Understanding Partiality in pro‐Drop Languages: An Information‐Structure Approach

Abstract

This article explores the acceptability and interpretation of referential null subjects in several varieties of Spanish (both Peninsular and American varieties) in different syntactic contexts (matrix and embedded) and distinct clause types (under bridge verbs, under factive verbs, and in adverbial clauses). Based on the results of an original online survey, completed by almost 300 respondents all over the world, it is shown that, in contrast with a consistent‐pro‐drop language like Italian, some Spanish varieties exhibit partial‐pro‐drop properties; this contributes to a recent line of research dealing with partiality in consistent‐pro‐drop languages. We argue that such variation can be accounted for within an information‐structure approach, in which the Topic Criterion (Frascarelli 2007), the formation of topic chains, and the existence of silent topics play a crucial role. Degrees of partiality are attributed to an interface condition that combines information‐structure requirements with PF visibility of overt copies in topic chains. Partial‐pro‐drop properties can then be explained by reference to independent syntactic conditions, such as the preference for overt minimal links and the sensitivity to islands.

Establishing a Variable Context for Lexical Subjects in Spanish

“…Before concluding, an important limitation to the present work must also be ad- From a different perspective, see Frascarelli & Jiménez-Fernández (2019), who take an informationstructure approach within an experimental framework.…”

“…An anonymous reviewer pointed out that this particular instance of an LS in a context in which there is a given topic established in the previous discourse (un señor) could reflect a tendency for some varieties of Mexican Spanish to be moving toward partial pro-drop status (see, e.g., Frascarelli & Jiménez-Fernández 2019). I thank the reviewer for this insight, and this issue should be explored in future research.…”

How Much Room for Discourse in Imperative? The Lens of Interface on English, Italian and Spanish*

“…The retrieval function of G‐Topics can serve either (a) to ensure topic continuity , that is to say, to maintain the current A‐Topic through one or more low‐toned copies in the topic chain created by the A‐Topic itself; this is the function of the so‐called Aboutness G‐Topic ; or (b) to mention a constituent that is part of the background , but it is not a copy of the current A‐Topic and, importantly, it is not proposed for a topic shift (this is defined as Background G‐Topic ; for discussion, cf. Frascarelli 2017, 2018, and Frascarelli & Jiménez‐Fernández 2019).…”

Licensing null arguments in recipes across languages

“…[23] See Frascarelli & Hinterhölzl (2007) for a full discussion of various types of topics, and also Rizzi (1997). Frascarelli & Jiménez-Fernández (2019) propose that null subjects can also be licensed by a null Aboutness-Shift topic.…”