Elena Callegari | Utrecht University (original) (raw)

Papers by Elena Callegari

Research paper thumbnail of Topicalization: The IO/DO Asymmetry in Icelandic*

In this paper, we investigate differences in the frequency of direct-object versus indirect-objec... more In this paper, we investigate differences in the frequency of direct-object versus indirect-object topicalization (i.e. fronting with no accompanying pronominal resumption) in Icelandic using the Icelandic Parsed Historical Corpus. We find that the overall incidence of DO topicalization is double that of IO left topicalization. We argue that this follows from the cross-linguistic preference towards having topical information appear before focal one: while DO topicalization can help ensure that this configuration is obtained when the IO is in focus, there is nothing to gain from topicalizing the IO when the DO is in focus, as IO > DO is already the unmarked order in Icelandic. 1 Ditransitives & Topicalization in Icelandic There are six possible case patterns that can occur with verbs taking two objects in Icelandic (Zaenen and Maling 1990), the most frequent one being an indirect object (IO) in the dative case and a direct object (DO) in the accusative case (DAT + ACC pattern). Th...

Research paper thumbnail of The relative order of foci and polarity complementizers

Linguistic Variation, 2021

According to Rizzi & Bocci’s (2017) suggested hierarchy of the left periphery, fronted foci (FOC)... more According to Rizzi & Bocci’s (2017) suggested hierarchy of the left periphery, fronted foci (FOC) can never precede polarity complementizers (PolC); yet languages like Bulgarian and Macedonian appear to display precisely such an ordering configuration. On the basis of a cross-linguistic comparison of ten Slavic languages, I argue that in the Slavic subgroup the possibility of having a focus precede PolC is dependent on the morphological properties of the complementizer itself: in languages where the order FOC < PolC is acceptable, PolC is a complex morpheme derived through the incorporation of a lower functional head with a higher one. The order FOC < PolC is then derived by giving overt spell-out to the intermediate copy of PolC rather than to the topmost one. In turn, this option is linked to the possibility, recorded in all languages which allow for FOC < PolC, to also realize the morpheme expressing interrogative polarity as an enclitic particle attaching to fronted foci.

Research paper thumbnail of Les sujets disloqués en trévisan

This paper looks at the discursive function of left-dislocated subjects in an understudied Romanc... more This paper looks at the discursive function of left-dislocated subjects in an understudied Romance variety, namely Trevigiano. In the interest of comparison, we also consider Ashby’s (1988) corpus on left dislocations in French. We argue that left dislocated subjects in Trevigiano, just like their French counterparts, are topics which serve to activate a new file card in the sense of Heim (1982), and we show that the majority of left-dislocated subjects in Trevigiano introduce a topic shift at the level of the sentence, rather than at the level of the discourse. We then provide examples of how speakers exploit this flexible tool in order to develop and manipulate the different levels of discourse.

Research paper thumbnail of The relative order of foci and polarity complementizers

According to Rizzi & Bocci’s (2017) suggested hierarchy of the left periphery, fronted foci (FOC)... more According to Rizzi & Bocci’s (2017) suggested hierarchy of the left periphery, fronted foci (FOC) can never precede polarity complementizers (PolC); yet languages like Bulgarian and Macedonian appear to display precisely such an ordering configuration. On the basis of a cross-linguistic comparison of ten Slavic languages, I argue that in the Slavic subgroup the possibility of having a focus precede PolC is dependent on the morphological properties of the complementizer itself: in languages where the order FOC < PolC is acceptable, PolC is a complex morpheme derived through the incorporation of a lower functional head with a higher one. The order FOC < PolC is then derived by giving overt spell-out to the intermediate copy of PolC rather than to the topmost one. In turn, this option is linked to the possibility, recorded in all languages which allow for FOC < PolC, to also realize the morpheme expressing interrogative polarity as an enclitic particle attaching to fronted foci.

Research paper thumbnail of Topicalization: The IO/DO Asymmetry in Icelandic*

In this paper, we investigate differences in the frequency of direct-object versus indirect-objec... more In this paper, we investigate differences in the frequency of direct-object versus indirect-object topicalization (i.e. fronting with no accompanying pronominal resumption) in Icelandic using the Icelandic Parsed Historical Corpus. We find that the overall incidence of DO topicalization is double that of IO left topicalization. We argue that this follows from the cross-linguistic preference towards having topical information appear before focal one: while DO topicalization can help ensure that this configuration is obtained when the IO is in focus, there is nothing to gain from topicalizing the IO when the DO is in focus, as IO > DO is already the unmarked order in Icelandic. 1 Ditransitives & Topicalization in Icelandic There are six possible case patterns that can occur with verbs taking two objects in Icelandic (Zaenen and Maling 1990), the most frequent one being an indirect object (IO) in the dative case and a direct object (DO) in the accusative case (DAT + ACC pattern). Th...

Research paper thumbnail of The relative order of foci and polarity complementizers

Linguistic Variation, 2021

According to Rizzi & Bocci’s (2017) suggested hierarchy of the left periphery, fronted foci (FOC)... more According to Rizzi & Bocci’s (2017) suggested hierarchy of the left periphery, fronted foci (FOC) can never precede polarity complementizers (PolC); yet languages like Bulgarian and Macedonian appear to display precisely such an ordering configuration. On the basis of a cross-linguistic comparison of ten Slavic languages, I argue that in the Slavic subgroup the possibility of having a focus precede PolC is dependent on the morphological properties of the complementizer itself: in languages where the order FOC < PolC is acceptable, PolC is a complex morpheme derived through the incorporation of a lower functional head with a higher one. The order FOC < PolC is then derived by giving overt spell-out to the intermediate copy of PolC rather than to the topmost one. In turn, this option is linked to the possibility, recorded in all languages which allow for FOC < PolC, to also realize the morpheme expressing interrogative polarity as an enclitic particle attaching to fronted foci.

Research paper thumbnail of Les sujets disloqués en trévisan

This paper looks at the discursive function of left-dislocated subjects in an understudied Romanc... more This paper looks at the discursive function of left-dislocated subjects in an understudied Romance variety, namely Trevigiano. In the interest of comparison, we also consider Ashby’s (1988) corpus on left dislocations in French. We argue that left dislocated subjects in Trevigiano, just like their French counterparts, are topics which serve to activate a new file card in the sense of Heim (1982), and we show that the majority of left-dislocated subjects in Trevigiano introduce a topic shift at the level of the sentence, rather than at the level of the discourse. We then provide examples of how speakers exploit this flexible tool in order to develop and manipulate the different levels of discourse.

Research paper thumbnail of The relative order of foci and polarity complementizers

According to Rizzi & Bocci’s (2017) suggested hierarchy of the left periphery, fronted foci (FOC)... more According to Rizzi & Bocci’s (2017) suggested hierarchy of the left periphery, fronted foci (FOC) can never precede polarity complementizers (PolC); yet languages like Bulgarian and Macedonian appear to display precisely such an ordering configuration. On the basis of a cross-linguistic comparison of ten Slavic languages, I argue that in the Slavic subgroup the possibility of having a focus precede PolC is dependent on the morphological properties of the complementizer itself: in languages where the order FOC < PolC is acceptable, PolC is a complex morpheme derived through the incorporation of a lower functional head with a higher one. The order FOC < PolC is then derived by giving overt spell-out to the intermediate copy of PolC rather than to the topmost one. In turn, this option is linked to the possibility, recorded in all languages which allow for FOC < PolC, to also realize the morpheme expressing interrogative polarity as an enclitic particle attaching to fronted foci.