The Syntax of Early English - Cryptm.org

The Verb-Second constraint and its loss 113Rögnvaldson and Thráinsson (1990), this supports the idea that V-movementis to the I-position, (which could not be blocked by a complementizer) andthat the Spec,IP position is not reserved exclusively for the nominative subject:in (30a–b) it is occupied respectively by an adverb á morgun, and an objecttopic essa bók. This type of language is often called an I-Verb-Secondlanguage or symmetric Verb-Second language. In such languages,XP–Vfin–subject sequences occur more or less freely in both root and nonrootcontexts, and are to be analysed as instances of V to I. This view of Verb-Second in Icelandic and Yiddish is, however, not uncontroversial. Vikner(1995) for instance, argues that all Verb-Second is movement to C, and henceanalyses embedded Verb-Second in Icelandic and Yiddish as a generalizedform of CP-recursion.Let us note the constructions in present-day English which still show Verb-Second: constituent questions, yes–no questions and negative-initial constructions,as in (31):(31) a. Why would Banquo make an appearance at the banquet?b. Did Banquo make an appearance at the banquet?c. Not a word did Banquo speak at the banquet.It appears that this type of partial Verb-Second, when it does occur, observesthe C-Verb-Second characteristics: it is restricted to root clauses and isincompatible with a complementizer unless the matrix verb is a bridge verb:(32) a. Macbeth wondered why would Banquo have made an appearance at thebanquetb. *Macbeth wondered ifwould Banquo make an appearance at thebanquetc. Macbeth said that not a word did Banquo speak at the banquetd. *Macbeth whispered that not a word did Banquo speak at the banquet(32a) can be interpreted as Verb-Second in the absence of a complementizer(why is a wh-word moved to Spec,CP rather than a complementizer generatedin C). This is confirmed by the ungrammaticality of (32b) with the complementizerif blocking V-movement. (32c–d) show the contrast between a negative-initialclause embedded (grammatically) in the that-complement of thebridge verb say and (ungrammatically) in the that-complement of the nonbridgeverb whisper. (32c) can therefore be analysed as a case of CP-recursion,which is not possible after non-bridge verbs as in (32d).There has been considerable debate on the question of whether Old EnglishVerb-Second is symmetric or asymmetric. Before we go into this in the nextsection, it may be useful to see what predictions the two analyses would makewith respect to the distribution of subject, finite verb and first constituent.