Subjects, Topics and the Interpretation of Referential pro.

interface. Their base-generation in the C-domain accounts for the fact that they are different
types of A'-dependencies with respect to wh-operators (Cinque 1990), as is proved by antireconstruction,
(absence of) Minimality effects and scope properties (cf. Frascarelli 2000,
2004a and section 5.2).
The present section, dedicated to the interface (syntax-intonation) properties of discourse
categories in the C-domain, is completed with a final mention of Focus constituents, which
will be also considered in this paper.
3.4 The Intonation of Focus
Narrow Focus constituents are also associated with a specific tonal event. Intonational
research shows that Foci, both fronted and in situ, are realized through a H* tone (cf.
D’Imperio 2002, Frascarelli 2004b), while no pitch-accent can be found on the “most
embedded constituent” of a broad Focus sentence, which shows a downgrading contour 19 (cf.,
among others, Frota 2000, Frascarelli 2004b). This leads to the conclusion that, at least in
languages like Italian, broad Focus is not interpreted at the PF interface as the effect of an
“extended Focus projection” (Selkirk 1986): narrow and broad Focus are signaled by
different tonal events and only narrow Focus is marked as H*. 20 Broad Focus rather appears
as a ‘default’ tonal interpretation, that arises in declarative sentences when the Focus field
(Rizzi 1997b) is not activated in the C-domain (cf. also Frascarelli and Puglielli to appear).
To conclude, narrow Focus is characterized at the syntax-phonology interface as an operatorlike
constituent that is subject to internal Merge (cf. Chomsky 2004, 2005) and interpreted in
the FocP projection (Frascarelli 2000), where it is associated with an H* tone.
In the following section, the properties and interpretation of null and overt subjects will
be analyzed in a corpus of Italian (taken from Bonvino 2006).
4. Referential Null Subjects and Information Structure
4.1 Shifting ‘subjects’ and silent Topics
The present investigation is based on a corpus of 100 minutes of conversations among friends
and interviews with students, from which a total of 173 sentences have been extracted.
Consider first the following passage, in which the speaker (who works in a radio station) is
talking about her boss and a colleague of hers: 21
(13) [il mio capo]i come diceva Carlo (Figure 5) […] proi è un exreporter […] proi è stato in
giro per il mondo […] proi mi ha preso in simpatia solo che siccome proi è mostruosamente
(informational) Foci are only allowed in that position (i.e., elements that have been raised through operator
movement). Consider the following example (the relevant sentence, underlined in (i), is given in detail in (ii)):
(i) A: mi ricordo che dovevamo fare quell’esercizio dove appunto riconoscere delle parole - delle lettere che
avevano un dato suono… B: beh IO francamente questa attività in particolare non me la ricordo.
‘A: I remember that we had to do an exercise where you were supposed to recognize some words – some
letters which had a particular sound… B: ‘Well, frankly, I don’t remember that particular exercise.’
(ii) Beh, IO francamente [questa attività in particolare]k non me lak ricordo
well I frankly this activity in particular not to.me it remember.1SG
‘Well, frankly, I don’t remember that particular exercise.’
As is clear from the context, the subject pronoun IO is a contrastive Focus (i.e., contrary to A, B does not
remember that exercise) and questa attività is a clitic-resumed Familiar Topic (pronounced with a L* tone),
located in a lower position. Of course, this does not exclude that secondary Foci can also be located in the low
C-domain.
19 This means that no (clear) peaks can be found in broad Focus sentences (unless a preverbal ‘subject’ DP is
present).
20 See D’Imperio (2002) for evidence that the pitch accent of a broad Focus is a “unitary accent gesture” and not
the effect of a tonal repulsion.
21 Indices in examples are used for simple expository purposes to indicate coreference relations.
10