V-Movement, subject clitics, and inversion

Building on new evidence from Bolognese, this paper proposes an account for the appearance and distribution of φ-related subject clitics both within and among Gallo-Italic grammars that relies only on independently motivated mechanisms. It notes problems for previous accounts that include additional subject clitic specific functional heads and varying height of head-movement. Instead, it proposes that subject clitics depend on standard Agree, and that they are a consequence of an extra uφ (“agreement doubling”) beyond the one inherited from C. Inversion in interrogatives is purely syntactic, and follows from strictly cyclic head-movement of V up to C. These two separate uφs underlie the distinct patterns of syncretisms and gaps in paradigms for verbal agreement suffixes and subject clitics in particular grammars, and for generalizations among them. Furthermore, gaps in a paradigm of subject clitics, like gaps in an agreement paradigm, do not imply a lack of Agree, but only a lack of overt exponents. Independently motivated syntactic mechanisms thus feed independently motivated morphological mechanisms. The syntax determines word/morpheme order, while morphophonology determines their realization.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Isogloss Open Journal of Romance Linguistics
Published
2025-07-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/isogloss.516
Primary Topic
Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

V-Movement, subject clitics, and inversion

Edward J. Rubin
Isogloss Open Journal of Romance Linguistics
Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
article

V-Movement, subject clitics, and inversion

Edward J. Rubin
article en

Abstract

Building on new evidence from Bolognese, this paper proposes an account for the appearance and distribution of φ-related subject clitics both within and among Gallo-Italic grammars that relies only on independently motivated mechanisms. It notes problems for previous accounts that include additional subject clitic specific functional heads and varying height of head-movement. Instead, it proposes that subject clitics depend on standard Agree, and that they are a consequence of an extra uφ (“agreement doubling”) beyond the one inherited from C. Inversion in interrogatives is purely syntactic, and follows from strictly cyclic head-movement of V up to C. These two separate uφs underlie the distinct patterns of syncretisms and gaps in paradigms for verbal agreement suffixes and subject clitics in particular grammars, and for generalizations among them. Furthermore, gaps in a paradigm of subject clitics, like gaps in an agreement paradigm, do not imply a lack of Agree, but only a lack of overt exponents. Independently motivated syntactic mechanisms thus feed independently motivated morphological mechanisms. The syntax determines word/morpheme order, while morphophonology determines their realization.

Isogloss Open Journal of Romance LinguisticsVol. 11(5)
University of Utah (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 77%
Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.