In this paper, alleged cases of Right Dislocation without an anticipatory pronoun have been analysed as Marginalization. The two constructions have different syntactic, interpretive and prosodic properties, which have been accounted for by assuming the structures proposed in (3) and (5) respectively. Specifically, the structure proposed by Kayne (1994) for Romance Right Dislocation has been shown to be better able to analyse Marginalization than Right Dislocation. A marginalized constituent occurs in its base position inside the clause; it is defocalized and destressed. Right Dislocation, on the other hand, should be analysed as involving a clause-external constituent, occurring in the complement position of a functional head in whose specifier the clause containing the anticipatory clitic is found, as in Kayne’s (1994) analysis of English Right Dislocation.
In the second part of the paper, the analysis has been extended to right-dislocated and marginalized subjects. Similar properties have been found, which support the different structural hypothesis proposed here. Postverbal subjects occurring in interrogative and exclamative sentences have proved to be marginalized and not necessarily right-dislocated.
If the absence of the clitic pronoun implies that a structure different from Right Dislocation is used, the conclusion can be drawn that clitic pronouns cannot be optional, nor can they be null. The former conclusion also holds true for non-overt pro in the Right Dislocation of subjects, which is not optional.
The conclusion that clitic pronouns and pro cannot be optional complies with the principle of Full Interpretation. The conclusion that clitic pronouns cannot be null can be explained as a restriction applying at the syntax-phonology interface. This in turn confirms the current assumption that null pronouns are not clitic, but weak.
References
ANTINUCCI, F. & CINQUE, G. 1977. "Sull'ordine delle parole in italiano: l'emarginazione". Studi di grammatica italiana 6, 121-146.
BELLETTI, A. 1988. "The Case of Unaccusatives". Linguistic Inquiry 19.1, 1-34. BELLETTI, A. 1998. "“Inversion” as focalization". Ms., University of Siena.
BELLETTI, A. 1999. "Aspects of the Low IP Area", Talk given at the Workshop on the
Cartography of Syntactic Positions and Semantic Types, Certosa di Pontignano,
November 1999.
BENINCÀ, P. 1988. "L’ordine degli elementi della frase e le costruzioni marcate".
Grande grammatica italiana di consultazione, ed. L. Renzi, vol.1: 115-194.
BENINCÀ, P. & POLETTO, C. 2001. "Topic, Focus and V2: defining the CP sublayers". Ms., University of Padua and CNR.
den BESTEN, H. & WEBELHUTH, G. 1990. "Stranding". Scrambling and Barriers, ed. G. Grewendorf & W. Sternefeld, 77-92. Amsterdam: Academic Press.
BRANDI, L. & CORDIN, P. 1981. "Dialetti e italiano: un confronto sul parametro del soggetto nullo". Rivista di grammatica generativa 6, 33-87.
CALABRESE, A. 1982. "Alcune ipotesi sulla struttura informazionale della frase in italiano e sul suo rapporto con la struttura fonologica". Rivista di grammatica
generativa 7, 3-78.
CALABRESE, A. 1992. "Some remarks on focus and logical structure in Italian".
Harvard Working Papers in Linguistics 1, 91-127.
CARDINALETTI, A. 1988. "Sul riordinamento postverbale dei costituenti in italiano".
ATI Journal 53, 12-30.
CARDINALETTI, A. 1997. "Subjects and clause structure". The New Comparative
Syntax, ed. L. Haegeman, 33-63. London: Longman.
CARDINALETTI, A. 1998. "A second thought on Emarginazione: Destressing vs. “Right Dislocation”". University of Venice Working Papers in Linguistics 8.2, 1- 28.
CARDINALETTI, A. 1999. "Italian “emphatic” pronouns are post-verbal subjects".
University of Venice Working Papers in Linguistics 9, 59-92.
CARDINALETTI, A. 2001. "A second thought on Emarginazione: Destressing vs. “Right Dislocation”". Current Studies in Italian Syntax. Essays Offered to
Lorenzo Renzi, ed. G. Cinque & G. Salvi, 117-135. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
CARDINALETTI, A. & STARKE, M. 1999. "The typology of structural deficiency. A case-study of the three classes of pronouns". Clitics in the Languages of Europe, EALT/EUROTYP 20-5, ed. H. van Riemsdijk, 145-233. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
CECCHETTO, C. 1997. "Clitic Right Dislocation is not the Mirror Image of Clitic Left Dislocation". Ms., DIPSCO, Milan.
CECCHETTO, C. 1999. "A comparative analysis of Left and Right Dislocation in Romance". Studia Linguistica 53(1), 40-67.
CHOMSKY, N. 1986. Knowledge of Language. Its Nature, Origin, and Use. New York: Praeger.
CHOMSKY, N. 1995. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. CINQUE, G. 1990. Types of A’-Dependencies. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
CINQUE, G. 1993. "A null theory of phrase and compound stress". Linguistic Inquiry 24, 239-298.
CINQUE, G. 1999. Adverbs and Functional Heads. A Cross-Linguistic Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
DE MAURO, T. 1993. Lessico di frequenza dell’italiano parlato. Milano: Etaslibri. FRASCARELLI, M. 1997. L’interfaccia sintassi-fonologia nelle costruzioni di
focalizzazione e topicalizzazione dell’italiano. PhD Dissertation, University of
Roma Tre.
FRASCARELLI, M. 2000. The Syntax-Phonology Interface in Focus and Topic
Constructions in Italian. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
GUASTI, M. T. & RIZZI, L. 1999. "Agreement and Tense as distinct syntactic positions: Evidence from acquisition". Ms., University of Siena.
KAYNE, R. S. 1994. The Antisymmetry of Syntax. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. NESPOR, M. & VOGEL, I. 1986. Prosodic Phonology. Dordrecht: Foris.
RIZZI, L. 1986a. "Null objects in Italian and the theory of pro". Linguistic Inquiry 17, 501-557.
RIZZI, L. 1986b. "On the status of subject clitics in Romance". Studies in Romance
Linguistics, ed. O. Jaeggli & C. Silva-Corvalán, 391-419. Dordrecht: Foris.
RIZZI, L. 1997. "The fine structure of the left periphery". Elements of Grammar, ed. L. Haegeman, 281-337. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
ROSS, J. R. 1967. Constraints On Variables in Syntax. PhD Dissertation, MIT.
ZUBIZARRETA, M.-L. 1998. Prosody, Focus, and Word Order. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.