Simplification or Complexification: Auxiliary Selection and Anti-agreement Effect in Brazilian Venetan
Abstract
In this paper we discuss a change in the auxiliary selectional pattern of Brazilian Venetan, a heritage Italo-Romance variety spoken in southern Brazil. Venetan varieties display a default form of the past participle in constructions with postverbal subjects and a fully agreeing form in constructions with preverbal subjects: this is true both for the homeland varieties of the language, spoken in northern Italy, as well as for the heritage variety under analysis in this paper, spoken in southern Brazil. A crucial difference emerges in unaccusative constructions: while Italian Venetan uses the same form of the auxiliary BE in presence of preverbal and postverbal subjects, Brazilian Venetan uses a specialized form of the auxiliary in the constructions with default agreement on the past participle, when postverbal subjects are present. We argue that the specialized auxiliary form emerges as a necessary resumption in the case of lack of agreement. The heritage variety becomes, therefore, morphosyntactically more complex than the non-heritage counterpart.
Keywords
anti-agreement, auxiliary, heritage, agreementReferences
Aalberse, S., Backus, A. & Muysken, P. 2019. Heritage languages. A Language Contact Approach. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.58
Ackema, P. & Neeleman, A. 2003. Context-Sensitive Spell-Out. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 21: 681-735. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025502221221
Adger, D. 2006. Combinatorial variability. Journal of Linguistics 42: 503-530. https://doi.org/10.1017/S002222670600418X
Aikhenvald, A. 2002. The Languages of the Amazon. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199593569.001.0001
Andriani, L., Casalicchio, J., Ciconte, F. M., D’Alessandro, R., Frasson, A., van Osch, B., Sorgini, L., Terenghi, S. 2021. Documenting Italo-Romance minority languages in the Americas. Problems and tentative solutions. In Coler, M. & Nevins, A. (eds.). Contemporary research in minority and diaspora languages of Europe. (Contact and Multilingualism). Berlin: Language Science Press.
Alexiadou, A., Anagnostopoulou, E. & Schäfer, F. 2015. External Arguments in Transitivity Alternations: A Layering Approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https:/doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199571949.001.0001
Benincà, P. 1994. La variazione sintattica. Bologna: Il Mulino.
Benincà, P. 2007. Clitici e ausiliari: gh’o, z’e. In Bentley, D. & Ledgeway, A. (eds.). Sui dialetti italoromanzi. Saggi in onore di Nigel Vincent. King’s Lynn. UK: Biddles. The Italianist 27.
Bentley, D. & Cennamo, M. 2022. Thematic and lexico-aspectual constraints on v–s agreement: Evidence from northern italo-romance. In Ledgeway, A. & Vincent, N. (eds.). Periphrasis and inflexion in Diachrony. A View from Romance, 335-361. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198870807.003.0013
Bentley, D., Ciconte, F. M. & Cruschina, S. 2015. Existentials and locatives in Romance dialects of Italy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198745266.001.0001
Biberauer, T. 2019. Factors 2 and 3: Towards a principled approach. Catalan Journal of Linguistics Special Issue: 45-88. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/catjl.219
Bonet, E., Cheng, L., Downing, L. & Mascaró, J. 2019. (In)Direct reference in the phonology-syntax interface under phase theory: a response to Modular PIC. Linguistic Inquiry 50(4): 751-777. https://doi.org/10.1162/ling_a_00324
Brandi, L. & Cordin, P. 1989. Two italian dialects and the null subject parameter. In Jaeggli, O. & Safir, K. (eds.). The Null Subject Parameter, 111-142. Dordrecht: Springer.
Casalicchio, J., Ciconte, F. M. & D’Alessandro, R. 2018. On phasal domains and the difference between subject and object clitics. Poster presented at GLOW 41, Budapest.
Cardinaletti, A. 2004. Toward a cartography of subject positions. In Rizzi, L. (ed.). The Structure of CP and IP, Volume The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, vol. 2, 115-165. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cardinaletti, A. 2018. On different types of postverbal subjects in Italian. Italian Journal of Linguistics 30: 79-106. https://doi.org/10.26346/1120-2726-125
Cheng, L. & Downing, L. 2012. Prosodic domains do not match spell-out domains. McGill Working Papers in Linguistics 22.
Chomsky, N. 2001. Derivation by phase. In Kenstowicz, M. (ed.). Ken Hale: A Life in Language, 1-52. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Ciconte, F. M. 2018. Soggetto e oggetto nell’italo-romanzo antico. Studi e Saggi Linguistici 56: 97-136.
D’Alessandro, R. 2021. Syntactic change in contact: Romance. Annual Review of Linguistics 7: 309-328.
D’Alessandro, R. 2022. Crossing domains: topic marking and doubling in Romance. In Boneh, N., Harbour, D. & Roy, I. (eds.). Building on Babel’s rubble, 395-409. Paris: PUV.
D’Alessandro, R., Natvig, D. & Putnam, M. 2021. Addressing challenges in formal research on moribund heritage languages: A path forward. Frontiers in Psychology 12.
D’Alessandro, R. & Roberts, I. 2008. Movement and agreement in Italian past participles and defective phases. Linguistic Inquiry 3(39): 477-491.
D’Alessandro, R. & Scheer, T. 2015. Modular PIC. Linguistic Inquiry 46(4): 593-624.
Frasson, A. 2021. Clitics are not enough: on agreement and null subjects in Brazilian Venetan. Glossa 6: 86. https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.1697
Frosi, V. M. & Mioranza, C. 1975. Imigração italiana no Nordeste do Rio Grande do Sul: processos de formação e evolução de uma comunidade ítalo- brasileira. Universidade de Caxias do Sul: Editora Movimento.
Garzonio, J. & Poletto, C. 2011. I clitici di ausiliare nelle varietà piemontesi. In Garzonio J. (ed.). Studi sui dialetti del Piemonte. Quaderni dei lavoro ASIt 13, 107-122. Padova: Unipress.
Guzzo, N. B. & Garcia, G. D. 2020. Phonological variation and prosodic representation: Clitics in Portuguese-Veneto contact. Journal of Language Contact 13: 389-427. https://doi.org/10.1163/19552629-bja10021
Harris, A. C. & Campbell, L. 1995. Historical syntax in cross-linguistic perspective (Vol. 74). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Haspelmath, M. 2006. Against markedness (and what to replace it with). Journal of linguistics 42(1): 25-70. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226705003683
Heath, J. 1978. Linguistic diffusion in Arnhem Land (Australian Aboriginal Studies Research and Regional Studies 13). Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.
Hulk, A. & Müller, N. 2000. Bilingual first language acquisition at the interface between syntax and pragmatics. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 3(3): 227-244. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728900000353
Kupisch, T. & Rothman, J. 2018. Terminology matters! Why difference is not incompleteness and how early child bilinguals are heritage speakers. International Journal of Bilingualism 22(5): 564-582. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006916654355
Lass, R. 1988. How to do things with junk: Exaptation in language evolution. Stellenbosch Papers in Linguistics 17: 33-63.
Lass, R. 1990. How to do things with junk: Exaptation in language evolution. Journal of Linguistics 26: 79-102.
Ledgeway, A. 2019. The causative construction in the dialects of southern Italy and the phonology syntax interface. In Franco, L. & Lorusso, P. (eds.). Linguistic Variation: Structure and Interpretation. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781501505201-021
Ledgeway, A. 2021. The syntactic distribution of Rafforzamento fonosintattico in cosentino. A phase theoretic account. In Nicolae, A. & Dragomirescu, A. (eds.). Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2017. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.355.11led
Legate, J. A. 2003. Some Interface Properties of the Phase. Linguistic Inquiry 34(3): 506-516.
McGinnis, M. 2004. Lethal Ambiguity. Linguistic Inquiry 35(1): 47-95.
Montrul, S. 2004. Subject and object expression in Spanish heritage speakers: A case of morphosyntactic convergence. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 7(2): 125-142. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728904001464
Montrul, S. 2008. Incomplete acquisition in bilingualism: Re-examining the age factor. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.39
Nespor, M. & Vogel, I. 1986. Prosodic Phonology. Dordrecht: Foris.
Nichols, J. 1992. Linguistic diversity in space and time. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Ouali, H. 2006. Unifying agreement relations: A minimalist analysis of berber. Doctoral dissertation. University of Michigan.
Ouhalla, J. 1993. Subject-extraction, negation and the antiagreement effect. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 11: 477-518. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00993167
Ouhalla, J. 2005. Agreement features, agreement and antiagreement. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 23: 655-686.
Parry, M. 1993. Subject clitics in Piedmontese: a diachronic perspective. Vox Romanica 52: 96-116.
Pascual y Cabo, D. & Rothman, J. 2012. The (il)logical problem of heritage speaker bilingualism and incomplete acquisition. Applied Linguistics 33: 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ams037
Platzack, C. 2001. The Vulnerable C-domain. Brain and Language 77(3): 364-377. https://doi.org/10.1006/brln.2000.2408
Poletto, C. 1993. La sintassi del soggetto nei dialetti italiani settentrionali. Padua: Unipress.
Polinsky, M. 2018. Heritage Languages and their Speakers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781107252349
Preminger, O. 2011. Agreement as a fallible operation. PhD dissertation, MIT.
Preminger, O. 2014. Agreement and its failures. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9780262027403.001.0001
Putnam, M. T. & Sánchez, L. 2013. What’s so incomplete about incomplete acquisition? A prolegomenon to modeling heritage language grammars. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 3(4): 478-508. https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.3.4.04put
Rizzi, L. 1986. On the status of subject clitics in romance. In Jaeggli, O. & Silva-Corvalán, C. (eds.). Studies in Romance Linguistics, 391-419. Dordrecht: Foris.
Schaefer, S. 2020. The morpho-syntactic encoding of discourse-linked topics: an agreement alternation in inversion in north-eastern Italian varieties. Glossa 5(1): 1-24. https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.1115
Sorace, A. 2011. Pinning down the concept of ‘interface’ in bilingualism. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 1(1): 1-33. https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.1.1.01sor
Sorace, A. & Filiaci, F. 2006. Anaphora resolution in near-native speakers of Italian. Second Language Research 22(3): 339-368. https://doi.org/10.1191/0267658306sr271oa
Tortora, C. 2014. Addressing the problem of intra-speaker variation for parametric theory. In Zanuttini, R. & Horn, L. (eds.). Micro-syntactic variation in North-American English, 294-323. New York: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199367221.003.0010
Published
Downloads
Copyright (c) 2023 Roberta D’Alessandro, Alberto Frasson
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
