Spanish aspectual se as an indirect object reflexive: The import of atelicity, bare nouns, and leísta PCC repairs

References

Adger, David & Daniel Harbour. 2007. Syntax and syncretisms of the person case constrain. Syntax 10(1). 2–37.10.1111/j.1467-9612.2007.00095.xSearch in Google Scholar

Albizu, Pablo. 1997. Generalized person-case constraint: A case for a syntax-driven inflectional morphology. In M. Uribe-Etxebarria & A. Mendikoetxea (eds.), Theoretical issues on the morphology-syntax interface, 1–33. Donostia: Gipuzkoako Foru Aldundia/EHU.Search in Google Scholar

Alexiadou, Artemis, Elena Anagnastopoulou & Florian Schäfer. 2006. The properties of anticausatives crosslinguistically. In M. Frascarelli (ed.), Phases of Interpretation. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110197723.4.187Search in Google Scholar

Anagnastopoulou, Elena. 2003. The syntax of ditransitives: Evidence from clitics. The Hague: Mouton de Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar

Anagnastopoulou, Elena. 2005. Strong and weak person restrictions: A feature checking analysis. In Lorie Heggie & Francisco Ordoñez (eds.), Clitic and affix combinations, 199–235. Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.10.1075/la.74.08anaSearch in Google Scholar

Arce-Arenales, Manuel Antonio. 1989. Semantic structure and syntactic function: The case of Spanish SE. PhD dissertation. University of Colorado, Boulder.Search in Google Scholar

Alsina, Alex. 1999. On the representation of event structure. In T. Mohanan & L. Wee (eds.), Grammatical semantics: evidence for structure in meaning, 77–122. Stanford, California: CSLI Publications.Search in Google Scholar

Armstrong, Grant. 2011. Two classes of transitive verbs: Evidence from Spanish. PhD Dissertation, Georgetown University.Search in Google Scholar

Armstrong, Grant. 2013. Agentive reflexive clitics and transitive se constructions in Spanish. Borealis. An International Journal of Hispanic linguistics 2(2). 81–128.10.7557/1.2.2.2526Search in Google Scholar

Baker, Mark. 1988. Incorporation: A theory of grammatical function changing. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar

Baker, Mark. 1996. The polysynthesis parameter. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Baker, Mark. 1997. Thematic roles and syntactic structure. In L. Haegeman (ed.), Elements of grammar, 73–137. Dordrecht: Kluwer.10.1007/978-94-011-5420-8_2Search in Google Scholar

Basilico, David. 2010. The se clitic and its relationship to paths. Probus 22. 271–302.10.1515/prbs.2010.010Search in Google Scholar

Bejar, Susan & Milan Rezac. 2003. Person licensing and the derivation of PCC effects. Selected papers from LSRL 32, Benjamins.10.1075/cilt.244.07bejSearch in Google Scholar

Bleam, Tonia. 1999. Leísta Spanish and the syntax of clitic doubling. PhD dissertation, University of Delaware.Search in Google Scholar

Bonet, Eulalia. 1991. Morphology after syntax: Pronominal clitics in Romance. Doctoral Dissertation, MIT.Search in Google Scholar

Bonet, Eulalia. 2008. The Person-case constraint and repair strategies. In Roberta D’Alessandro, Susann Fischer & Gunnar Hrafn Hrafnb-Jargarson (eds.), Agreement restrictions, 103–128. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110207835.103Search in Google Scholar

Borer, Hagit. 1984. Parametric syntax: Case studies in Semitic and romance languages. Cinnaminson: Foris Publications.10.1515/9783110808506Search in Google Scholar

Borer, Hagit. 2005. Structuring sense II: The normal course of events. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199263929.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Bosse, Solveig, Benjamin Bruening & Masahiro Yamada. 2012. Affected experiencers. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 30(4). 1185–1230.10.1007/s11049-012-9177-1Search in Google Scholar

Bruening, Benjamin. 2001. QR obeys superiority: Frozen scope and ACD. Linguistic Inquiry 32. 233–273.10.1162/00243890152001762Search in Google Scholar

Bruening, Benjamin. 2010. Double object constructions disguised as prepositional datives. Linguistic Inquiry 41. 287–305.10.1162/ling.2010.41.2.287Search in Google Scholar

Campanini, Cinzia & Florian Schäfer. 2011. Optional Se-constructions in romance: Syntactic encoding of conceptual information. Handout from talk at Generative Linguistics in the Old World 34.Search in Google Scholar

Charnavel, Isabelle & Victoria E. Mateu. 2014. Antilogophoricity in clitic clusters. In Ulrike Steindl et al., (eds.), Proceedings of the 32nd West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, 1–10. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.10.1515/tlr-2015-0007Search in Google Scholar

Chomsky, Noam. 2001. Minimalist inquiries: The framework. Cambridge, MA: MITWPL.Search in Google Scholar

Cuervo, María. 2003. Datives at Large. PhD Dissertation, MIT.Search in Google Scholar

Cuervo, María. 2014. Alternating unaccusatives and distribution of roots. Lingua 141. 48–70.10.1016/j.lingua.2013.12.001Search in Google Scholar

D’Alessandro, Roberta. 2007. Impersonal Si constructions. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110207514Search in Google Scholar

Demonte, Violeta. 1995. Dative alternation in Spanish. Probus 7. 5–30.10.1515/prbs.1995.7.1.5Search in Google Scholar

Dikken, Marcel den. 1995. Particles: On the syntax of verb-particle, triadic, and causative constructions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Dowty, David R. 1979. Word meaning and Montague grammar. Dordrecht/Holland/Boston: D. Reidel Publishing.10.1007/978-94-009-9473-7Search in Google Scholar

Dryer, Matthew. 1986. On primary objects, secondary objects, and antidative. Language 62. 808–845.10.2307/415173Search in Google Scholar

Fernández-Ordóñez, Inés. 1999. Leísmo, Laísmo, Loísmo. In I. Bosque & V. Demonte (eds.), Gramática Descriptiva de la lengua española. Chapter 21, 1317–1398. Madrid: Espasa-Calpe.Search in Google Scholar

Fernández-Soriano, Olga. 1999. Two types of impersonal constructions in Spanish: Locative and dative subjects. Syntax 2(2). 101–140.10.1111/1467-9612.00017Search in Google Scholar

Folli, Raffaella & Heidi Harley. 2005. Consuming results in Italian and English: Flavors of v. In P. Kempchinsky & R. Slabakova (eds.), Syntax, semantics, and acquisition of aspect, 95–120. Springer: Dordrecht.10.1007/1-4020-3033-9_5Search in Google Scholar

Franco, Jon. 2000. Agreement as a continuum: The case of Spanish pronominal clitics. In F. Beukema & M. den Dikken (eds.), Clitic phenomena in European languages, 147–189. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/la.30.07fraSearch in Google Scholar

Hale, Kenneth. 1986. Notes on world view and semantic categories: Some Warlpiri examples. In P. Muysken & H. van Riemsdijk (eds.), Features and projections, 233–254. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.10.1515/9783110871661-009Search in Google Scholar

Harley, Heidi. 1995. Subjects, events and licensing. Doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.Search in Google Scholar

Harley, Heidi. 2002. Possession and the double object construction. Yearbook of Linguistic Variation 2. 29–68.10.1075/livy.2.04harSearch in Google Scholar

Harley, Heidi. 2013. External arguments and the mirror principle: On the distinctness of Voice and v. Lingua 125. 34–57.10.1016/j.lingua.2012.09.010Search in Google Scholar

Hoekstra, Teun. 1988. Small Clause Results. Lingua 74. 101–139.10.1016/0024-3841(88)90056-3Search in Google Scholar

Jackendoff, Ray. 1996. The proper treatment of measuring out, telicity, and perhaps even quantification in English. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 14. 305–54.Search in Google Scholar

Kayne, Richard. 1975. French syntax: The transformational cycle. Cambridge, MA and London: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar

Kayne, Richard. 1985. Principles of particle constructions. In H. Obenauer et al. (eds.), Levels of syntactic representation, 101–140. Amsterdam: Foris.10.1515/9783112328064-006Search in Google Scholar

Kempchinsky, Paula. 2004. Romance SE as an aspectual element. In J. Auger et al. (eds.), Contemporary approaches to romance linguistics, 239–256. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/cilt.258.13kemSearch in Google Scholar

Krifka, Manfred. 1989. Nominal reference, temporal constitution and quantification in event semantics. In R. Bartsch, J. van Benthem & P. van Emde Boas (eds.), Semantics and contextual expression, 75–115. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.10.1515/9783110877335-005Search in Google Scholar

Krifka, Manfred. 1992. Thematic relations as links between nominal reference and temporal constitution. In I. Sag & A. Szabolsci (eds.), Lexical matters, 29–53. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Search in Google Scholar

Larson, Richard K. 1988. On the double object construction. Linguistic Inquiry 19. 335–391.10.4324/9780203429204-7Search in Google Scholar

Larson, Richard K. 1990. Double objects revisited: Reply to Jackendoff. Linguistic Inquiry 21. 589–63210.4324/9780203429204-8Search in Google Scholar

Legate, Julie Anne. 2014. Voice and v: Lessons from Acehnese. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/9780262028141.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

López, Luis. 2008. The [person] restriction: Why? and most specifically, why not? In R.D. Alessandro, S. Fischer & G. Hrafnbjargarson (eds.), Agreement restrictions, 129–158. Berlin: De Gruyter.10.1515/9783110207835.129Search in Google Scholar

MacDonald, Jonathan E. 2004. Spanish reflexive pronouns: A null preposition hypothesis. In G. Garding & M. Tsujimura (eds.), WCCFL 23 Proceedings, 528–540. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Search in Google Scholar

MacDonald, Jonathan E. 2006. Null directional prepositions in Romanian and Spanish. In J.P. Montreuil & C. Nishida (eds.), New perspectives in Romance Linguistics Vol. 1: Morphology, syntax, semantics, and pragmatics. Selected papers from the 35th linguistics symposium on Romance linguistics, 169–185. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/cilt.275.14macSearch in Google Scholar

MacDonald, Jonathan E. 2008. Domain of aspectual interpretation. Linguistic Inquiry 38(1). 128–147.10.1162/ling.2008.39.1.128Search in Google Scholar

MacDonald, Jonathan E. & Susana Huidobro. 2010. The lack of Spanish non-argumental clitic doubling. In C. Borgonovo, M. Español-Echevarría & P. Prévost (eds.), Selected proceedings of the 12th Hispanic linguistics symposium, 50–62. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Search in Google Scholar

MacDonald, Jonathan E. 2015. A movement analysis of some double object constructions. Proceedings of the 32nd West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics.Search in Google Scholar

MacDonald, Jonathan E. to appear. An implicit projected argument in Spanish impersonal and passive se constructions. Syntax.10.1111/synt.12146Search in Google Scholar

Marantz, Alec. 1984. On the nature of grammatical relations. Cambridge: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar

Marantz, Alec. 1993. Implications of asymmetries in double object constructions. In Theoretical aspects of Bantu grammar, ed. by Sam A. Mchombo, 113–150. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Search in Google Scholar

Marchis, Michaela & Artemis Alexiadou. 2013. The syntax of clitics revisted: Teo types of clitics. Lingua 127. 1–13.10.1016/j.lingua.2013.01.002Search in Google Scholar

Marín Gálvez, Rafael. 2000. El componente aspectual de la predicación. Doctoral dissertation, Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona.Search in Google Scholar

Masullo, Pascual. 1992. Incorporation and case theory in Spanish. A crosslinguistic perspective. Doctoral dissertation, University of Washington, Seattle.Search in Google Scholar

McGinnis, Martha. 2004. Lethal ambiguity. Linguistic Inquiry 35(1). 47–95.10.1162/002438904322793347Search in Google Scholar

Mendikoetxea, Amaya. 2008. Clitic impersonal constructions in Romance: Syntactic features and semantic interpretation. In A. Siewierska (ed.), Impersonal constructions in grammatical theory, 290–336. Special Issue of the Transactions of the Philological Society, 106(2). Oxford: Blackwell.10.1111/j.1467-968X.2008.00210.xSearch in Google Scholar

Moltmann, Friederike. 1991. Measure adverbials. Linguistics and Philosophy 14(6). 629–660.10.1007/BF00631962Search in Google Scholar

Mufwene, Salikoko S. 1984. Stativity and the progressive. Distributed by Indian University Linguistics Club Bloomington, IndianaSearch in Google Scholar

Nevins, Aandrew. 2007. The representation of third person and its consequences for person-case effects. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 25(2). 273–313.10.1007/s11049-006-9017-2Search in Google Scholar

Nishida, Chiyo. 1994. The Spanish reflexive clitic se as an aspectual class marker. Linguistics 32. 425–458.10.1515/ling.1994.32.3.425Search in Google Scholar

Oehrle, Richard T. 1976. The grammatical status of the English dative alternation. Ph.D., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.Search in Google Scholar

Ormazabal, Javier & Juan Romero. 2007. The object agreement constraint. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 25. 315–347.10.1007/s11049-006-9010-9Search in Google Scholar

Ormazabal, Javier & Juan Romero. 2010. The derivation of dative alternations. In Maia Duguine, Susana Huidobro & Nerea Madariaga (eds.), Argument structure and syntactic relations: A cross-linguistic perspective, 203–232. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/la.158.13ormSearch in Google Scholar

Ormazabal, Javier & Juan Romero. 2012. PPs without disguises: Reply to bruening. Linguistic Inquiry 43(2). 455–474.10.1162/LING_a_00097Search in Google Scholar

Ormazabal, Javier & Juan Romero. 2013. Object clitics, agreement and dialectal variation. International Journal of Latin and Romance Linguistics 25(2). 301–344.10.1515/probus-2013-0012Search in Google Scholar

Otero, Carlos Peregrin. 1999. Pronombres reflexivos y recíprocos. In Ignacio Bosque & Violeta Demonte (eds.), Gramática de la lengua española, chapter 23, 1428–1517. Madrid: Espasa-Calpe.Search in Google Scholar

Perlmutter, David. 1971. Deep and surface structure constraints in syntax. New York: Rinehartand Winston Inc.Search in Google Scholar

Pesetsky, David. 1995. Zero syntax: Experiencers and cascades. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar

Piñón, Christopher. 2008. Aspectual composition with degrees. In L. McNally & C. Kennedy (eds.), Adjectives and adverbs: syntax, semantics, and discourse, 183–219. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Pustejovsky, James. 1991. The syntax of event structure. Cognition 41. 47–81.10.1016/0010-0277(91)90032-YSearch in Google Scholar

Pylkkänen, Liina. 2002. Introducing arguments. Doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.Search in Google Scholar

Pylkkänen, Liina. 2008. Introducing arguments. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/9780262162548.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Ramchand, Gillian & Peter Svenonius. 2002. ‘The Lexical Syntax and Lexical Semantics of the Verb-Particle Construction’. In Line Mikkelsen & Chris Potts (eds.), Proceedings of WCCFL 21, 387–400. Somerville, Ma: Cascadilla Press.Search in Google Scholar

Rappaport-Hovav, Malka & Beth Levin. 2008. The English dative alternation: The case for verb sensitivity. Journal of Linguistics 44. 129–167.10.1017/S0022226707004975Search in Google Scholar

Reinhart, Tanya & Eric Reuland. 1993. Reflexivity. Linguistic Inquiry 24. 657–720.Search in Google Scholar

Rezac, Milan. 2003. The fine structure of cyclic Agree. Syntax 6. 156–182.10.1111/1467-9612.00059Search in Google Scholar

Rezac, Milan. 2006. Escaping the person case constraint: Reference-set computation in the phi-system. Linguistic Variation Yearbook 6, 97–138.10.1075/livy.6.06rezSearch in Google Scholar

Rivero, María Luisa. 2008. Oblique subjects and person restrictions in Spanish: A morphological approach. In R.D. Alessandro, S. Fischer & G. Hrafnbjargarson (eds.), Agreement Restrictions, 215–250. Berlin: De Gruyter.10.1515/9783110207835.215Search in Google Scholar

Rothstein, Susan. 2004. Structuring events. Oxford: Blackwell.10.1002/9780470759127Search in Google Scholar

Sanz, Montserrat. 2000. Events and predication: A new approach to syntactic processing in English and Spanish. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing.10.1075/cilt.207Search in Google Scholar

Sanz, Montserrat & Itziar Laka. 2002. Oraciones transitivas con se: el modo de acción en la sintaxis. In Cristina Sánchez (ed.), Las construcciones con se, 311–343. Madrid: Visor Libros.Search in Google Scholar

Schäfer, Florian. 2008. The syntax of (anti-)causatives. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/la.126Search in Google Scholar

Schroten, Jan. 1972. Concerning the deep structures of Spanish reflexive sentences. The Hague: Mouton.Search in Google Scholar

Smith, Carlota. 1983. A theory of aspectual choice. Language 59. 497–501.10.2307/413899Search in Google Scholar

Smith, Carlota. 1991. The parameter of aspect. Dordrecht: Kluwer.10.1007/978-94-015-7911-7Search in Google Scholar

Smollet, Rebecca. 2005. Quantized direct objects don’t delimit after all. In Henk Verkuyl, Henriette de Swart & Angeliek van Hout (eds.), Perspectives on aspect. 41–60. Dordrecht: Springer.10.1007/1-4020-3232-3_3Search in Google Scholar

Snyder, William. 2001. On the nature of syntactic variation: Evidence from complex predicates and complex word-formation. Language 77. 324–342.10.1353/lan.2001.0108Search in Google Scholar

Snyder, William. 2012. Parameter theory and motion predicates. In Violeta Demonte & Louise McNally (eds.), Telicity, change, and state: A cross-categorial view of event structure (OSTL 39), 279–299. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199693498.003.0011Search in Google Scholar

Strozer, Judith R. 1976. Clitics in Spanish. Ph.D. Dissertation. UCLA.Search in Google Scholar

Suñer, Margarita. 1982. The syntax and semantics of presentational sentence-types in Spanish. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Suñer, M. 1988. The role of agreement in clitic-doubled constructions. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 6. 391–434.10.1007/BF00133904Search in Google Scholar

Swart, Henriëtte de. 1998. Licensing of negative polarity items under inverse scope. Lingua 105. 175–200.10.1016/S0024-3841(98)00021-7Search in Google Scholar

Tenny, Carol. 1987. Grammaticalizing aspect and affectedness. Doctoral dissertation, MIT, Boston, MA.Search in Google Scholar

Travis, Lisa. 2010. Inner aspect: The articulation of VP. Dordrecht: Springer.10.1007/978-90-481-8550-4Search in Google Scholar

Uriagereka, Juan. 1995. Aspects of the syntax of clitic placement in Western Romance. LI 26(1). 79–123.Search in Google Scholar

van Hout, A. (1998). On the role of direct objects and particles in learning telicity in Dutch and English. In A. Greenhill et al. (eds.), Proceedings of 22th BUCLD, 397–408. Somerville: Cascadilla Press.Search in Google Scholar

Verkuyl, Henk. 1972. On the compositional nature of the aspects. Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing Company.10.1007/978-94-017-2478-4Search in Google Scholar

Verkuyl, Henk. 1993. A theory of aspectuality. [Cambridge Studies in Linguistics 64] Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511597848Search in Google Scholar

Woolford, Ellen. 2000. Agreement in disguise. In V. Carstens & F. Parkinson (eds.), Advances in African linguistics, 103–117. Trenton: Africa World Press.Search in Google Scholar

Zagona, Karen. 1996. Compositionality of aspect: Evidence from Spanish aspectual Se. In C. Parodi, C. Quicoli, M. Saltarelli & M.L. Zubizarreta (eds.), Aspects of Romance linguistics, 475–488. Washington, DC: Georgetown UP.Search in Google Scholar

Zagona, Karen. 2002. The syntax of Spanish. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511613234Search in Google Scholar

Zubizarreta, Maria Luisa 1987. Representaciones léxicas y estructura sintáctica. In V. Demonte & M. Fernández Lagunilla (eds.), Sintaxis de las lenguas románicas, 31–59. Madrid: Ediciones El Aquero.Search in Google Scholar

Zucchi, Sandro. 1998. Aspectual shift. In S. Rothstein (ed.), Events and grammar, 349–370. Dordrecht: Kluwer.10.1007/978-94-011-3969-4_15Search in Google Scholar

Zucchi, A. & Michael White. 2001. Twigs, sequences and the temporal constitution of predicates. Linguistics and Philosophy 24. 187–222.10.1023/A:1005690022190Search in Google Scholar