Jaume Solà i Pujols - Departament de Filologia Catalana ...

pronouns and emphatic (pseudo-)I-subjects, even if not in a θ-position, are not far removed from
it: their word order distribution is nearly the same as, respectively, standard objects and inverted
subjects, and only more subtle evidence, such as their co-occurrence with FQs, leads to
reconsideration of the theory. One possibility is that these elements are adjoined to their
respective θ-positions, in a structure like 0:
(92) [ DP [ DP pro (FQ) ] strong pronoun ]
In 0:
- the pro would be licenced by the clitic (if clitics licence a pro) or by AGR o (in NSLs),
depending on whether the DP is in object position or in I-subject position,
- the strong pronoun is an adjunct carrying emphasis. It is subject to the same BT
constraints as the pro it is adjoined to.
- the FQ can be moved to some other position, provided it is in the c-command scope of,
respectively, AGR o or the clitic. 88
This is a rather speculative and non-explanatory approach. I will abstract away from this
digression in the remainder of the thesis.
2.5. On the Nature of AGR Requirements
In section 1., we advanced several rules requiring that AGR must be coindexed with
some DP or CP Argument. On the one hand AGR must have an AGR-identifier which must
provide the I-subject with Case and on the other hand:
88 French cases like:
(i) Il faut tout que je face
It needs everything(FQ) that I do
'I have to do everything'
are atypical cases of long distance FQ. I cannot say anything
about the issue.
1