferential with its grammatical subject, there is almost a 50/50 split in the appearance of the object clitic pronoun; therefore, no comparison can be made as to one being more “topical” than another. The coreferential object clitic pronouns with their grammatical subject form the diagonal which separates when preverbal object clitic position should be found and when it is not expected. What appears Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 142 above the diagonal line (in the shaded section of Table 4.9) are the contexts when one would expect to find a preverbal object clitic pronoun; what appears below the diagonal line are the contexts when one would expect to find a postverbal object clitic pronoun. Examples (145) and (146) demonstrate these contexts: (145) Ttij tienes un enfermo, se muere, no sabes bien de que se ha muerto, entonces de la autopsia. . .tej va, a dar el resultadOj. You have a patient, he dies, no you know well of what himself has died, then from the autopsy, you going to give the result. ‘You have a patient, he dies, you don’t know from what he has died, then from the autopsy, you get the result.’ (Esgueva, 136) (146) Oigaji YOj queria, preguntarle, de esto que ustedj nos estaba ensenando. Platiqueme.. . ‘Listen: I wanted to ask you about what you were showing us. Tell me .. . (Lope Blanch, 142) In (145) we find a second person CL (te) with a third person other SUBJECT (the autopsy). Looking at Table 4.9, we would expect that the object clitic pronoun is in preverbal position (83% of the time), and it is. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 143 On the other hand, in example (146), we have a third person human object CL and a first person SUBJECT. Using Table 4.9, we would expect the object clitic pronoun in preverbal position 21% of the time or, in 79% of the cases, we would expect to have a postverbal object clitic pronoun, which is the case here. In our initial study we had not coded for subject person. In order to be able to compare our results with those of Myhill, we took a subset of our data and then performed a random sample from that subset. The results may be found below in Table 4.10. Table 4.10 Relationship Between Clitic and Subject Person Controlled by Position Subject Person Clitic 2 1 3A 30 2 Preverbal Postverbal 1 7 0 0 0 0 1 Preverbal Postverbal 0 4 1 1 3 0 3A Preverbal Postverbal 0 3 0 1 3 1 30 Preverbal Postverbal 1 2 1 4 p <.000 In Myhill’s Table above (Table 4.9), Myhill shows the tendency for clitic climbing dependent upon the object clitic pronoun in relation to the subject person. In Table 4.10, we show the preverbal and postverbal Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 144 tendencies with respect to the object clitic pronoun in relation to the subject person. We see that the tendencies are parallel in all categories with the exception of one, which is highlighted in bold. Our data shows that a first person subject is higher in topicality than a second person object clitic pronoun (highlighted in bold). Myhill states that “in some languages first person outranks second person, while in other languages the reverse is true” (Myhill 1989:241). However, even if we flipped first and second person, we would still have a discrepancy, but this time with the first person clitic and the second person subject. We suggest that the difference here is related to an element in the discourse which favors leaving the clitic pronoun in postverbal position. We will look at this more closely during the course of our discussion of the proposed anaphoric Discourse Clitic Chain in Section 4.3. 4.2.1.7 Object clitic position and the type of clitic. Our next analysis involves the position of the object clitic pronoun and the type of clitic, that is, first person singular, second person singular, etc. Table 4.11 below separates each of the object clitic pronouns that we encountered, the number of tokens for each, and the percentage that such number represents. Table 4.11 illustrates that the object clitic position in relation to the type of clitic is significant. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 145 Analyzing Table 4.11, we see that there is a significant amount of preverbal object clitic position with animate objects, i.e., the shaded areas presented in the table.2 9 What is interesting to us here is the object clitic pronoun te. In Myhill’s (1992) topicality hierarchy we would expect to have more preverbal object clitic pronouns, as second person singular is at the highest level of topicality. Table 4.11 Object clitic position in relation to the type of clitic Clitic Preverbal Postverbal Count % of Total Count % of Total Me s X V s N N Te o w w Lo 616 67.6 295 32.4 La 263 69.9 113 30.1 Nos 253 56.5 195 43.6 Os 30 17.3 143 82.7 Los 120 61.5 75 38.5 Las 47 77.0 14 23.C Le X x\x* X X X X >\\\\H 3 Les 135 78.5 37 21.5 Se W V ^ \w ^ Ovxxx^ Lo/Le 332 53.1 293 46.£ Imp se 359 89.3 43 10.7 No ret 24 85.7 4 14.3 Se/le 35 40.2 52 59.6 p < .000 2 9 We consider only the singular forms here, since, following Myhill (1992), all plurals fall within the third person other category, and therefore have the lowest level of topicality. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 146 In order to see the difference in the number of cases of second person object clitic pronouns which were coreferential with the subject pronoun, we tabulated and separated te into coreferential and noncoreferentiaL The results can be seen in Table 4.12 below. Table 4.12 Coreferentiality of te (second person singular) Coreferential: Object Position % M slot coreferential. 3 re verba I 38.7 94 3ostverbal 61.3 14S Total: 100.0 243 Coreferential Preverbal 39.6 66 3ostverbal 60.4 9£ Total: 100.0 164 p <.000 Table 4.12 does not show that coreferentiality has any effect on the preverbal or postverbal position of the object clitic pronoun. We would expect that there would be more postverbal position when the object clitic is coreferential with the subject, as a coreferential object clitic pronoun cannot be more topical than its subject. Therefore, the object clitic pronoun will tend to appear in the default position of postverbal. However, we would also expect that there would be more preverbal position of the object clitic in instances when the object clitic and the subject are not coreferential, since this clitic pronoun falls highest in the topicality hierarchy. This is not the case here; therefore, it is necessary to look at Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 147 other factors (besides the relationship between the CL person and the SUBJECT person) in order to account for this discrepancy. Examples (147) and (148) illustrate te in pre- and postverbal position when it is not coreferential with the grammatical subject: Preverbal Position (147) A tij este ario, que tes ibas a decir yOj, a tis este afio . . . To you this year, what you was I to say /, to you this year To you this year, what was I going to tell you, to you this ye a r.. (Esgueva, 312) Postverbal Position (148) Bueno quiero decirte una cosa: el ano que viene, bueno este ano, .. . Well, I want to tell you something: the year that comes, well this year,.. . ‘Well, I want to tell you something: next year, well this year, i (Esgueva, 311) In example (147) the object clitic te is in preverbal position. However, there is also an expressed postverbal subject pronoun yo. Example (147) follows the topicality hierarchy proposed by Myhill (1992), Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 148 with a 2n d person object clitic pronoun being more topical than a 1s t person subject. Therefore, it would be expected that the object clitic pronoun would appear in this position. In example (148), we have a postverbal object clitic pronoun (2n d person) and a morphologically marked subject pronoun yo (1s t person). Taking Myhill’s topicality hierarchy as well as his verb groups into consideration (see Chapter 2, page 70), we would expect the object clitic pronoun to fall into postverbal position, as is the case here. We have suggested earlier that the default position is postverbal position and therefore, we will not consider this example further. 4.2.1.8 Third Person Lo/La It is also necessary to look at the object clitic pronouns lo ‘he or it’ and la ‘she or it’, since these two pronouns can represent either an animate or an inanimate object, a property which may affect topicality. Examples (149)-(152) illustrate each of these cases: Lo/La Animate Preverbal Position (149) . . . yo las oia discurrir como Aspasia o Hipatia, maestras de elocuencia; . . . . . . I them heard reason like Aspasia or Hipatia, teachers of eloquence;.. . Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 149 \ .. I heard them reason like Aspasia or Hipatia, teachers of eloquence;. . . (Pepita Jimenez, 171) Postverbal Position (150) Vicente: ^Vamos a tenerlO; [un bebe];? Vicente: We going to have it [a baby]? ‘Vicente: Are we going to have one?’ (Tragaluz, 77) Lo/La inanimate Preverbal Position (151) . . . pero [la verdad]j es antes que todo, y la; hemos de decir, aunque perjudique a nuestra heroina. . . . . .. but the truth is before that all, and it we have from to say, although it perjudices to our heroine. . . . \ .. but the truth is above all, and we have to say it, although it prejudices our heroine. . . .’ (Pepita Jimenez, 162) Postverbal Position (152) Encarna: No te estoy [proponiendo nada];. Puede que no vuelva a decirtelO;. Encarna: No to you I am proposing nothing. It can that no return to say you it. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 150 ‘Encama: I’m not proposing anything to you. Perhaps I won’t say it to you again.’ (Tragaluz, 77) We performed a cross tabulation of just these two pronouns with respect to position and layering it with the type of object, i.e., animate or inanimate. The results can be found in Table 4.13 below: Table 4.13 Object Clitics Lo and La with respect to position and animate/inanimate Type of Object Position Lo La 7 o NV o N D.O. Animate Preverbal 59.2 184 78.1 182 Postverbal 10.8 127 21.9 51 D.O. Inanimate Preverbai 55.4 230 52.8 101 Postverbal 14.6 185 17.1 9 C p < .000 (for D.O. animate) p < .559 (for D.O. inanimate) Table 4.13 indicates that, when the object clitics lo and la are separated into animate and inanimate groups, that the first group, the animate group, is significant (p < .000) with respect to the position of the object clitic pronoun. However, the inanimate object clitic pronouns lo and la do not appear to be relevant with respect to the position of the object clitic (p < .559). All other groups of object clitics (i.e., the plurals and those which are inanimate) have not been discussed here. Each group represents a minute percentage of the total and, following the topicality hierarchy which Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 151 is of interest to us, these object clitics would fall into the lowest level in the topicality hierarchy. We will show that the preverbal position will be accounted for by the ability to link to an anaphoric discourse referent. We will discuss this point in Section 4.3. 4.2.1.9 Object clitic position and genre and geographical location. The last two independent variables that we took into consideration were genre and geographical location and their relationship to object clitic position. Table 4.14 below shows the relationship between the position of the object clitic pronoun and Genre. (See Appendix A) The first group, interviews, includes the three groups of transcribed interviews that were included in our data set, one from bilingual speakers in the United States, one from Spain, and one from Caracas, Venezuela. These interviews are what we consider to be spontaneous speech; as the person is speaking, his/her speech is being recorded. The second group is that of Theater. This group consisted of seven sources, a selection of theater from Spain and from Mexico. We consider the tokens found in these works to be part of what we call “nonspontaneous speech.” This decision was based on the fact that, although it is written, it is written in order to be spoken, and therefore will have the characteristics of spontaneous speech. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 152 Third is our group of Prose. As can be seen below in the table, there are fewer tokens in this group than in other groups. All of the prose considered came from Spain.3 0 This section was considered written text and is the only section considered as written. Finally, our last group is that of Narrative. The word Narrative is broadly defined. For the purpose of this study, “narrative” is any work which is a “story”; whether in the form of two or more people talking, or the recounting of a conversation with someone (as in El Conde Lucanor) or in the form of an epic poem (as is Comentarios Reales de los Incas). We have included in this section works from both Spain and Latin America. The results of the cross tabulations show a significance at p < .000. We find more preverbal object clitic pronouns in all genres except Theater. Table 4.14 Object clitic position relationship to genre Interview Theater Prose Narrative V o N V o N V o N V o N Preverbal 36.5 2020 31.9 621 37.8 80 7 2 .7 1355 Postverbal 33.5 1018 38.1 1328 32.2 38 27.3 50S p < .000 3 0 Further investigation including more Prose from other parts of the Spanish speaking world is deferred to a future study. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 153 Table 4.15 below compares the object clitic position in relationship to the origin of the works— from the United States, Spain, Spanish America, or Mexico. It was expected that we would encounter the same phenomena within all groups, but this is not the case. We find that in the United States as well as in Spain, there is more preverbal object clitic position than postverbal, while in Spanish America (more precisely, Peru and Venezuela) the position is almost divided evenly. In Mexico, we find more postverbal position than preverbal. Table 4.15 Object Clitic Position Relationship to Geographica Location U.S. Spain Spanish Amer. Mexico Object Position Y o N Y o N Yo N Y o h 3reverbal 78.8 492 32.2 2829 18.9 638 24.0 117 3ostverbal 21.2 132 37.8 1722 51.1 668 76.0 371 100 624 100 4551 100 1306 100 48£ p < .000 These results may be a bit misleading, as there is not the same amount of written and spoken (whether spontaneous or nonspontaneous) tokens in the data for the United States, Spanish America or Mexico. For the United States we have only considered spontaneous speech; in Spanish America only spontaneous and nonspontaneous speech; and in Mexico only nonspontaneous speech. Table 4.15 appears to be relevant for the United States, Spain, and Mexico. However, the variation for Spanish America is almost a 50/50 split. In order to take this variable into consideration, although statistically Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 154 it is shown to be relevant, it is necessary to look at more tokens which include more written data for Mexico and Spanish America, as well as spontaneous spoken for Mexico. This will be taken into consideration for future research on this topic. 4.2.1.10 Conclusions. Within the subsections of Section 4.2 above we have analyzed the variation in the object clitic expression. We first discussed the collapsing of the dependent variable, object clitic position, into two positions, preverbal and postverbal, from the three class distribution which included intermediate position. We demonstrated that the intermediate position of Old Spanish functions as the Preverbal position of Modern Spanish. Therefore, we combined the Intermediate and Preverbal positions into preverbal. We next looked at the object clitic position in Old Spanish with respect to the type of clause it was found in (e.g., a main clause or a dependent clause). The results support the Tobler-Mussafia law as well as Barry’s theory of “backgrounding.” Third, we analyzed the effect that coreferentiality has on object clitic pronoun position. The results showed to be insignificant for those object clitic pronouns which were coreferential, while there was significance in the noncoreferential object clitic and its position, although the significance is not conclusive. We then looked at the object clitic Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 155 pronoun with respect to the finite verb. There were 29 distinct finite verbs which did not fall categorically into groups, therefore each of the 29 verbs were considered separately. We next looked at object clitic position and the type of object in order to observe if there is a relationship between an animate object or inanimate object and its object clitic position. The results, although show a significance, are not conclusive. We also presented Myhill’s (1992) Topicality Hierarchy and showed that our data follows Myhill, except with respect to one position. In our data we saw that a first person subject is higher in topicality than other persons, whereas Myhill states that second person is higher on the topicality scale. We suggested that the difference in our data may be related to an element in the discourse which promotes postverbal position instead of the topical, preverbal position. We then looked at the position of the object clitic pronoun and the type of clitic (i.e., first person, second person, etc.) and found that the type of clitic is also significant in the position of the object clitic pronoun. The next variable we looked at was the third person pronouns lo/la in order to see if there is a significance in object clitic position depending upon whether or not lo/la is animate or whether it is inanimate. Our results show that the relationship between the object clitic position and the pronouns lo/la is significant when lo/la are animate. However, when lo/la Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 156 are inanimate, there is no significance with respect to the position of the object clitic pronoun. Finally, the last two independent variables we analyzed were those of genre and geographical location. These two variables were taken into consideration merely to show the relationship between Spanish of different genre and from geographical locations and observe the relationship, if any, that these variables have on object clitic position. 4.2.2 Object clitic position and semantic-pragmatic observations. We have now seen that the above independent variables show a tendency to be significant with respect to our dependent variable (the position of the object clitic pronoun), in this section we will observe the pragmatic effects that these results suggest. In this section, we will adopt the concept of information structure and discourse topic, integrated with activation cost (Chafe 1994) and grounding (Givon 1990), with our data in order to lay the foundation for the discourse clitic referent chain and its variant that we will propose for an anaphoric test which predicts clitic position. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 157 4.2.2.1 Information Structure As discussed in detail in Chapter 2, Section 2.4.5, information structure is concerned with the structure of sentences. Consider example (153) below: (153) . . . entonces ya lo puede coger. . .. then already it he can pick up. ‘. . .then he can pick it up.’ (Esgueva, 9) Looking at this block of information, we cannot detect a referent for the preverbal object clitic pronoun lo. Therefore, it is necessary to look to at a larger discourse block, as in example (154) below: (154) Una persona que sabe volar o que quiere saber volar, y que esta tranquilo, que le gusta el aire, coge /a palanca, con dos o tres dedos, despues, cuando ya se ha acostumbrado, que no tiene... vamos, no tiene ninguna importancia el que lO j coja con la mano entera porque no se agarrota, entonces ya lOj puede coger.3 1 A person that knows how to fly or that wants to know how to fly, and that is calm, that the air is pleasing to him, catches 3 1 It is noted that the direct object la palanca is represented by the direct object pronoun lo, a masculine direct object pronoun. This lack of agreement is found in some varieties of Spanish, and is found quite frequently in the oral interviews which were used for this dissertation. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 158 the pole (cable), with two or three fingers, after, when already himself has become accustomed, that no has . . . well, no have any importance that which it he catches with the hand entire because no become numb, then already itj he can catch ‘A person who knows how to fly or that wants to know how to fly, and who is calm, who likes the air, grabs the pole (cable), with two or three fingers, then, when s/he becomes accustomed, that he doesn’t have... look, it doesn’t matter if one grabs it with the entire hand because it doesn’t become numb, then one can grab it,. (Esgueva, 9) We suggest that the object clitic pronoun in preverbal position incorporates the topicality of the referent in the discourse. Therefore, our hypothesis proposes that the placement of the object clitic pronoun in preverbal position identifies the object as a topic which is salient in the discourse. 4.2.2.2 Discourse Topic As discussed in Chapter 2, Section 2.4.3.4 of this dissertation, discourse topic is an essential element to the demonstration of the discourse clitic referent chains that we are proposing. Ochs and Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 159 Schieffelin (1976:340) define discourse as “any sequence of two or more utterances produced by a single speaker or by two or more speakers who are interacting with one another (at some point in time and space).” Ochs and Schieffelin (1976) divide discourse into continuous and discontinuous discourse.3 2 For our purposes, we will modify slightly the idea of collaborating discourse topic. We propose that collaborating discourse topics are those topics in which the utterances which are spoken match, either exactly or with replacement by an object clitic pronoun, from the preceding discourse. Analyzing our data, examples (155)-(157) below demonstrate collaborating discourse within various contexts: (155) Enc.: ^Me puedes hablar de [lo que piensas hacer]j en el futuro con tu carrera? Inf.: EsOj actualmente no lO j puedo, no lOj puedo senalar. Creo que depende de muchisimos factores. . . . Interviewer: Me can you speak of that which you think to do in the future with your career? 3 2 For a discussion of the difference between continuous and discontinuous discourse, see Chapter 2, Section 2.4.3.4 and Ochs and Schieffelin (1976). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 160 Informant: That currently no it I can, no it I can settle on. I believe that depends of many factors. .. . ‘Int.: Can you speak of what you are thinking of doing in the future with your career? Inf.: That, currently, I can’t, I can’t settle on it. I think it depends on many factors. . . . ’ (Esgueva, 201) (156) Inf.: En la familia nosotrosj tenemosj.. . aayo tengo sobrinas, sobrinos que son adoptivos. Entonces, en la familia no es . . . no es novedad. No es novedad. Si. Enc.: iY conocian [a los papas de el]k o no? Inf.: No. No sabemosj [quien]k son, no sabemoSj sus nombres . .. aa [su apellido];, nada de eso. Nada nada. Y no queremos . . . no queremos saberlOj, porque no es importante. Int.: Claro, claro. Es su hijof realmente. Informant: In the family we have .. . aa I have nieces, nephews that are adopted. Then, in the family no is . . . no is novelty. No es novelty. Yes. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 161 Interviewer And did you meet the parents of him or not? Informant: No. No we know who are, no we know their names . . . aa their last name, nothing of that. Nothing, nothing. And no we want. . . no we want to know it, because no is important. Interviewer: Of course, of course. Is your child really. ‘Inf.: In the family we have . . . aa I have nieces, nephews that are adopted. Then, in the family it isn’t . .. it isn’t a novelty. It isn’t a novelty. Int.: And did you meet his parents or not? Inf.: No. We don’t know who they are, we don’t know their names . . . aa their last name, nothing like that. Nothing, nothing. And we don’t want to . . . we don’t want to know it, because it is not important. Int.: Of course, of course. He is really your child.' (Lope Blanch, 303) (157) Inf.: Pero Johnj... me lo mandan del traba . .. de alia, de . . . de Nueva York, me lo manda cada cuatro semanas. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 162 Enc.: jQue barbaridad! Es mas lejos que Mejico. Inf.: Si. De una costa a I’otra costa. [Fijate! Enc.: iY ustedes, van, a verlOj tambien a Nueva York? Inf.: Pues apenas el| esta alia desde el primer... Informant: But John . . . me it they send from the [work]... from there, from . . . from New York, me it he sends each four weeks. Interviewer: How awful! Is more far than Mexico. Informant: Yes. From one coast to the other coast. Imagine that you! Interviewer: And you go to see him also to New York? Informant: Well hardly . . . he is there from the first... ‘Inf.: But John . .. they send it [a ticket] from work . . . from there, from .. . from New York, he sends it to me every four weeks. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 163 Int.: How awful! It Is farther than Mexico. Inf.: Yes. From one coast to the other. Can you imagine! Int.: And do you go to see him in New York? Inf.: Well hardly . . . He has been there since the first. . . ’ (Lope Blanch, 302) Examples (155)-(157) are ail examples of collaborating discourse, as there is a link to the previous discourse, and we will show that there are also links to the proceeding discourse in some cases as well. In example (155), we have a preverbal object clitic pronoun. Tracing back to the previous discourse, the first referent related to the object clitic pronoun can be seen in the question posed by the interviewer, with the phrase lo que piensas hacer ‘what you are thinking of doing’. This is followed by the response from the informant, first with the pronoun eso ‘that’ in a topicalized position, followed in the same clause by the pronoun lo, and then in the next clause with lo and the double verb construction. If we continue to read, we do not immediately see another referent to this object clitic pronoun. We suggest that the relationship created by the link from the first statement by the interviewer, to the preverbal pronoun eso ‘that’, to the final referent in the periphrastic construction calls for a preverbal object clitic pronoun. Figure 4 below illustrates this idea: Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 164 Figure 4: Collaborating chain 1 Interviewer Informant [first referent] -* [top. element]-*[1s t obj. clit. ref.]-* [preverbal obj. clitic in double verb constr.] lo que piensas hacer -» eso -* lo -» lo puedo senalar Figure 4 shows the relationship of the first reference to what will be the object clitic (in example, the phrase lo que pfensas hacer ‘what you are thinking of doing’), which leads to the informant answering with a topicalized pronoun eso ‘that’ (top. element). This is followed, in the same clause, by the first object clitic referent lo ‘it’, which is then followed by the object clitic in preverbal position in the double verb construction. As we continue to read the passage, i.e., the next sentence, there is no direct reference to this pronoun, although it remains the discourse topic, but talking in general terms about things that the speaker might like to do. Example (156) is a different situation. Figure 5 below diagrams the interchange between the informant and the interviewer that is given above. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 165 Figure 5: Collaborating chain 2 Informant: [expressed subj. pronoun]^ Interviewer: [D.O. 1]-* Informant: [referent to D.O. 1] -♦[D.O. 2 ]^ [postverbal obj. clitic in double verb constr.] -♦ Interviewer: [D.O. 2 referent] nosotros -♦ a los papas de el -♦ quien -♦ su apellido -♦ no queremos saberlo -♦ su hijo The interviewer and informant are talking about the informant’s family, more concisely, her adopted son. Therefore, in Figure 5, we see that the informant uses an expressed subject pronoun, nosotros ‘we’ in order to focus the discourse on the family. The informant’s response of nosotros tenemos ‘we have’ brings the interviewer to ask if they met the parents of the boy (the parents being D.O. 1). The informant responds that no, that they don’t know who they are (quien) (referent to D.O. 1), not even what their last name is (su apellido) (D.O. 2) and that they do not want to know it (no queremos saberlo) (postverbal obj. clitic). If we continue to read the next line of the discourse, we see the interviewer mention su hijo, therefore a referent to D.O. 2. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 166 Although D.O. 1, D.O. 2 and the referent to D.O. 2 are not the same direct object, they are all interrelated: parents, last name, son. We propose that the object clitic pronoun is found in postverbal position as it refers to the “last name,” which is secondary to the discourse topic, that is, her son. The continuing discourse following the postverbal object clitic assures that the son stays as the discourse topic by reintroducing it with su hijo ‘your son’. Finally, example (157) is also different. Figure 6 illustrates the exchange between the interviewer and informant: Figure 6: Collaborating chain 3 Informant Interviewer Informant [Subject 1J -* [Expressed Subject 2]-* [Postverbal obj. clitic,]-* [Exp. Subj. 3J John -* ustedes -♦ van a verlo -* el Figures 4, 5, and 6 are important for the present study. They will be used in the proposal of the anaphoric test which will be presented in Section 4.2.3 below. 4.2.2.3 Threading it all together In the previous sections, we have looked at some of the pragmatic factors which, when combined with lexico-semantic factors, provide the Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 167 possibility of predicting the syntactic position where an object clitic will appear. Of the previous sections, the most important for us are 4.2.2.1 (Information structure) and 4.2.2.2 (Discourse topic), as well as the collaborating chains which were proposed in section 4.2.2.2. Therefore, we would like to test our hypothesis regarding the position of object clitic pronouns through the use of Discourse Clitic Chains. 4.3 Operationalizing of an Anaphoric Test: Discourse Chains. In subsections 4.1 and 4.2, we discussed the relevance of certain independent variables in relationship to the dependent variable (pre- or postverbal object clitic position). We have also seen how certain semantic and pragmatic factors affect the position in which an object clitic pronoun appears. We would now like to propose an anaphoric test for the position of object clitics in Spanish. On page 8 of this thesis we stated the following hypothesis: The variation in object clitic position in Spanish is pragmatically-controlled in opposition to the null hypothesis which contends that variation in object clitic position is free. Through this hypothesis, we are claiming that the language system identifies an object clitic pronoun in pre- or postverbal position on the Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 168 basis of pragmatic properties of the discourse referent with which the clitic is linked. We propose the following discourse clitic chain and its marked discourse variant, examples (158) and (159) for convenience: Default Discourse Clitic Chain: Enclisis (158) D ,... IsCNP),... Ij... CL,...] (D)m Topic Marked Variant for the Discourse Clitic Chain: Proclisis (159) D ,... [S (NP),... CL,... Ij...] (D)m (j) Example (158) is the default chain, in which the object clitic pronoun will appear in postverbal position and its discourse referent is low/neutral in topicality. The chain shows that we start with a discourse passage (D) which includes a sentence S in which expressed or nonexpressed subject pronoun (NP) Subject, followed by an inflectional verb (I), and the object clitic pronoun (CL). After S, the sentence which includes the clitic pronoun link in question, there may or may not appear more of the same discourse chain and this discourse may or may not continue the discourse topic. Through a discourse chain, i.e., (158) or (159), the unstressed pronoun is referentially interpreted with a referential expression which precedes (anaphorically) the clitic through one or more coindexed links. The clitic pronoun itself may serve as an antecedent for subsequent links in the discourse (cataphorically). An example of this type (158) of discourse chain is (160) below: Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 169 (160) YOj estoy encantado con las huertas, y todas las tardes [smej paseo;] por ellas un par de horas. [Mi padre, quiere, llevarmej] a ver sus Olivares, sus vinas, sus cortijos; pero nada de esto hemos visto aun. No he, salido del iugar y de las amenas huertas que le circundan. I am enchanted with the gardens, and all the afternoons me pass through them a pair of hours. My father wants to take me to see his oliveyards, his vineyards, his farmhouses; but nothing of this have we seen still. No I have left from the place and from the pleasant gardens that him surround. ‘I am enchanted with the gardens, and every afternoon I stroll through them for a couple of hours. My father wants to take me to see his oliveyards, his vineyards, his farmhouses; but we haven’t seen any of this still. I haven’t left from this place and from the pleasant gardens that surround him.’ (Pepita Jimenez, 47) In (160) we see exactly how this Discourse Clitic Chain functions. In the first sentence, the discourse topic includes, and is about, the speaker. There is an expressed subject, yo T which will serve as the referential expression for the postverbal anaphoric object clitic pronoun Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. mej in the next sentence. In the second sentence, we see a change in the sentence topic to m i padre ‘My father1 which is coindexed with the verb quiere ‘he wants’. The object pronoun me ‘me’ in postverbal position is the default position and therefore is low or neutral in topicality. Finally, we have continuing discourse which again returns to the discourse topic, that is, the speaker. Therefore, the grammatical subject in the first sentence is coindexed with the postverbal object clitic pronoun, which is then coindexed with the null subject pronoun or the verb inflection Ij in the last sentence of the discourse. Example (161) illustrates the topic marked variant for the Discourse Clitic Chain, that is, a clitic pronoun in preverbal position with an expressed subject and within a main clause: (161) .. . Antes me canso yOj que el,, y no queda vericueto, ni lugar agreste, ni cima de cerro escarpado en esta cercanias, adonde no lleguemos. [S EI serior VicariOj mej va reconciliando], mucho con el clero espanol, a quien alguna veces he tildado yojt hablando con usted, de poco ilustrado. jCuanto mas vale, (0 ) me digOj a menudo, este hombre, lleno de candor y de buen deseo . . . .. . First me tire I than he, and no stay rough pathless place, nor place wild, nor peak of hill steep in this vicinity, where no we arrive. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 171 The Mr. Vicario me goes reconciling a lot with the clergy Spanish, to who some times I have criticized I, speaking with you, of little illustrated. How much more worth, me I say frequently, this man, filled of candor and of good desire. . . . First I tire before him, and there is no rough, pathless place, nor wild place, nor a steep peak of a hill in this vicinity, where we don’t go. Father Vicario takes me reconciling a lot with the Spanish clergy, those whom I sometimes have criticized, speaking with you, of being little illustrated. How much more valuable, I say frequently, this man, filled with candor and good desire (Pepita Jimenez, 75) In (161) in the first sentence there is an expressed subject yo T, which is the discourse topic. In the first clause of the second sentence we see a change in the sentence topic to El serior Vicario but also the placement of the preverbal object clitic pronoun me ‘me’. Therefore, in the first clause of the second sentence we have a sentence topic as well as the discourse topic recapitulated in preverbal me. Following Myhill’s (1992) topicality hierarchy, the object clitic pronoun should appear in preverbal position, as the grammatical subject is a third person animate El serior Vicario while the object clitic pronoun is a first person pronoun (me). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 172 In the following clause of the same sentence, sentence topic is again changed back to the discourse topic, signaled by the expressed postverbal subject yo. Therefore, in (161), a continuous referential chain is identified from the first sentence of the discourse through the expressed postverbal subject yo, coindexed (referentially linked) to the preverbal object clitic pronoun in the first phrase of the following sentence me,, then to the expressed postverbal subject yOj in the following clause and finally, continuing the discourse with a nonexpressed subject in the following sentence. The sentence topic intersects the chain at the beginning of the second sentence with an expressed preverbal subject coindexed in a second reference chain with the verb of that sentence, but we see that the discourse topic is continuous by the quick recovery of the discourse topic in the following phrase with a returning expressed postverbal to the discourse topic of yo. 4.3.1 Setting the Discourse Clitic Chain In order to begin to operationalize the proposed Discourse Clitic Chain, it is necessary to analyze, statistically, the relationship between certain variables. Since our interest is the position of the object clitic pronoun within discourse, and our Discourse Clitic Chain takes into account sentence structure and preceding discourse, we need to Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 173 investigate the relationship between the dependent variable (object clitic position) and four other independent variables:3 3 (1) subject person; (2) clitic referent; (3) clitic referent location; and (4) “aboutness.” These variables may have a function which contributes to the discourse saliency of the referent and, according to our research hypothesis, will show a tendency to be in preverbal position. 4.3.1.1 Relationship between Object Clitic Position and Aboutness In this section we evaluate the position of the object clitic pronoun with respect to its referent. For our purposes, we have divided “aboutness” into two types: one in which the object clitic pronoun refers to the subject of the same clause, (i.e., reflexive or conjoint reference) and one in which the clitic refers to an argument in the previous discourse (i.e., disjoint reference). Table 4.16 below shows the results of this cross tabulation. 3 3 ln the initial study we had not coded for these variables. Therefore, we took a subset of our data and ran a random sampling in order to observe the tendencies. With the limited amount of data used when the random sample was performed, we consider the number of tokens as well as a p <.10 value as being significant. The results constitute preliminary linguistic evidence of a tendency and a more exhaustive study of these variables should be considered in future investigation. See Appendix D for list of Variables with variants. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 174 Table 4.16 Relationship between the Position of the Object Clitic Pronoun and Aboutness Aboutness Subject Discourse Total Position % N % N % N Preverbal 0 0 28.4 23 25 23 Postverbal 100 11 71.6 58 75 69 Total 100 11 100 81 100 92 p <.041 Table 4.16 shows that, when the clause in which the object clitic pronoun appears refers to the grammatical subject of the same clause (i.e., reflexive object pronouns), all instances are in postverbal position. Example (162) below illustrates this type of construction: (162) Juana: jPor favor! No puedeSj marchartej ahora; seria escandaloso. . . . Juana: Please! No you can to walk yourself now; it would be scandalous. .. . ‘Juana: Please! YoUj can’t walk [yourse!f]; out now; it would be scandalous. .. .' (Oscuridad, 75) On the other hand, when the object clitic pronoun refers to an argument in the discourse (disjoint reference), then 28.4% of the time the object clitic pronoun is found in preverbal position, and 71.6% of the time Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 175 this object clitic pronoun is found in postverbal position. Examples (163) and (164) below are examples of an object clitic pronoun which refers to an argument in the discourse: Preverbal Position (163) Elisa: Ya se que [me pongo en ridiculojj. No lOj puedo remediar. Elisa: Already I know that me I put in ridiculous. No it I can remedy. ‘Elisa: I already know that [I look ridiculousjj. I can’t remedy it;.’ (Oscuridad, 99) Postverbal Position (164) Carlos: . . . Se comprende que dude IgnaciOj.... No sabej aun lo grande, lo libre y hermosa que es nuestra vida. No haj adquirido confianza; tiene miedo a dejar su baston.. . . [Sois vosotros quienes debeis ayudarlej a confiar! Carlos: . . . One understands that doubts Ignacio... No he knows even the grand, the free and beautiful that is our life. No he has acquired confidence; he has fear to leave his cane. .. It is you all who should help him to trust! Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 176 ‘Carlos: . . . One can understand that IgnaciOj doubts. . . . Hej doesn’t even know how great, free and beautiful our life is. Hef hasn’t acquired confidence; hef is afraid to leave his cane aside.... It is all of you whom should help him; to trust!’ (Oscuridad, 87) The fact that the object clitic pronoun is always found in postverbal position in those clauses in which the clitic refers to the grammatical subject of the same sentence identifies the non-committal (default or canonical) postverbal position. Under this referential condition, the clitic does not convey discourse saliency, hence no preverbal (discourse marked) found. When the referent of the object clitic pronoun is an argument of a sentence in the previous discourse, we would expect positional variation as the clitic and the subject of the sentence have disjoint reference. Exactly among these cases the clitic whose discourse referent may be relatively more salient will tend to appear in preverbal position, which we hope to confirm. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 177 4.3.1.2 Aboutness, Clitic Referent, and Position of the Object Clitic Pronoun In order to observe more closely the characteristics of the object clitic pronoun in a clause in which the clitic refers to an argument in the previous discourse, we added the feature of “clitic referent” to our analysis. This is then controlled for the position of the object clitic pronoun. Table 4.17 below illustrates that relationship: Table 4.17 Relationship between the Clitic Referent and Aboutness controlled for by Position of the Object Clitic Pronoun Aboutness Total Grammatical Subject Discourse Position Clitic Referent % N % N % N Preverbal Subject 0 0 73.9 17 73.9 17 Object 0 0 26.1 6 26.1 6 Totals: 0 0 100 23 100 23 Postverbal Subject 54.5 6 51.7 30 52.2 36 Object 45.5 5 48.3 28 47.8 33 Totals: 100 11 100 58 100 69 p <.86 Although Table 4.17 is not statistically relevant, the tendency is linguistically important for our hypothesis. We assume that the clitic is inert with respect to the saliency of its referent. We are particularly Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 178 interested in those cases which have a preverbal object clitic pronoun, as in examples (165) and (166) below: Subject Referent . . . Es tan nueva para mi. [Una sensacion como de . . . desprecio.jj [Carlos! No lo; pude evitar. .. . . . . It is so new for me. [A sensation like .. . contempt.^ Carlos! (165) Carlos: Juana: Carlos: ‘Carlos: Juana: Carlos: I couldn’t avoid it [the sensation of contempt],. (Oscuridad, 79) Object Referent (166) Juana: . . . Yo se muy bien que no deseas el malj, pero lOj estas haciendo. ‘Juana: . . . I know very well that you don’t wish harm, but you are doing it.’ (Oscuridad, 101) As seen in Table 4.16 and again here in Table 4.17, all of the preverbal object clitic pronouns refer to contexts in which the object clitic Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 179 pronoun is salient in the discourse. We see that the clitic referent in 73.9% of the instances is the grammatical subject of that clause, while 26.1% of the instances it is not. This strong correlation is not exhibited by the clitics in postverbal position, which suggests that this position is inert as to discourse effects. Within our data set, we note that, in those cases which are about the discourse, and in which the referent is the grammatical subject of the previous discourse (i.e., a previous clause or sentence), three out of four times it is coindexed with a preverbal clitic, as opposed to those instances in which the clitic referent is a discourse object, for which one out of four times it is in preverbal position. As stated earlier, although the results of Table 4.17 are not statistically relevant, the distribution does support the hypothesis that preverbal clitics are discourse active in contrast to postverbal clitics which are discourse “inert” or “inactive.” 4.3.1.3 Aboutness, Clitic Referent, Clitic Referent Location, and Position of the Object Clitic Pronoun In order to see the interface between all of the above variables and the syntactic location of the clitic referent, we added one more variable: Clitic Referent Location. There are three possibilities for the syntactic location of the clitic referent: in a main clause, in a dependent clause, or in Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 180 the same clause as the object clitic pronoun (this location is “inert” as you have already seen in Table 4.16 and therefore these examples will not be discussed in the following section). Examples (167)-(170) illustrate a clitic referent in a main clause (pre- and postverbal position) and a clitic referent in a dependent clause (pre- and postverbal position), respectively: Main Clause Clitic Referent Preverbal Position (167) Ignacio: Pero yOj estoy ardiendo por dentro; ardiendo con un fuego terrible, que no mej deja vivir . . . ‘Ignacio: But I; am burning inside; burning with a terrible fire, that doesn’t allow mej to live . . (Oscuridad, 75) Postverbal Position (168) Carlos: .. . Tampoco tienes motivo. jNo debes tenerlo! ‘Carlos: .. . You don’t have a motive either. You shouldn’t have it!’ (Oscuridad, 107) Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 181 Dependent Clause Clitic Referent Preverbal Position (169) Pepita se levanto de su asiento, fue hacia la puerta; y la, abrio; miro para ver si alguien escuchaba desde fuera; lat volvio a cerrar. . . . ‘Pepita got up from her seat, went towards the doo^ and opened it,; she looked to see if someone listened from outside; she shut itj again.’ (Pepita Jimenez, 128) Postverbal Position (170) Carlos: jSi sufrimos por su culpa, ese sufrimiento sera para el, una victoria! Y no debemos darlef ninguna. ‘Carlos: If we suffer because of him, that suffering will be a victory for hin^l And we should give himj any.’ (Oscuridad, 107) Table 4.18 below illustrates the relationship of the Clitic Referent Location with the other variables previously discussed. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 182 Table 4 Relationship between the Cliti Location, and Aboutness (Contro .18 c Referent, Clitic Referent led by Object Clitic Position) Clitic Referent Position Aboutness Clitic Referent Location Subject Object Total % N Y o N Y o N 3reverbal Discourse Main Clause 76.5 13 50 3 39.6 16 Dependent Clause 5.9 150 3 17.4 4 Same Clause 17.6 3 3 0 13.0 3 Totals: 100 17 100 6 100 23 Postverbal Discourse Main Clause 73.3 “ “ 22 37 Dependent Clause 20.0 6 21.4 6 20.7 12 Same Clause 3.7 2 25.0 7 15.5 9 Totals: 100 30100 28 100 58 Gram. Subject Main Clause 33.3 5 30.0 372.7 8 Dependent Clause 0 020.0 19.1 1 Same Clause 16.7 120.0 118.2 2 Totals: 100 6 100 5100 11 p <.039 Table 4.18 is statistically relevant3 4 (p <.039) and provides support for the Discourse Clitic Chains Approach to the study of clitic position ^Table 4.18 is based on a random sample of a subset of our data, and therefore only a portion of the tokens were considered. Although there are many cells with fewer than five cases, we consider Table 4.18 to be a descriptively important linguistic tendency, although a conclusion which is strongly supported by the statistics is not possible without further data being analyzed. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 183 which we have proposed in this dissertation. First, Table 4.18 shows that there is variation in the position of the object clitic pronoun when the object clitic pronoun refers to the discourse (as opposed to the clitic referring to the grammatical subject, where all object clitic pronouns appeared in postverbal position). Cf. Table 4.16. Looking first at those instances in which the clitic referent is a discourse subject, Table 4.18 shows a consistently higher percentage of preverbal position (versus postverbal) fora subject referent in a main clause (76.5% vs. 73.3%). This is a slight tendency which is linguistically relevant and consequently shows some support (although weak) for our research hypothesis, and it is not strong enough to reject the statistical null hypothesis. On the other hand, looking at Table 4.18, where the clitic referent is a subject in a dependent clause, there is a higher percentage of post verbal position (20%) versus preverbal (5.9%) object clitic pronouns. This strongly favors the clitic in postverbal position when its referent is salient (i.e., a Subject) in a less salient context in the discourse and indicates a dichotomy between the preverbal and postverbal positions. This offers a more substantial support for our research hypothesis and rejects the null hypothesis. With respect to a clitic referent which is a discourse object, again we have mixed results. First, we see that when the clitic referent is an object in a main clause, there is a slight tendency for the object clitic Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. pronoun to appear in postverbal position (50.0% vs. 53.6%). Referring back to those instances in which the clitic referent is a discourse subject in a main clause (main clause+subject referent, a more salient discourse context), we observed that there was a slight tendency of preverbal position (76.5% vs. 73.3%), which we considered as linguistically relevant. Here, with an object clitic pronoun whose clitic referent is an object in a main clause (main clause+object referent, a less salient discourse) we find expectedly opposite results (50% vs. 53.6%). Taking these two observations together, they are consistent in correlating the preverbal and postverbal positions with more and less salient combinations of discourse factors. Finally, when the clitic referent is an object within a dependent clause, we see a tendency for the object clitic pronoun to appear in preverbal position (50.0% vs. 21.4%). Following our research hypothesis, we would have expected to have less preverbal object clitic pronouns and more postverbal, since we have an object referent found within a dependent clause, a discourse context which is less salient than other contexts. Because the number of tokens is small (a total of nine within this context), perhaps with a larger data sample the results may be different. However, for the present study, the results do not favor our research hypothesis. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 185 4.4. Conclusions. In this chapter we have evaluated the three objectives of this dissertation. First, in Section 4.1 we considered the limits of position variation and explained the process used to weed out those verbs which only accepted preverbal object clitic position and those which only accept postverbal object clitic position (TABLES 4.1 and 4.2). With the elimination of those verbs, we were left with twenty-nine verbs which accept pre- and postverbal object clitic pronouns and therefore the variation. We next discussed the variation in object clitic position (Section 4.2). We considered object clitic placement in relationship to various independent variables, including: Old and Modern Spanish (TABLE 4.3), the type of clause (main or subordinate) (TABLE 4.4), verb placement (TABLE 4.5), coreferentiality (TABLE 4.6), the finite verb (TABLE 4.7), the type of object (TABLE 4.8), the type of clitic (TABLE 4.11), genre (TABLE 4.14), and geographical location (TABLE 4.15). We showed that the position of the object clitic pronoun was relevant within each of these contexts, but that one specific variable, alone, is not able to explain the variation in the position of the object clitic pronoun. Finally, in the third section of this chapter, Section 4.3, we proposed a Default Discourse Clitic Chain with a topic marked variant in order to provide a mechanism for a test for object clitic pronouns. In order Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 186 to provide a statistical basis for our Discourse Clitic Chain, we analyzed the interface between various variables. First, we looked at the interaction between the position of the object clitic pronoun and what we call aboutness (whether the clause is about the grammatical subject or about the discourse) (TABLE 4.16). Then we expanded upon this analysis and added the clitic referent (subject or object) (TABLE 4.17). Taking it one step farther, we added the clitic referent location, in order to be able to establish the ability to link anaphorically to previous discourse (TABLE 4.18). The results of this analysis were mixed, although there is some support for our research hypothesis and for our Discourse Clitic Chain approach. Our analysis also shows that the positional variation is not random and therefore tends to lead to a rejection of the null hypothesis. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 5. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS 187 5.1 Summary of findings. In the present dissertation, we have started with three objectives: 1. To encounter the specific boundaries in which object clitic variation appears in either preverbal or postverbal position and some of the possible syntactic constraints; 2. To test the research hypothesis that the variation in object clitic position in Spanish is discourse (pragmatically) controlled in opposition to the null hypothesis which contends that variation in object clitic position is free; and 3. A demonstration of a proposal for an anaphoric test which determines in which position (pre- or postverbal) the object clitic pronoun will appear based on discourse saliency of the clitic referent. First, we have shown that there is a group of verbs which only accept preverbal position object clitic pronouns and another group that only accept postverbal pronouns (Tables 4.1 and 4.2). Although some of these verbs may be classified as certain syntactic properties that prohibit the object clitic from appearing in the other position (either pre- or Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 188 postverbal), there is a statistically defined set of verbs which allow variation between pre-and postverbal position (Appendix C). Next, we hypothesized that object clitic position is pragmatically- controlled by discourse properties and that the null hypothesis that object clitic pronouns are free would be statistically rejected. We have shown that there are a number of independent variables which show a statistical tendency significant with respect to the placement of the object clitic pronoun both synchronically and diachronically. The variation offered between these independent variables include: Old and Modern Spanish, the type of clause (main or subordinate), verb placement (clause initial or non-clause initial), coreferentiality, the lexical-semantic type of finite verb, the type of object (animacy), the type of clitic (person), genre, and geographical location. See a description of these variables in Chapter 3, Sections 3.2 and 3.3. A review of the position of the object clitic pronoun, along with the type of object, shows that the position of the object clitic pronoun is statistically significant when it is animate (p < .000). In contrast, when the object clitic pronoun (in particular, the clitics to ‘it’ and la ‘it’) is inanimate, a cross tabulation of these clitics with respect to object position is not significant (p < .559) (TABLE 4.13). We have shown that the position of these clitics is dependent upon the relationship of the object clitic with the topicality of its referent. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Although historical genre stages and geographical location included in the corpus generalize our results, they were shown to be statistically valid and we were able to analyze all of our data as a complete set (TABLES 3.1 and 3.2). In sum, our corpus of periphrastic constructions includes 106 distinct finite verbs (Appendix B). Out of these 106 verbs, 29 of them allowed for variation in the object clitic position (Appendix C). The other 77 either accepted pre- or postverbal object clitics, but not both. This is not to say that none of these verbs do not allow variation, but that there was no variation found within our data set. Of the 29 verbs that allowed variation, some of those verbs may be classified as modals, verbs of motion, etc., but others do not fit into a specific grammatical category. After analyzing the independent variables which may affect the position of the object clitic pronoun, and suggesting that not any one of the independent variables explains the appearance of the object clitic pronoun in one position or the other, we proposed an anaphoric test, in order to test our hypothesis: The variation in object clitic position in Spanish is discourse (pragmatically) controlled (in opposition to the null hypothesis which states that variation in object clitic position is free). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 190 We proposed a Default Discourse-based Clitic Reference Chain (Chapter 4, Section 4.3) with the following form: D ,... [s(NP)j... Ij... CLj]... (D)(iK j) where the discourse referent (D), the object clitic pronoun (CL) in syntactically postverbal position are coindexed. The variant to this Discourse Clitic Chain (Chapter 4, Section 4.3) places the object clitic pronoun in preverbai position: D ,... [s(NP)j... CLj... I,]... (D)( iK D We stipulate that the postverbal object clitic position as the default (discourse inert) and the preverbal is the discourse “active” position, hence we tested the variant Discourse Clitic Chains with variables that would affect this Discourse Clitic Chains, particularly the preverbal object clitic position pronouns. We first looked at the relationship between the position of the object clitic pronoun (our dependent variable) and aboutness (if the clause is about the grammatical subject or if it is about the discourse) (TABLE 4.16). Table 4.16 was shown to be statistically relevant (p < .041). It was shown that when the clause in which the object clitic pronoun appears refers to the grammatical subject of the same clause (i.e., reflexive object clitic pronouns), all instances are in postverbal position. When the object clitic pronoun refers to an argument in the discourse, that is, a disjoint reference, then there is a tendency for the object clitic pronoun to appear in postverbal position. The fact that the Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 191 object clitic pronoun is always found in postverbal position in those clauses in which the clitic refers to a grammatical subject of the same sentence identifies the non-committal (default or canonical) postverbal position. Therefore, the clitic conveys discourse saliency, hence no preverbal, discourse marked clitics are found. We then expanded that cross tabulation by the clitic referent (Subject or Object) (TABLE 4.17). We used this variable to show the ability of an object clitic to be coindexed with either a Subject or Object. Although the results of this cross tabulation were not found to be statistically relevant (p <.86), for our purposes, the tendency is linguistically important for our hypothesis. We assumed that the clitic is inert with respect to the saliency of its referent. We observed that all of the preverbal object clitic pronouns refer to contexts in which the object clitic pronoun is salient in the discourse. The clitic referent in 73.9% of the instances is the grammatical subject of that clause, while 26.1% of the instances it is not. This strong correlation is not exhibited by clitics in postverbal position, which again suggests that this position (postverbal) is inert as to discourse effects. Finally, in our data set we found that, in those cases in which the referent is the discourse subject, three out of four times it is coindexed with a preverbal clitic, as opposed to those in which the clitic referent is a discourse object, for which one out of four times it is in preverbal position. Although not statistically relevant, the Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 192 results of Table 4.17 support the hypothesis that preverbal clitics are discourse active in contrast to postverbal clitics which are discourse inert. Finally, the last step was to analyze the above cross tabulation with one more variable, that of the clitic referent location (e.g., within a main clause, dependent clause, or the same clause) (TABLE 4.18). This Table is statistically relevant (p <.039) and shows a descriptively important linguistic tendency. We first analyzed those instances in which the clitic referent is a discourse subject, finding a consistently higher percentage of preverbal position (versus postverbal) for a subject referent in a main clause. This slight tendency is linguistically relevant and consequently shows some support for our research hypothesis, although it was not found to be strong enough to reject the null hypothesis. When the clitic referent is a subject in a dependent clause, there is a higher percentage of postverbal position (versus preverbal) object clitic pronouns. This favors the clitic in postverbal position when its referent is salient in a less salient context in the discourse and indicates a dichotomy between the preverbal and postverbal positions. This offers a more substantial support for our research hypothesis and rejects the null hypothesis. Third, when a clitic referent which is a discourse object, the results are mixed. When the clitic referent is an object in a main clause, there is a slight tendency for the object clitic pronoun to appear in postverbal Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 193 position. This, combined with the opposite results of a clitic referent that is a discourse subject in a main clause, are consistent in correlating the preverbal and postverbal positions with more and less salient combina tions of discourse factors. Finally, when the clitic referent is an object within a dependent clause, there is a tendency for the object clitic pronoun to appear in preverbal position. The results for this discourse context was unexpected, as the discourse context is a less salient one and therefore we would have expected to have more postverbal object clitic pronoun position instead of preverbal object pronoun position. It was noted that there are few cases (a total of nine) and at this time we do not have an explanation for these results. Further investigation may show that indeed the tendency is to have more postverbal position than preverbal position within this discourse context. An analysis of these variables as a group favors our research proposal and supports our proposal for a Discourse Clitic Chain to predict placement of the object clitic pronoun. 5.2 Contribution to the field This dissertation is an integrated approach to the analysis of clitic position in Spanish. Previous studies of clitic position have looked at the problem through single properties of the language system. We have Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 194 integrated syntax, semantics, and pragmatics into one unified account: an anaphoric discourse account. 5.3 Projections for future research This dissertation has proposed a mechanism which will be able to be used to test object clitic position not only in Spanish but also in other Romance languages. One immediate extension is a comparative study of object clitic position across Romance. Second, in order to more concisely point out the specific pragmatic factors involved in object clitic position, an expanded data set should be coded for the variables listed on Appendix D (subject person, clitic referent, clitic referent location, and aboutness) in order to “fine tune” the Discourse Clitic Chain. Finally, another area of future investigation includes the distribution of the set of finite verbs in the periphrastic constructions along a statistical continuum (following Figure 1 of Chapter 1) for a better look at diffusional variation. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 195 Bibliography Aissen, J. and D.M. Perlmutter. 1976. Clause Reduction in Spanish. Berkeley Linguistic Society, 2:1-30. Aleman, Mateo. 1927. Guzman de Alfarache. Madrid: Espasa-Calpe. El libra de Alexandre. 1934. Ed. by Willis, R.S. Princeton Princeton University Press. Anderson, Alice Long. 1979. Theories of the Evolution of the Spanish Unstressed Personal Pronouns. Dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Auto de los Reyes Magos. 1900. Ed. by Menendez Pidal, R. Revista de Archivos, Bibliotecas y Museos, 4:453-462. Avila, Juan de. 1912. Epistolario espiritual. Madrid: Ediciones de ‘La Lectura’. Bach, Kent. 1994. Thought and Reference. Oxford:Clarendon Press. Barry, A.K. 1987. Clitic Pronoun Position in Thirteenth-Century Spanish. Hispanic Review. 213-220. Blecua, Jose Manuel. 1969. El Conde Lucanor. Madrid: Clasicos Castalia. Buero Vallejo, Antonio. 1967. Tragaluz. Madrid:Escelicer Cervantes Saavedra, Miguel de. 1911. El ingenioso hidalgo don Quijote de la Mancha, ed. by Marin, F.R. Madrid: Ediciones de ‘La Lectura’. Chafe, Wallace. 1976. Givenness, contrastiveness, definiteness, subjects, topics, and point of view. Subject and Topic, ed. by Li, C. New York: Academic Press, 25-55. —. 1987. Cognitive constraints on information flow. Coherence and Grounding in Discourse, ed. by Tomlin, R. Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 21-51. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 196 —. 1994. Discourse, Consciousness, and Time. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Chapter 6-11, 13. Chenery, W. 1904. Object Pronouns in Dependent Clauses: A Study of Old Spanish Word Order. PMLA 20.1-151. Colbum, G.B. 1928. The complementary infinitive and its pronoun object. Hispania 20:424-429. Contreras, Heles. 1979. Sobre la promocion de los cliticos en espanol. Aproximaciones a la sintaxis del espanol, ed. by Garcia Pinto, Magdalena and Mario A. Rojas. Barcelona: Puvill Libras S.A., 103- 129. Cortes, Hernan. 1866. Segunda crta, relacion al emperador Carlos V. Cartas y relaciones. Paris: Chaix, 53-157. Crystal, David. 1992. An Encyclopedic Dictionary of Language and Languages. Oxford:Blackwell Publishers. Danes, Frantisek. 1966. A three-level approach to syntax. Travaux linguistiques de Prague, ed. By F. Danes et al. University of Alabama Press, 1:225-240. Davies, Mark. 1995. Analyzing Syntactic Variation with Computer-Based Corpora: The Case of Modern Spanish Clitic Climbing. Hispania 78:370-380. Dik, Simon C. 1978. Functional Grammar. Amsterdam: North-Holland. Esgueva, M. and M. Cantarero. 1981. El habla culta de la ciudad de Madrid. Materiales para su estudio. Madrid: C.S.I.C. Fernandez Llera, V. 1929. Fuero juzgo en latin y castellano. Gramatica y vocabulario del Fuero juzgo. Madrid: Imprenta clasica espanola. Fillmore, Charles. 1976. Pragmatics and the description of discourse. Pragmatik II, ed. by S. Schmidt. Munich: Wilhelm Fink Verlag, 80-97. Foulche-Delbosc, R. 1907. Vida de Santa Maria Egipciaqua. Barcelona: L’Aveno. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 197 Franch, Juan Alcina and Jos6 Manuel Blecua. 1980. Gramatica espanola. Barcelona: Editorial Ariel. Gessner, Emil. 1893. Das spanlsche Personalpronomen. Zeitschrift fur romanische Philologie, 17:33-54. Givon, Talmy. 1979. Discourse and Syntax. Syntax and Semantics. Vol. XII. New York: Academic Press. — . 1983. Topic Continuity in Discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. —. 1990. Syntax: A Functional Typological Introduction. Vol. II. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Gonzalo de Berceo. 1988. Milagros de Nuestra Senora, ed. by Michael Gerli. Madrid:Catedra. Gonzalo de Berceo. 1904. Vida de Santo Domingo de Silos, ed. by Fitzgerald, John. Paris:Bouillon. Guevara, Antonio de. 1915. Menosprecio de corte y alabanza de aldea. Madrid: Ediciones de ‘La Lectura’. Halliday, M. 1967. Notes on transitivity and theme in English, part II. Journal of Linguistics 3:199-244. Hankamer, Jorge and Ivan Sag. 1976. Deep and Surface Anaphora. Linguisti Inquiry. 7/3.391-426. Huang, C.T.J. 1984. On the Distribution and Reference of Empty Pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry. 15:4. Keniston, H.S. 1938. The Syntax of Castilian Prose. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. La vida de Lazarillo de Tormes. 1912. New York: Stechert & Co. Lambrecht, K. 1995. Information Structure and Sentence Form. New York: Cambridge University Press. Lapesa, Rafael. 1942. Historia de la lengua espanola. Madrid: Escelicer. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 198 Leavitt, Walter. 1954. The position of the object pronouns in Old Spanish. New Haven: Yale University Dissertation. Li, C.N. and S. Thompson. 1976. Subject and topic: a new typology of language. Subject and Topic, ed. by Li, C.N. New York: Academic Press, 457-89. Lope Blanch, Juan. 1990. El espanol hablado en los Estados Unidos. Materiales para su estudio. Mexico: Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico. Lujan, M. 1978. Clitic Promotion and Mood in Spanish Verbal Complements. Montreal Working Papers in Linguistics, 10:103-90. Menendez Pidal, Ramon. 1908. Manual elemental de gramatica historica espanola. —. 1946. Cantar de Mio Cid. Madrid: Espasa-Calpe. —. 1951. Poema de Fernan Gonzalez. Reliquias de la poesia epica espanola. Madrid: Espasa-Calpe, 34-180. —. 1955. Primera cronica general de Espafia que mando componer Alfonso el Sabio y se continuaba bajo Sancho IV en 1289. Madrid: Gredos. Mey, Jacob L. 1993. Pragmatics: An Introduction. Oxford:Blackwell Publishers. Meyer-Lubke, W. 1897. Zur Stellung der tonlosen Objektspronomina. Zeitschrift fur Romanische Philologie 21. Montemayor, Jorge de. 1954. Los siete libros de la Diana, ed. by Lopez Estrada, Francisco. Madrid: Espasa-Calpe. Mussafia, A. 1886. Una particolarita sintattica della lingua italiana dei primi secoli. Miscellanea di filologia e linguistica in memoria di N. Caix e U.A. Canello. Firenze. Myhili, John. 1988. The Grammaticalization of Auxiliaries: Spanish Clitic Climbing. Proceedings of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 14:352-63. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 199 —. 1989. Variation in Spanish Clitic Climbing. Synchronic and Diachronic Approaches to Linguistic Variation and Change, ed. by Thomas J. Walsh. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 227-250. —. Myhill, John. 1992. Typological Discourse Analysis: Quantitative Approaches to the Study of Linguistic Function. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. Ochs, Elinor Keenan. 1976. Toward a universal definition of SUBJECT. Subject and Topic, ed. by Li, C. New York: Academic Press, 303- 333. Ochs, Elinor Keenan and Bambi B. Schieffelin. 1976. Subject and topic: a new typology of language. Subject and Topic, ed. by Li, C.N. New York: Academic Press, 335-384. Otero, Carlos. 1986. Arbitrary Subjects in Finite Clauses. Generative Studies in Spanish Syntax, ed. by Bordelois, Ivonne, Heles Contreras, and Karen Zargona. Dordrecht: Foris, 81-109. Prince, Ellen F. 1981. Toward a Taxonomy of given/new information. Radical Pragmatics, ed. by Cole, P. New York: Academic Press, 223-55. Quevedo y Villegas, Francisco Gomez de. 1927. El buscon, ed. by Castro, Americo. Madrid: Ediciones de ‘La Lectura’. Radford, Andrew. 1990. Transformational Grammar. New York: Cambridge University Press. Ramsey, Marathon Montrose. 1956. A Textbook of Modern Spanish. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Ramsden, H. 1964. Weak Pronouns in Early Romance Languages. Manchester. Raposo, Eduardo. 1986. On the Null Object in European Portuguese. Studies in Romance Linguistics, ed. by Jaeggli, Osvaldo and Carmen Silva-Corvalan. Dordrecht: Foris, 373-390. Real Academia Espanola. 1982. Esbozo de una nueva gramatica de la lengua espanola. Madrid: Espasa-Calpe. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 200 Rivero, M.L. 1986. Parameters in the Typology of Clitics in Romance and Old Spanish. Language 64:774-807. —. 1991. Clitic and NP climbing in Old Spanish. Current Studies in Spanish Linguistics, ed. by Campos, Hector and Fernando Martinez-Gil. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 241-282. Roldan, Mercedes. 1974. Constraints on clitic insertion in Spanish. Linguistic studies in Romance Languages, ed. by Campbell, et al. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 124-138. Saltarelli, Mario. 1978. Sentential clitics and clause reduction in Italian. Contemporary Studies in Romance Linguistics, ed. by Sufier, M. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 279-301. —. 1980. Syntactic Diffusion. Papers from the 4th International Conference on Historical Linguistics, ed. by Traugott, Elizabeth, et al. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 183-191. —. 1986. Sincretismo Funcional, Evolucion y la Norma Castellana. Actas del II Congresso Internacional Sobre el Espanol de America. Mexico, D.F.: Facultad de Filologia y Letras, 473-477. —. 1989. Syntactic Shift and the origin of Clitics. Studies in Romance Linguistics, ed. by Kirschner, Carl et al. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 347-64. —. 1990. La Gramatica de los Cliticos y sus Parametros. Presented at the Asociacion de Linguistica y Filologia de America Latina, IX Congreso Internacional Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Sao Paulo-Brazil, 6-10 de agosto de 1990. Serrano y Sanz, M. 1919. Liber regum: Cronicon villarense. Boletin de la Real Academia Espanola, 6:194-215. Spaulding, R. 1927. Puedo hacerlo versus Lo puedo hacer. Hispania 10:343-348. Sufier, Margarita. 1980. Clitic Promotion in Spanish Revisited. Contemporary Studies in Romance Languages, ed. by Nuessel, Jr., Frank H. Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club, 300-330. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 201 Teresa de Jesus, Santa. 1929. La vida de la madre Teresa de Jesus, escrita de su misma mano. New York: Stechert & Co. Tobler, A. 1875. Jules Le Coultre, de I’ordre des mots dans Crestien de Troyes. Gottingische gelehrte Anzeigen 34:1057-1082. —. 1886. Vermischte Beitrage zur franzosischen Grammatik 10. Zeitschrift fiir romanische Phiiologie 13.184-191. Valdes, Juan de. 1895. Dialogo de la lengua. Romanische Studien 6:23/339-420. Valera, Juan. 1986. Pepita Jimenez. Madrid: Coleccion Austral. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 202 Appendix A Data Sources for Clitic Position Study A. Literary Texts 14th Century Don Juan Manuel, 1335: El Conde Lucanor Juan Ruiz, 1343: El libro de Buen Amor 16th Century Alonso de Ercilla y Zuniga, 1569-1589: La Araucana 17th Century Inca Garcilaso de la Vega, 1609-1615: Comentarios Reales de los Incas Tirso de Molina, 1630: El burtadorde Sevilla 19th Century Juan Valera, 1874: Pepita Jimenez Benito Perez Galdos, 1897: Misericordia 20th Century Rodolfo Usigli, 1937: El gesticulador Rodolfo Usigli, 1947: Corona de Sombra Antonio Buero Vallejo, 1950: En la ardiente oscuridad Rodolfo Usigli, 1965: Corona de Luz Antonio Buero Vallejo, 1964: La doble historia de Dr. Valmy Antonio Buero Vallejo, 1967: El tragaluz Picospardos, 1982: Picospardds B. Spoken. Transcribed Texts Esgueva, M. and M. Cantarero. 1981. El habla culta de la ciudad de Madrid. Materiales para su estudio. Madrid: C.S.I.C. Lope Blanch, Juan. 1990. El espanol hablado en los Estados Unidos. Materiales para su estudio. Mexico: Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico. Rosenblat, A. and P. Bentivoglio. 1979. El habla culta de Caracas. Materiales para su estudio. Caracas: Universidad Central de Venezuela. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Appendix B Position of object clitic 1 Preverbai 2 Intermediate 3 Postverbal Position of second object clitic 1 Preverbal 2 Intermediate 3 Postverbal 4 Not applicable Subject Expression 1 Expressed, preverbal 2 Expressed, postverbal 3 Not expressed Subject-Object Relation (1) 1 Expressed preverbal subject, preverbal clitic 2 Expressed preverbal subject, postverbal clitic 3 No expressed subject, preverbal clitic 4 No expressed subject, postverbal clitic 5 Expressed subject, intermediate clitic 6 No expressed subject, intermediate clitic C litic (9=6) 1 me 2 te 3 lo 4 la 5 le 6 os 7 los 8 las 9 le 10 les 11 se 12 lo (idea) 13 Impersonal/passive se 14 Nonreferential 15 se (le) Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 204 Appendix B (continued) Second Clitic (9=6) 1 me 2 te 3 lo 4 la 5 le 6 os 7 los 8 las 9 le 10 les 11 se 12 lo (idea) 13 Impersonal/Passive Se 14 Not applicable First Clitic Coreferentiality 1 Coreferential 2 Not coreferential 3 Impersonal/Passive Se Second Clitic Coreferentiality 1 Coreferential 2 Not coreferential 3 Impersonal/Passive Se 4 Not applicable Type of object clitic (first clitic) 1 Direct object, animate 2 Direct object, inanimate 3 Indirect object 4 Reflexive 5 Ethical Dative Negation 1 None 2 Negation 3 Negation postverbal Verb type 1 Indicative 2 Subjunctive Clause type of appearance of clitic 1 Main Clause 2 Subordinate Clause Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 205 Appendix B (continued) Number of Clitics 1 One 2 Two Source of Data 1 Lope Blanch 2 La doble historia de Dr. Valmy 3 En la ardiente oscuridad 4 Corona de Luz 5 Tragaluz 6 Picospardos 7 Peplta Jimenez 8 El Conde Lucanor 9 Esgueva 10 Corona de Sombra 11 El libro de Buen Amor 12 La Araucana 13 El gGesticulador’ 14 Misericordia 15 Comentarios Reales de los Incas 16 El burladorde Sevilla 17 Caracas data Type of Spanish 1 Spontaneous speech 2 Nonspontaneous speech 3 Written texts Genre 1 Interviews 2 Theater 3 Prose 4 Narrative and other written texts Georgraphica Location 1 United States 2 Peninsular 3 Spanish America 4 Mexico Verb placement 1 Non sentence initial 2 Sentence or clause initial Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 206 Appendix B (continued) First Clitic referent 1 Preceding 2 Proceeding 3 Other Year of source 1 1990 2 1964 3 1950 4 1965 5 1967 6 1995 7 1888 8 1335 9 1981 10 1944 11 1343 12 1569 13 1937 14 1897 15 1609 16 1630 17 1990 Education 1 Elementary 2 High School 3 College 4 Not applicable Verb 1 tocar 2 poder 5 ir a 6 ir 9 ponerse 10 irse 13 oir 14 deber 17 ocurrir 18 comenzar a 21 saber 22 ensenar 25 empezar a 26 andar 29 venir a 30 juntarse a 33 hay que 34 llegar 37 atrever 38 acabar de 41 procurar 42 ser 45 preferir 46 haberque 49 temer 50 lograr 3 estar 4 querer 7 pensar 8 echar 11 tener que 12 soler 15 dejar 16 llevar 19 ayudar 20 ver 23 volver 24 mandar 27 seguir 28 hacer 31 dar 32 tratar de 35 decidir a 36 permitir 39 necesitar 40 pasar 43 volverse 44 convenir 47 resistirse 48 sentir 51 abstener 52 intentar Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 207 Appendix B (continued) 53 disponer 54 ordenar 55 pretender 56 poner 57 evitar 58 parecer 59 leer 60 dedicarse 61 quedarse 62 obligar 63 servir 64 correr 65 ace rear 66 correr 67 terminar 68 reducir 69 acertar 70 tardar 71 desear 72 negar 73 apresurar 74 desplacer 75 forzar 76 bastar 77 impedir 78 producir 79 prometer 80 excitar 81 proponer 82 rehusar 83 aconsejar 84 prepararse 85 acordar 86 haber de 87 continuar 88 agradar 89 vivir 90 invitar a 91 olvidar 92 acusar 93 incitar 94 decidir 95 creer 96 suponer 97 dignar 98 subir 99 guiar 100 espantar 101 enviar 102 salir 103 tornar 104 mostrar 105 sacar 106 quedar Speaker 1 Interviewee 2 Interviewer 3 Not applicable Subject-Object Relation (2) 1 Expressed preverbal subject, preverbal clitic 2 Expressed preverbal subject, postverbal clitic 3 No expressed subject, preverbal clitic 4 No expressed subject, postverbal clitic 5 Not applicable 6 Expressed subject, intermediate clitic 7 No expressed subject, intermediate clitic Type of object (second clitic) 1 Direct object, animate 2 Direct object, inanimate 3 Indirect object 4 Reflexive 5 Ethical Dative 6 Not applicable Second Clitic referent 1 Preceding 2 Proceeding 3 Other Second Verb Type 1 Nonfinite 2 Gerund Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 208 Appendix B (continued) Second verb 1 'vender1 4 'decir' 7 'ver1 10 'mirar1 13 'salir* 16 ’estarse' 19 'vivir' 22 'agarrar1 25 'batear* 28 'contar' 31 'comprar* 34 'llevar' 37 'cantar' 40 'beber' 43 'abrirse1 46 'leer' 49 'encerrar1 52 'quejarse' 55 'pegar' 58 'cocinar* 61 'suceder' 64 'mostrar' 67 'banarse' 70 'retirarse' 73 'representar1 76 'confesarse' 79 'bajar1 82 'interesar1 85 'cuidar' 88 'formar' 91 'ensenar' 94 'seguir' 97 'preguntar' 100 'cambiarse' 103 'visitar' 106 'hallar' 109 'oir1 112 'adoptar' 115 'conocer1 118 'tener' 2 'hablar1 5 'hacer* 8 'casarse' 11 'ir* 14 'pensar1 17 'irse' 20 'mandar1 23 'recibir1 26 'mentar1 29 'venir* 32 'poner1 35 'pedir' 38 'subir' 41 'pasearse' 44 'dejar' 47 'traducir1 50 'trabajar1 53 'curar' 56 'platicar1 59 'dividirse' 62 'apoyar' 65 'creer' 68 'usar' 71 'acostarse' 74 'prepararse' 77 'voltear' 80 'acordarse' 83 'distinguir' 86 'acamparse' 89 'caerse' 92 'pagar' 95 'anadir' 98 'graduarse' 101 'entrar' 104 'sorprender' 107 'describir' 110 'recomendar' 113 'entender1 116 'desprender1 119 'expiicar1 3 'perder1 6 'olvidar* 9 'morirse' 12 'meter* 15 'moverse' 18 'ausentarse' 21 'mantener1 24 'tirar' 27 'caminar1 30 'dar' 33 'quedarse' 36 'felicitar1 39 'quemarse' 42 'pasar' 45 'regresar* 48 'ayudar' 51 'repartir' 54 'sentirse' 57 'abrir' 60 'meterse' 63 'elevarse' 66 'arrear' 69 'revisar' 72 'procesar' 75 'sentir' 78 'prometir' 81 'sacar' 84 'estar' 87 'jalarse' 90 'juntarse' 93 'mezclar' 96 'rezar' 99 'enojarse' 102 'estudiar' 105 'abandonar' 108 'esperar' 111 'celebrar' 114 'preparar' 117 'arreglar' 120 'cambiar' Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 209 Appendix B (continued) 121 'limpiar1 122 'mover* 123 'comunicarse' 124 'manejar* 125 'alistarse' 126 'llamar* 127 'adapter* 128 'analizar' 129 'elegir' 130 'acabarse* 131 'aguantar' 132 'parar' 133 'lastimar' 134 'hinchar* 135 'conseguir' 136 'quemar* 137 'olvidarse' 138 'adictar* 139 'destruirse' 140 'extenderse' 141 'saber* 142 'traer' 143 'levantarse' 144 'recoger* 145 'portarse' 146 'desaparecerse' 147 'apostar' 148 'cerrar' 149 'navegar* 150 'ganar' 151 'recordar' 152 'publican 153 'guardarse' 154 'apuntarse' 155 'enfermar' 156 'profanar* 157 ’acercarse’ 158 'ser* 159 'sentarse' 160 'distraer' 161 'besar' 162 'tomar' 163 ’rodar* 164 'sufrir* 165 'disculpar' 166 'telefonear* 167 'acompanar* 168 'pesar' 169 'concederse' 170 'oirse' 171 'animar* 172 'estimular' 173 'preocuparse' 174 'encontrarse' 175 'franquearse' 176 'ponerse' 177 'comprender' 178 'doblegar' 179 'necesitar' 180 'defenderse' 181 'insistir' 182 'apretar* 183 'indicar' 184 'convencerse' 185 'castigar* 186 'ocuparse' 187 'resolver' 188 'transformarse' 189 'destruir' 190 'curarse' 191 'robar* 192 'compadecer' 193 'comentar* 194 'tomarse' 195 'resignarse' 196 'sobreponerse' 197 'enfadarse' 198 'mentir' 199 'marchar' 200 'tomar* 201 'quitarse' 202 'quitar' 203 'recostarse' 204 'perjudicar' 205 'confesar' 206 'evitar' 207 'detener' 208 'presionar' 209 'coger' 210 'compararse' 211 'decepcionar' 212 'resistir* 213 'comprobar' 214 'excederse' 215 'inventarse' 216 'iluminar' 217 'cansar' 218 'vencerse' 219 'secar' 220 'salvar' 221 'caer' 222 'llegar' 223 'servirse' 224 'enganar* 225 'dominar' 226 'concertar* 227 'despedir* 228 'mirarse' 229 'constipar' 230 'enfriarse* 231 'guardar' 232 'procurar' 233 'transmitir* 234 'ahogarse' 235 'hundirse' 236 'perdonar* 237 'figurar' 238 'impedlr* 239 'buscar' 240 'merecer' 241 'gritar' 242 'consultar* 243 'dedicarse' Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 210 Appendix B (continued) 244 'levantar' 247 'proferir' 250 'ingresar1 253 'conducir' 256 'apagarse' 259 'completar' 262 'arrodillarse' 265 'charter* 268 'aprender1 271 'convencer' 274 'romper' 277 'adaptarse' 280 'negar' 283 'llenar1 286 'clavar' 289 'tropezar1 292 'asegurar1 295 'retener' 298 'reprimirse' 301 'amonestar' 304 'enterarse' 307 'cansarse' 310 'echar' 313 'deslizarse' 316 'proponer' 319 'invocar1 322 'gozar' 325 'abstenerse' 328 'golpear' 331 'ofrecer' 334 'pergar' 337 'pelear' 340 'tolerar' 343 'calmar1 346 'importar' 349 'precipitar' 352 'rehacer' 355 'presentar' 358 'acomodarse' 361 'recordarse' 364 'separar' 245 'informar1 248 'agradecer* 251 'revivir' 254 'destrozar1 257 'diagnosticar' 260 'terminar' 263 'reirse' 266 'volver' 269 'callarse' 272 'administrar' 275 'impregnar' 278 'marcharse' 281 'disuadir' 284 'combatir' 287 'dudar' 290 'vacilar' 293 'apreciar' 296 'remediar' 299 'contenerse' 302 'contagiar' 305 'reservar' 308 'anotar' 311 'sugerir' 314 'avisar' 317 'arreglarse' 320 'vencerse' 323 'coronar' 326 'advertir' 329 'escuchar' 332 'realizar' 335 'ignorar' 338 'haber1 341 'referirse' 344 'aparecerse' 347 'cometer' 350 'adquirir' 353 'repetir' 356 'temer' 359 'jurar' 362 'cumplir' 365 'benedecir' 246 'considerar' 249 'encontrar1 252 'enviar' 255 'intervenir* 258 'calificar' 261 'incorporar' 264 'palpar' 267 'engolfarse' 270 'volverse' 273 'rechazar* 276 'percibir' 279 'conformarse' 282 'concretar' 285 'abrazar1 288 'contestar' 291 'reconocer' 294 'reir' 297 'intentar' 300 'adivinar' 303 'llorar' 306 'iluminarse' 309 'faltar' 312 'tratarse' 315 'ocurrir' 318 'confiarse' 321 'dormir' 324 'desganitar' 327 'ilustrar' 330 'extinguir' 333 'herir' 336 'embriagar' 339 'interrogar' 342 'obligar' 345 'consumarse' 348 'apoderarse' 351 'descubrir' 354 'meditar' 357 'abaca r' 360 'convocar' 363 'sumar' 366 'decirse' Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 211 367 'destacarse' 370 'anquilarse' 373 'justificarse' 376 'cenar' 379 ’desarrollar’ 382' ace rear' 385 'pisotear* 388 'brindar1 391 'ostentar1 394 'editar* 397 'repeler1 400 'arrugar' 403 'reparar' 406 'matar* 409 'entregar1 411 ‘acostumbrarse’ 414 ‘imaginar1 417 ‘alterar* 420 ‘asistir’ 423 ‘responder’ 426 ‘endurecer1 429 ‘regalar’ 432 ‘parecer1 435 ‘trasladar* 438 ‘vengar* 441 ‘observar1 444 ‘acertar’ 447 ‘cumpiir’ 450 ‘arrancar’ 453 ‘logar1 455 ‘socorrer1 458 ‘acabar’ 461 ‘cobrar’ 464 ‘enxugar1 467 ‘ensanarse’ 470 ‘aventurar1 473 ‘vagar’ 476 ‘desembargar* 479 ‘apremiar1 482 ‘desmayarse’ 485 ‘escapar’ Appendix B (continued) 368 'alegrarse' 371 'colocarse' 374 'saludarse' 377 'despedirse' 380 'imaginar* 383 'arrepentirse' 386 'cortarse' 389 'proyectar* 392 'utilizar' 395 'insultar' 398 'juzgar1 401 'ocultar1 404 'crecer' 407 'apiadar* 410 ‘atracar* 412 ‘deprimir’ 415 ‘conservar1 418 ‘controlar’ 421 ‘atender1 424 ‘decidir1 427 ‘tranquilizar1 430 ‘andar* 433 ‘esmerar’ 436 solucionar* 439 ‘desahogar1 442 ‘emitir1 445 ‘escusar1 448 ‘comenzar1 451 ‘probar* 454 ‘tornar’ 456 ‘prender1 459 ‘desenganar1 462 ‘encobrir1 465 ‘vestir1 468 ‘maravillar’ 471 ‘asconder1 474 ‘maltratar* 477 ‘loar1 480 ‘desechar1 483 ‘desconectar’ 486 ‘deshacer1 369 'imponerse' 372 'escribir1 375 'recortar' 378 'desquiciarse' 381 'encender' 384 'reprochar1 387 ’contrariar’ 390 'apresurarse' 393 'acusar* 396 'triunfar' 399 'causar' 402 ’fingir' 405 ‘atraer’ 408 'poder1 413 ‘convertir1 416 ‘soportar’ 419 ‘atrofiar1 422 ‘demostrar1 425 ‘plantear1 428 ‘morder’ 431 ‘enterrar1 434 ‘tocar’ 437 ‘divorciar’ 440 ‘valer’ 443 ‘largar1 446 ‘escoger1 449 ‘partir1 452 ‘rogar’ 454 ‘danar1 457 ‘saltar1 460 ‘fallar1 463 ‘criar’ 466 ‘retraer’ 469 ‘aderescar’ 472 ‘henchir’ 475 ‘desterrar1 478 ‘derramar’ 481 ‘discutir1 484 ‘librar1 487 ‘aprovechar1 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 488 ‘desgraciar* 491 ‘culpar1 494 ‘alimentar’. Appendix B (continued) 489 ‘desembargar’ 492 ‘ordenar’ 490 ‘folgar’ 493 ‘cubnY Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 213 Appendix C Verbs with which variation in object clitic pronoun placement is found _____________ Verb ^cabarde_________ <\ndar_____________ Mrever____________ Comenzar a________ Convenir__________ Deber_____________ Jejar______________ Echar_____________ Empezar a_________ Estar______________ Haber de__________ Hacer_____________ r a________________ r_________________ Jegar_____________ 3arecer___________ 3ensar____________ 3oder_____________ 3onerse___________ Quedarse__________ Querer____________ Saber_____________ Seguir_____________ Sentir_____________ Terminar___________ rratar de___________ y/enir a____________ ^/er__________________ y/olver Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Appendix D Other Variables and Their Variants Considered Subject Person • First person singular • Second person singular Third person animate singular • Third person other singular First person plural • Second person plural • Third person animate plural Third person other Impersonal/Passive Clitic Referent Location • Main Clause • Dependent Clause • Same Clause Clitic Referent • Subject • Object Aboutness • About the grammatical subject • About the discourse Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

Asset Metadata

Creator Gill, Deborah Jean (author)

Core Title An anaphoric approach to clitic position in Spanish

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

School Graduate School

Degree Doctor of Philosophy

Degree Program Spanish

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag language, linguistics,Language, Modern,OAI-PMH Harvest

Language English

Advisor Saltarelli, Mario (committee chair), Araluce, Ramon (committee member), Rutherford, William E. (committee member), Silva-Corvalan, Carmen (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c16-76849

Unique identifier UC11338768

Identifier 3018082.pdf (filename),usctheses-c16-76849 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier 3018082.pdf

Dmrecord 76849

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Gill, Deborah Jean

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA