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

144
face as à. In locative clitics, either the full PLOC or its Case/Σ-deficient version is
present, along the two options above; it amalgamates with the (phi-less) pronoun
as y, (224)a. Locative clitics have no DP-like behaviour, whether because of their
full PLOC, or because their pronoun lacks phi-features. In dative clitics, something
like PDAT is needed to account for their PP behaviour as well. We may suppose
them to have the same PDAT as à-phrases, which amalgamates with the pronoun to
give dative clitics. DP-like behaviour for floating quantifiers occurs if D rather
than PDAT projects, (224)c (cf. Rouveret 2010: 255, Stowell 1989: 325f.; Chomsky
2008: 145f.), or if the PDAT of clitics is still poorer than that of à-phrases (e.g. containing
Den Dikken's 2006 PDAT but not relator). 103
(224) a. locatives: [PP/P PLOC D(phi-less) pronoun]
b. dative à-phrases: [PP PDAT DP]
c. dative clitics: [P PDAT Dpronoun] or [D PDAT Dpronoun]
where PLOC but not PDAT provides Σ-licensing
PDAT is thus weaker than PLOC in not providing Σ-licensing. The difference between
the defective PDAT and all other PPs for Σ-licensing (the Cliticization Requirement)
as well as other properties may be construed through the phasehood of
Chomsky (2000a et seq.). Phases are categories whose complement undergoes
spell-out to LF/PF, after which it is invisible to syntax and an independent LF/PF
unit. They provide all the licensing required by the spelled-out object in syntax,
PF, and LF. The prototypical phase is the full CP. Full PPs are parallel to full CPs
in their functional architecture, A'-islandhood, and complete Agree/Case system
(Cardinaletti and Starke 1999, Koopman 2000, Abels 2003, Den Dikken 2006,
Rezac 2008a, Bošković 2004ab). The phasal status of all PPs save datives can
bring together the various cases where DPs in datives alone are visible to external
relationships (sections 4.2, 4.5): floating quantifier licensing, antecedence of anaphoric
relations like the reflexive se, inalienable possession, and secondary predicates,
the creation of new anaphor binding domains, and interference in clitic
climbing. These all require that some of the content of the dative DP be related to
an element lower in the clause, for instance to bind. To them may be added the
ability of datives alone to serve in purely applicative interpretations, if these require
a relationship to a lower element as well, like the binding by a possessor into
103 I use P for both the elements traditionally called preposition and oblique case, differentiating
their syntactic behaviour by richness of the feature or structural content of P, independently of its
morphological realization (Rezac 2008a). The presence and properties of PDAT can accommodate
various theories of its insertion. I speak as if it is present on the dative DP from its basegeneration
onwards, but it seems to make no difference for the present view if PDAT is a clausal
functional head attached to the DP through movement (Kayne 2004, cf. 1993, Bianchi 2006:
2045). The greater richness of locatives than of datives is a common proposal in the literature,
founded on the Cliticization Requirement, floating quantifiers, and applicativity (below), as well
as less secure grounds (q.v. Roberge and Troberg 2007). It is distinct from differences among
full PPs, like immunity to Condition B in Katei looked at her*(self)i / around her(self)i, dependent
on the context of the PP (Büring 2005: 11.3.2, Zribi-Hertz 2003, 2008).