Phi-features and the Modular Architecture of - UMR 7023 - CNRS

140
datives and in locatives, not of clitics. Other properties of the repair confirm
its syntactic character, including reliance on the applicativeprepositional
distinction and operation at a distance from the clitic cluster.
The 1 st /2 nd /reflexive – 3 rd distinction that conditions the repair is syntactic.
– Irreparable problems: Beside the syntactic PCC, cliticization may fail
due to extrasyntactic restrictions on the morphology of clitic clusters, the
interpretation or pragmatics of clitics, or the absence of a cliticization site
and islandhood constraints on clitic climbing. None of these problems can
be repaired by a strong pronoun or y, unlike the PCC.
These conclusions suggest a certain view of the repair. Let us adopt the following
as starting points:
– The PCC arises in the context (121)/(122) of the Agree/Case approach.
– Datives may stand in the prepositional or applicative constructions (132).
– Dative clitics must pass between v and the direct object in cliticizing.
– Dative PPs are defective, unlike locative and other full PPs, leaving them
incapable of licensing unfocussed pronouns but also transparent to various
clausal relations like floating quantifier licensing and applicative relations.
The theory of PP types is elaborated further below.
Applicative and clitic datives stand between v and the direct object, (218)a,
unlike prepositional datives, (218)b. There they create the PCC for 1/2/reflexive
accusatives, which are always clitic by the Cliticization Requirement (unless focussed,
to which we return). The effect of the repair seems to be to turn dative defective
PPs into full PPs, like locatives. Thereby, they acquire the properties of the
latter: they are capable of licensing unfocussed strong pronouns; they are invisible
to the PCC; they are unavailable to applicative relations like possession. The last
property means that the repair is restricted to indirect objects. Presumably both
true locatives and repaired indirect objects are below the direct object in (218)b,
but we would expect the same behaviour of full PPs above it, since it is the full PP
structure itself prevent the PCC and other clausal relations, even for the high full
par/de 'by' PPs of section 4.5. The repair is detectable only for pronouns, through
suspending cliticization. However, nonpronominal indirect objects may be viewed
as undergoing the repair as well, since they would keep the same form both as
prepositional dative à-phrases and as repaired, locative-like, à-phrases. PCC repairs
in other languages will be seen to apply to all datives in chapter 5.
(218) a. PCC: v DATapplicative/clitic *1/*2/*SE/√3.ACC (tDAT)
b. Other: v (PPfull) √1/√2/√SE/√3.ACC (DATprepositional/PPfull)
where PPfull is a PP autonomous of / invisible to clausal Agree/Case