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

Now we have to answer at least three questions:
- Is Spec of AGR ever filled in NSLs? If it is:
- What is its status? More specifically:
- Is it filled only by elements coindexed with the I-subject?
We will address these questions in sections 1.1. and 1.2.
1.1. Dislocation vs. Specifier (of AGR)
A conceivable approach to the nature of preverbal subjects in NSLs is to assume that
they are left dislocated DP's. There are various arguments in favor of this view. We will see that
it is nevertheless too simplistic a view.
Before addressing the issue, let me say a word about word order. It has often been
claimed that inverted subject constructions cannot be the 'basic word order' for Romance
languages allowing this option, for they involve a Focus interpretation which is contextually and
pragmatically marked. Therefore preverbal subject constructions (which are indeed
pragmatically more neutral) have to be basic structures, and a basic structure will not involve
dislocation. I think that these considerations are pointless: they involve a naive conception of
transformational grammar that has been largely overcome: nowadays underlying levels of
representation are abstract and complex representations which simply cannot be claimed to be
more or less 'basic'. When I claim that inverted subjects are Case positions in NSLs I am not
committing myself to any claim about what is more 'basic' or 'neutral': inverted subject
constructions are simply an available option of the grammar which happens to be pragmatically
or contextually marked (in that it usually involves Focus).
A basic argument in favor of dislocation for preverbal subjects in NSLs is a theoretical
one, based on indeterminacy: 149 even the most radical theory contending preverbal subjects in
1
149 This is one of the arguments wielded in Rosselló (1986).