Comparative Syntax of the Balkan Languages (Oxford ... - Cryptm.org

154 DALINA KALLULLI7. Albanian and Greek are pro-drop, null-subject languages, and nothing stopsclitics from appearing sentence initially.8. In Albanian the definite article is suffixed to the noun stem (indicated by the useof hyphens in the Albanian examples); in Greek, as in English, it is a separate phonologicalentity and precedes the noun stem.9. For instance, doubling is sensitive to the feature Inunan in Romanian and animac\in Spanish (cf. Jaeggli 1986, Borer 1984, Sufier 1988, Dobrovie-Sorin 1990).10. Note, however, that the implication is only one way: definite direct object DPsmay be doubled but need not be. As not all definites can be clitic doubled in Greek (cf.,e.g., (9b), (10b)), Anagnostopoulou tries to relate direct object clitic doubling in this languageto Heim's (1982) Familiarity Condition. However, this analysis is untenable in theface of doubling of indefinites unless Heim's crucial claim that all indefinites representnovel information is rejected.11. Cf. also Agouraki (1993), who provides several other examples of doubling ofindefinites.12. Anagnostopoulou's claim that attributive definites may not be clitic doubled inGreek is not uncontroversial, though. In this context, according to Anagnostopoulou(1994), while clitics necessarily license familiarity on the direct object DPs they double,these DPs may be either novel or familiar if not doubled. This is clearly imperfect, asclitic doubling emerges under her treatment not only as a totally optional but also as anentirely redundant phenomenon if clitics may double definite DPs that are non-novel orfamiliar even when not doubled.13. An additional argument against the right-dislocation hypothesis is presented insection 3.3.14. However, clitic doubling in Albanian and Greek is incompatible with focus DPs,as will become clear in section 3. According to the view that any constituent that can beraised by QR can serve as focus (cf. Chomsky 1976), quantifiers in general are defaultfoci. In (11) I have tried to control this factor by focusing the verb. This is indicated inthe English translation by the use of capital letters. The interaction of clitic doubling andfocussing will be discussed at length in section 2.15. Anagnostopoulou (1994) claims that doubled DPs in Greek may only receive areferential interpretation. A. Androutsopoulou (private communication), however,pointed out to me that the doubled DP in (12b) can receive an attributive interpretation(for instance, when the verb is focused).16. Except where indicated otherwise, I will be concerned with doubling only ofdirect objects, not of accusative quirky subjects.17. For details on the formalization of focus (i.e., its formal representation in X-reduced intensional logic), see Jacobs (1983), Rooth (1996), and Krifka (1996).18. Brody claims that the S-structure presence of the +f feature shows up as heavystress at PF. According to him, the stressed + f-marked category is not necessarily thesame as the +f-phrase, but the +f-phrase will always contain a +f-marked element.Although he does not define the notion of "heavy stress", 1 lake it to be phonetic prominence,probably indicated by a pitch accent. Unlike Brody, I wish to leave open thepossibility that focus may have other PF correlates even if phonetic prominence or pitchaccent is absent.19. At this point, it should be clear that direct object clitic doubling is somewhat lessstrict in Greek than in Albanian since only in the latter does it obligatorily occurwhenever the direct object DP is outside the focus domain. The fundamental point tonote, however, is that in both languages direct object clitic doubling indisputably marksthe direct object DP as [-Focus]. In other words, while doubling of direct object DPs in