Formal Approaches to Semantic Microvariation: Adverbial ...

The second argument that Split [+Tense] V sentences are not instances of V2 topicalization
comes the fact that they are possible in subordinate clauses.
(33) Si m’acompagnay d’ung ancien escuyer bourguignon, nommé
Thus me-accompagnied of an old squire burgundian named
Philippe d’Arlay, qui beaucoup avoit veu de la guerre...
Philippe d’Arlay who a lot had seen of the war
Thus accompanied by an old Burgundian squire named Philippe d’Arlay, who
had seen a lot of war...
La Marche. Mémoires. t.2. (c. 1470). p. 243
Old French was an asymmetrical V2 language, i.e. topicalization was only possible
in main clauses 6 . Here we have QAD across an auxiliary inside a relative clause.
Therefore, beaucoup cannot be in the topic position.
The final argument against split DPs across tensed verbs in Middle French being
the result of topic movement comes from the fact that the position that the degree
quantifier occupies seems to be below the subject.
(34) Toute a peu s’est de dueil deffaite
Everything by few refl-is of duel undone
‘Everything was undone by few duels’
Christine de Pizan. t.2 (1400). p. 321
In summary, I have argued that the position occupied by degree quantifiers in split DPs
across inflected verbal elements in Middle French is not a topic position. If it is not a
topic position, what kind of position is it?
The answer to this question is that ‘pre-tensed verb’ was, in fact, an adverbial
position in Middle French. The examples in (35) show that eventive beaucoup and peu
6 There is actually some debate about this; however, I follow Roberts (1993) in assuming that OF
was, in fact, asymmetrical V2.
85