On the left periphery of the clause

Ever since the advent of generative grammar, much work in syntax has been devoted to the structure of the clausse and its two-part configuration: the core of the clause, on the one hand, and the left periphery, on the other.By left periphery, I mean any lexical material that appears to the left of the canonical subject position.In (1a), for example, we find a neutral word order (Subject-Auxiliary-Verb-Object), whereas in (1b), the interrogative equivalent of (1a), we see that the auxiliary 'has' appears to the left of the clause (Auxiliary-Subject-Verb-Object).(1) a. Claudia has watched a movie.b. Has Claudia watched a movie?Originally, the core clause was labelled S (for sentence) while the left periphery was labelled COMP (see Bresnan 1970).For theoretical reasons (the rise of X-bar theory, Chomsky 1970; Jackendoff 1977) as well as empirical reasons (two elements can appear to the left of the canonical subject, as shown by ( 2)), two positions were postulated for the left periphery: COMP and its specifier, as in (3), the idea being that the wh-phrase 'what' appears in the specifier position while the auxiliary is in COMP.(2) What has Claudia watched?(3) CP specifier C COMP Wh-phrases are not the only elements that can be fronted in English and other languages.Topics (4a) or focused elements (4b) are often fronted to the left of the canonical subject:

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
The Canadian Journal of Linguistics / La revue canadienne de linguistique
Published
2026-05-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/cnj.2025.10010
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

On the left periphery of the clause

Eric Mathieu
The Canadian Journal of Linguistics / La revue canadienne de linguistique
Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
article

On the left periphery of the clause

Eric Mathieu
article en

Abstract

Ever since the advent of generative grammar, much work in syntax has been devoted to the structure of the clausse and its two-part configuration: the core of the clause, on the one hand, and the left periphery, on the other.By left periphery, I mean any lexical material that appears to the left of the canonical subject position.In (1a), for example, we find a neutral word order (Subject-Auxiliary-Verb-Object), whereas in (1b), the interrogative equivalent of (1a), we see that the auxiliary 'has' appears to the left of the clause (Auxiliary-Subject-Verb-Object).(1) a. Claudia has watched a movie.b. Has Claudia watched a movie?Originally, the core clause was labelled S (for sentence) while the left periphery was labelled COMP (see Bresnan 1970).For theoretical reasons (the rise of X-bar theory, Chomsky 1970; Jackendoff 1977) as well as empirical reasons (two elements can appear to the left of the canonical subject, as shown by ( 2)), two positions were postulated for the left periphery: COMP and its specifier, as in (3), the idea being that the wh-phrase 'what' appears in the specifier position while the auxiliary is in COMP.(2) What has Claudia watched?(3) CP specifier C COMP Wh-phrases are not the only elements that can be fronted in English and other languages.Topics (4a) or focused elements (4b) are often fronted to the left of the canonical subject:

The Canadian Journal of Linguistics / La revue canadienne de linguistique
University of Ottawa (CA)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 2%
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.