THE DEVELOPMENT AND LOSS OF THE OLD IRISH DOUBLE SYSTEM OF VERBAL INFLECTION
Glenda Elizabeth Newton
Trinity College
This dissertation is submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy
Cambridge University October 2006
DECLARATION
This dissertation is a result of my own work and includes nothing which
is the outcome of work done in collaboration. It does not exceed the word
limit of 80,000 words. The research reported in this dissertation was funded by a postgraduate
award from the Arts & Humanities Research Council.
THE DEVELOPMENT AND LOSS OF THE OLD IRISH DOUBLE SYSTEM OF VERBAL INFLECTION
Glenda Elizabeth Newton
SUMMARY This dissertation aims to provide a new syntactic account of the Old Irish double system of verbal inflection, its development from Proto-Indo-European (PIE) and its loss between Old and Modern Irish within the framework of Chomsky’s minimalist programme.
The verb in Old Irish has a different morphological ending depending on its position in the clause. In absolute initial position it has absolute inflection and in near-initial position it has conjunct inflection. Existing theoretical accounts of the Old Irish verbal system have proposed that the choice between absolute and conjunct verbal endings is dependent on the position of the finite verb in the syntax. However, a detailed examination of the Old Irish data suggests that this cannot be the case, as the finite verb appears to occupy the same syntactic position in all clauses. A new synchronic account is proposed whereby the different verbal forms are a result of the combination of syntactic and post-syntactic operations. The development of the double system has received much attention in the philological literature, yet the origin of the system remains highly disputed. This dissertation develops a new account combining the phonological aspects of Cowgill’s Particle Theory with a generative analysis of the development of verb-initial word order between PIE and Old Irish. It is argued that the development of unmarked verb-initial word order in Old Irish can be linked both to changes in the C system and to the development of the new verbal morphology. Turning finally to the loss of the double system, it is argued that this began before the Old Irish period. Syntactic changes in pre-Old Irish meant that the double system ceased to be syntactically productive and began to be derived post-syntactically. These post-syntactic operations were not productive, applying only in limited set of environments. On the basis of Middle and Early Modern Irish data it is argued that a decrease in evidence for the different forms led to a failure to acquire the environments in which these operations applied. As a result, the double system was lost from the language as a whole. In addition to providing a new account of the Old Irish verbal system, this dissertation touches on a number of theoretical issues. First, it considers the syntax-phonology interface and the types of operation that can take place there. Secondly, it gives an example of how head movement might develop, which provides a new perspective on the link between head movement and morphology. Finally, the loss of the double system provides an example of how, despite the necessarily abrupt nature of parametric change, its effects can be gradual.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Completing this thesis has been a huge task, which would not have been possible without the help and support of many different people. First, I would like to thank my supervisor, Ian Roberts. In addition to his insightful comments and suggestions for my research, Ian has always been incredibly encouraging, supportive and enthusiastic about my work. Working with Ian has been a hugely inspiring and enjoyable experience and I am immensely grateful for all the time and energy he has put into helping me research, write and complete this dissertation. David Willis, my PhD advisor, has also played an important role in my research and my linguistic career in general. In addition to introducing me to the study of historical linguistics, he has read and commented on various papers and always been happy to discuss any aspect of my research. For this I am very grateful. Thanks are also due to Adam Ledgeway for stepping in as the assessor for my second year interview. Theresa Biberauer has had a huge influence both on me and my thesis. As a teacher, Theresa was truly an inspiration. Her enthusiasm for linguistics in general and syntax in particular rubbed off on me from my first undergraduate supervision. Throughout my time as an undergraduate, an MPhil and a PhD student Theresa has always been there to offer me encouragement and support, both academically and personally. She has read and provided invaluable comments on virtually all of my work (including the whole of this thesis) and helped me to make some of my most difficult decisions. I am incredibly grateful to her for all of this and more besides. Turning to some more general thank yous, I would like to thank the staff and students (past and present) of the Linguistics Department for making it a great place to be. On the staff side I would like in particular to thank Kasia Jaszczolt, Mark Jones, Ariel Knapman, Peter Matthews, Francis Nolan and Rachel Smith who have contributed in various ways to my PhD and my general linguistic education. My MPhil and PhD colleagues also deserve a big thank you, most notably: Fiorien Bonthuis, Faye Chalcraft, Joanne Chapter, Lila Daskalaki, Andrew Janes, Kate Ketner, Eleni Kriempardis, Theo Markopoulos, Marios Mavrogiorgos, Alyson Pitts, Matthew Reeve, Christina Sevdali, Keith Shaw, Makis Sipetzis and Edward Wilford. Special thanks are due to my “PhD mentor” Marc Richards who has read and commented on various bits of my work and always been happy to help with matters of syntax and semicolons! Now, to the ASNaCs, without whom this work would not have begun. I am very grateful to Máire Ní Mhaonaigh and Oliver Padel for letting me onto the Celtic Philology course in 2000-2001, and for all their efforts in bringing my knowledge of Irish and Welsh up to speed. This course was the beginning of my fascination with all things Celtic. Máire and also Paul Russell have always been very helpful throughout my PhD in answering questions and offering advice on Celtic matters. I would also like to thank the Trinity Celticists, Mohan Ganesalingam and Geraldine Parsons for the many useful discussions we have had over the years.
I have received a lot of helpful feedback from participants at the various conferences I have attended, including the Postgraduate Conference in Linguistics at Manchester in March 2005, Lingo at Oxford in September 2005, ConSOLE at the University of the Basque Country in December 2005 and LAGB at Newcastle in September 2006. In particular, I would like to thank Nick Zair, who I met in Oxford, for our discussions on the joys of Old Irish, for help with Latin and Greek and for offering to proofread my thesis. I feel very fortunate to have been a member of Trinity College throughout my time in Cambridge. As an undergraduate and a postgraduate it has been a great place to live and work. I am particularly grateful for their financial support, both in terms of my Research Scholarship, and the money they have provided for attending conferences. Finally I would like to thank my non-linguistics friends and my family for keeping me sane over the last three years by providing many much needed distractions from the world of linguistics. In particular in this regard I would like to attempt to express my inexpressible gratitude to Ed. You have done so much. Thank you for everything. My world is a much happier one with you in it.
LINGUISTIC ABBREVIATIONS
The following abbreviations are found in the main text and the glosses of the linguistic examples:
1 first person NAS nasalization 2 second person NEG negative 3 third person NOM nominative case ABS absolute inflection P preposition ABSL absolutive case PASS passive ACC accusative case PERF perfect Adj adjective PF Phonological Form AdjP adjective phrase PIE Proto-Indo-European Adv adverb PL plural AdvP adverb phrase PP prepositional phrase Asp aspect PRED predicate AUX auxiliary PRES present C complementizer PRET preterite CONJ conjunct inflection PRT particle COND conditional PROG progressive COP copula PT prototonic CP complementizer phrase PTC particle DAT dative case PVB preverb D determiner Q question particle DM Distributed Morphology REL relative DP determiner phrase RM Relativized Minimality DT deuterotonic S sentence F feminine SG singular FIN finiteness SOV subject-object-verb order FOC focus SUBJ subjunctive FOR force SUFF suffixed pronoun FUT future SVO subject-verb-object order GEN genitive T tense HMC head-movement constraint TOP topic IE Indo-European TP tense phrase IMPF imperfect UG Universal Grammar INF infixed pronoun v light verb INST instrumental V verb INT interrogative V2 verb-second order LEN lenition VN verbal noun LF logical form VOS verb-object-subject order LHM Long Head Movement VP verb phrase LOC locative vP light verb phrase M masculine VSO verb-subject-object order N neuter X head category N noun XP phrasal category
TEXTUAL ABBREVIATIONS The following abbreviations are used in this dissertation to refer to texts. ACC Amra Choluimb Chille. W. Stokes (ed.) (1899). The Bodleian
Amra Choluim Chille. Revue Celtique 20, 270–271.
AM Audacht Morainn. F. Kelly (ed.) (1976). Dublin: Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies.
AMC Aislinge Meic Con Glinne: K. Jackson (ed.) (1990). Dublin: Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies.
AS Agallamh na Senórach: Colloquy of the Ancients. S. O’Grady (ed.) (1892) Silva Gadelica: a collection of tales in Irish, 2 vols. Vol 1, 94–233, vol 2, 101–265.
CC In Cath Catharda: The Civil War of the Romans. An Irish Version of Lucan's Pharsalia. W. Stokes (ed.) (1909). Leipzig: Hirzel
Corm Cormac’s Glossary. W. Stokes (ed.) (1962). Three Irish glossaries. London: Williams and Norgate.
Corp Gen Corpus genealogiarum Hiberniae. M. O’Brien (ed.) (1962). Dublin: Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies.
DiAChor Di Astud Chor. N. McLeod (ed.) (1992). Early Irish contract law. Sydney: Centre for Celtic Studies.
Il Iliad. A. Murray (1999). London: Harvard University Press. LL The Book of Leinster, formerly Lebar na Núachongbála. R.
Best, M. O’Brien & A. O’Sullivan (eds.) (1954–1983). Dublin: Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies.
LU Lebor na hUidre (Book of the Dun Cow). Best R. & O. Bergin (eds.)(1929). Dublin: Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies.
Ml The Milan glosses on the psalms, Milan. Thes i, 7–483. NE Noo Ean (St John’s Gospel reprinted from the Manx Bible
1819). London: British and Foreign Bible Society PKM Pedeir Keinc y Mabinogi. I. Williams (ed.) (1930). Cardiff.
RV Die Hymnen des Rigveda. T. Aufrecht (ed.) (1877) Bonn: Marcus.
Sg Glosses on Priscian, St Gall. Thes ii, 49–224. TBC (II) Táin Bó Cúailnge from the Book of Leinster. C. O’Rahilly (ed.)
(1967). Dublin: Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies. Thes Thesaurus Palaeohibernicus: a collection of old-Irish glosses,
scholia, prose, and verse. W. Stokes & J. Strachan (eds.) (1901–3) Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies.
TT Togail Troi. LL, 1063–1117. Wb Würzburg Glosses on the Pauline epistles. Thes i, 499–712.
THE DEVELOPMENT AND LOSS OF THE OLD IRISH DOUBLE SYSTEM OF VERBAL INFLECTION
ABBREVIATIONS CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION 1
1. Introduction: aims and objectives 1 2. Background information 4
2.1 Irish 4 2.2 Theoretical Background 6
2.2.1 An introduction to the minimalist programme 7 2.2.2 The status of head movement 12
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT OF THE OLD IRISH VERBAL SYSTEM 18
1. Introduction 18 2. The Old Irish verbal system: the basic facts 18
2.1 Simple verbs 19 2.2 Compound verbs 21 2.3 Infixed pronouns 23
3. Syntactic analyses of Old Irish 25 3.1 Old Irish as a residual verb second language 26 3.2 Two types of raising: Carnie, Harley and Pyatt (2000) 28 3.3 Are simple verbs in C? Empirical evidence 30
3.3.1 Object pronouns 30 3.3.2 Relative clauses 32 3.3.3 Interim Summary 35
3.4 Deriving compound verbs: a problem for syntactic accounts 36 3.4.1 Initial preverbs are in C 36 3.4.2 Head movement 38 3.4.3 XP movement 43 3.4.4 Remnant movement 46
3.5 Summary 49
4. The syntax-phonology interface and the Old Irish verbal system 50 4.1 The syntax-phonology interface 50 4.2 Post-syntactic movement and the Old Irish verb 52 4.3 A new post-syntactic account 60
4.3.1 Simple verbs and do-support: a cross-linguistic parallel 60 4.3.2 Compound verbs 74
4.4 A closer look at the Old Irish data 84 4.5 Summary 89
5. Conclusion 89
CHAPTER 3 – SYNTACTIC CHANGE 92 1. Introduction 92 2. Parametric change and the role of language acquisition 92
3. Parameters in the minimalist programme 95
4. How to set parameters 98
4.1 Cue-based models of language acquisition 98 4.2 A cue-based model of syntactic change 101
5. Conclusion 106
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM 108
1. Introduction 108
2. Philological accounts of the development of the double system 108 2.1 Introduction 108 2.2 Particle theory (Cowgill 1975) 112 2.3 Suffix and infix deletion theory (McCone 1979) 114 2.4 Summary 120
3. Aspects of the syntax of Proto-Indo-European 120
3.1 Introduction 120 3.2 The structure of the left-periphery 121 3.3 Word order 129 3.4 Preverbs 136 3.5 Summary 138
4. From Proto-Indo European to Pre-Old Irish: Changes in the C-system
4.1 Introduction 139 4.2 The development of V-to-C movement: a syntactic reanalysis 140 4.3 Changes in the CP from PIE to Old Irish 144 4.4 From optional to obligatory verb fronting 152 4.5 From clitic to affix: changes in the inner C position 155 4.6 Summary 160
5. The development of preverbs 160
6. The development of conjunct particles 164 6.1 Negative particles 164 6.2 Interrogative particles 166 6.3 Conjunctions 168 6.4 Summary 174
7. Conclusion 174
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM 177
1. Introduction 177 2. Univerbation: the loss of the double system in the syntax 179
2.1 Introduction: what is univerbation? 179 2.2 ‘Univerbation’ within the clause: generalised V-to-T movement 182
2.2.1 The loss of final syllables & the loss of V-to-C movement183 2.2.2 Syntactic evidence and the loss of V-to-C movement 186
2.3 ‘Univerbation’ within the vP: generalised v-to-V movement 194 2.4 The development of post-syntactic rules 198
2.4.1 Deuterotonic compound verbs 198 2.4.2 Absolute verbal inflection 200
2.5 Summary 201
3. The simplification of compound verbs 202 3.1 Texts 203 3.2 How the deuterotonic/prototonic alternation was lost 204 3.3 The simplification of compound verbs: a theoretical perspective 207 3.4 The causes of simplification 208 3.5 The spread of the simplification 212 3.6 Summary 216
4. The loss of the absolute and conjunct 217
4.1 How the absolute/conjunct distinction was lost 217 4.2 The loss of the absolute/conjunct distinction: a theoretical account 223 4.3 Summary 226
5. Conclusion 227
CHAPTER 6 – CONCLUSION 229 REFERENCES 233
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1. INTRODUCTION: AIMS AND OBJECTIVES
From a linguistic perspective Old Irish is a fascinating object of study because it
differs significantly from other Indo-European (IE) languages. Nowhere is this more
apparent than in the verbal system. First, Old Irish, like Modern Irish and Welsh,
shows unmarked verb-initial word order in both main (1) and subordinate clauses (2).
1. béoigidir in spirut in corp in fect so
vivifies.PRES.3SG the spirit the body the time this
‘The spirit vivifies the body now’ (Wb 13d7)
2. as-rubart día friu-som ara celebartis a sollumnu
say.PERF.3SG God to.3PL that celebrate.PAST.SUBJ.3PL his feasts
‘God said to them that they should celebrate his feasts’ (Ml 102d3)
Verb-initial word order is relatively rare not only within the IE language family but
across all the languages of the world.1 Secondly, Old Irish has a double system of
verbal inflection, whereby the inflectional ending found on the verb differs depending
on the position of the verb in the clause. When the verb is in absolute initial position it
has independent or absolute endings (3). When the verb is not in initial position, when
it is preceded by a so-called conjunct particle, it has dependent or conjunct endings
(4).
3. léicid-som cloich asa tailm
release.PRES.3SG.ABS-emph.part.3SG.M stone out-of-his sling
‘He releases a stone out of his sling…’ (LU 6210–6211)
4. cenid leci in metur…
although.NEG allow.PRES.3SG.CONJ the metre…
‘Although the metre does not allow…’ (Ml 30a10) 1 According to The World Atlas of Language Structures (Haspelmath, Dryer, Gil & Comrie 2005: 330) of the 1228 languages under consideration only 85 (7%) are VSO.
CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION
2
Old Irish is the only Indo-European language where a fully productive system of this
kind is attested.2 The idiosyncrasies of the Old Irish verbal system raise three main
research questions: (i) how does the system function synchronically in Old Irish? (ii)
How did the system develop from Proto-Indo-European (PIE)? (iii) How was the
system lost between Old and Modern Irish? This dissertation aims to address all three.
Because the Old Irish verbal system is so different from those of other languages it
offers a significant challenge to the theory of Universal Grammar. If the principles
and parameters of Chomsky’s minimalist programme (Chomsky 1993, 1995a, 2000,
2001, 2004, 2005, 2006) reflect the syntactic knowledge present in all humans at
birth, then this theoretical framework should account equally well for Old Irish as for
English or French. The first aim of this dissertation is to establish that this is the case
and to develop a coherent synchronic account of the double system of verbal
inflection within the framework of minimalist syntax.
As no other early IE language has unmarked verb-initial word order or a double
system of verbal inflection neither of these features can be reconstructed for PIE.
However, Old Irish is clearly an IE language and so these two features must have
developed from PIE origins.3 The second aim of this dissertation, then, is to establish
how and why this development took place. This topic has received much attention in
the philological literature, yet so far no definitive account has been reached. This
dissertation aims to shed new light on the problem by approaching it from a different
perspective, namely that of generative syntax.
Although Modern Irish retains verb-initial word order, it no longer has a
productive double system of verbal inflection. The question of how the double system
was lost has not been tackled in the literature. The third aim of this dissertation is to
examine this issue and provide an account of the loss of the double system consistent
with a generative theory of syntactic change.
This dissertation hopes to contribute not only to our understanding of the history of
Irish but also to our understanding of syntactic change. Building on previous
diachronic work in a generative framework by David Lightfoot and Ian Roberts, this
dissertation aims to show how syntactic change should be modelled within the most 2 There are traces of a similar system in Old Welsh, but it is not clear whether these traces reflect a fully productive system. See Rodway (1998) for discussion. 3 Although see Vennemann (2002) who suggests that some of the idiosyncratic features of Celtic may originate from contact with Semitic languages.
CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION
3
recent version of the minimalist programme (Chomsky 2005, 2006) and what the
advantages of such an approach are.
To summarise, therefore, this dissertation aims to achieve the following objectives:
• To provide a synchronic account of the Old Irish double system of verbal
inflection within the framework of Chomsky’s minimalist programme.
• To show how syntactic change can be modelled within the most recent version
of the minimalist programme and what the advantages are of such an
approach.
• To provide an account of the development of the double system of verbal
inflection and verb-initial word order from PIE consistent with this framework
for syntactic change.
• To provide an account of the loss of the double system of verbal inflection
during Middle and Early Modern Irish.
The structure of the dissertation is as follows: chapter 2 provides an introduction to
the most salient features of the Old Irish verbal system, reviews the existing
generative accounts and develops a novel synchronic account of the double system in
the Old Irish period. Chapter 3 outlines the theoretical framework for the remainder of
the dissertation, considering how syntactic change should be modelled within the
most recent formulation of minimalism. Chapter 4 reviews the existing philological
literature on the development of the double system and then goes on to propose a
novel account based within a minimalist framework. Chapter 5 looks at the loss of the
double system.
The remainder of this chapter introduces some relevant background information on
Old Irish and the minimalist framework, which is assumed throughout this
dissertation.
CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION
4
2 BACKGROUND INFORMATION
2.1 Irish
The Celtic branch of the IE language family can be divided into two main groups,
Continental and Insular Celtic.4 The Continental Celtic languages, Gaulish, Lepontic
(Cisalpine Gaulish) and Celtiberian (Hispano-Celtic), are our earliest attested
evidence of Celtic, consisting mainly of inscriptions discovered in France, Italy and
Spain dating from the sixth century BC to the fourth century AD. The evidence for
Insular Celtic is later, with the earliest inscriptions dating from the late fourth century
AD (Russell 1995: 25). The Insular Celtic languages (the Celtic languages spoken in
the British Isles, and Breton) can be divided into two groups, Brittonic and Goidelic.
The Brittonic languages originated in mainland Britain, but with the arrival of the
Angles and the Saxons in the sixth and seventh centuries AD, the British speakers
were pushed into the western peninsulas and across the English Channel to northern
France, giving rise to the three modern Brittonic languages Welsh, Cornish and
Breton. The Goidelic languages developed from the language spoken in Ireland. Scots
Gaelic and Manx were established through the migration of Irish speakers from
Ireland to Western Scotland and the Isle of Man.5 The relationship between the Celtic
languages can be seen in the diagram below.
5. Proto-Celtic
Continental Celtic Insular Celtic
Celtiberian Lepontic Gaulish Goidelic Brittonic
Irish Scots Gaelic Manx Welsh Breton Cornish
As this dissertation is concerned with Irish let us consider the Goidelic branch in more
detail. The earliest evidence of Irish is found in inscriptions written in the Ogam
script.6 The majority of the Ogam stones date from the fifth and sixth centuries AD
4 The relationship between the Continental and Insular Celtic languages is somewhat controversial. See Russell (1995: 15–18) for an overview and further references. For the remainder of this dissertation it will be assumed, following McCone (1996), that there was an Insular Celtic stage. 5 See Jackson (1951) on the historical development of the Goidelic languages. 6 See McManus (1991) for more details.
CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION
5
and are mostly memorial inscriptions of the form ‘A, son/descendent of B’. Although
the Ogam stones have provided Celticists with much useful information on the
historical phonology of Irish, their formulaic nature means that they are of little use
for the study of morphology and syntax. In particular, for our purposes, the Ogam
inscriptions make no contribution to our understanding of the Irish verbal system as
they contain no verbs.
The language of the Ogam stones, the language of the fifth and sixth centuries, is
referred to as Primitive Irish.7 Old Irish, the focus of chapter 2 of this dissertation, is
the language of the seventh, eighth and ninth centuries. The main sources of Old Irish
are glosses in Latin manuscripts, which are collated, edited and translated in Stokes &
Strachan (1901–3). The most substantial of these are the Würzburg Glosses on the
Pauline Epistles (ca 750), the Milan Glosses on the Psalms (ca 800) and the St Gall
Glosses on Priscian’s Grammar (ca 850).8 For his Grammar of Old Irish, Thurneysen
(1946) draws primarily on the language of the glosses, as these glosses are found in
(more or less) contemporary manuscripts. There are many examples of what appear to
be Old Irish texts in later manuscripts such as the twelfth-century Lebor na hUidre
‘The Book of the Dun Cow’ (Best & Bergin 1929) and The Book of Leinster (Best,
O’Brien & O’Sullivan 1954–1983). However, this evidence is less reliable as it is not
clear to what extent the texts have been modified or modernised by later scribes. The
Old Irish evidence used in this dissertation comes primarily from Thurneysen’s
Grammar and the glosses.
Middle Irish is generally agreed to begin with the biblical poem Saltair na Rann
which is dated on non-linguistic grounds to the tenth century (ca 988 – Mac Eoin
1961a). There are many contemporary Middle Irish manuscripts, and so our study of
Middle Irish is not restricted in the way that Old Irish is. However, we face a different
problem. Middle Irish texts contain to varying degrees combinations of Old Irish and
Early Modern Irish forms alongside “monstrosities which never formed part of the
living language of Ireland” (Strachan 1904: 153). This tendency of Middle Irish
scribes to archaise makes it difficult to determine what the spoken language of the
period was like, and importantly for linguistic purposes, what changes had taken place
at a given point in time. For example, a text that appears on linguistic grounds to date 7 Russell (1995) refers to the Ogam inscriptions as Archaic Irish. Thurneysen (1946: 8–9) uses the term Archaic Irish to refer to early manuscript sources, i.e. pre AD 750. We will follow Thurneysen’s usage for the remainder of this dissertation. 8 These dates are taken from Thurneysen (1946) and are generally well accepted.
CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION
6
from the early Middle Irish period may have been written later, but by a well-trained
scribe, who knew how to archaise the forms ‘correctly’. Of course this does not mean
that Middle Irish texts cannot be used for linguistic study, but they must be used with
care.
The Early Modern Irish period began in 1200, with the formation of the Bardic
schools (Russell 1995: 27). A distinction is often made between Classical Modern
Irish, the highly stylised archaic language described in the Grammatical Tracts
(Bergin 1916–55) and used for Bardic poetry and Early Modern Irish, the language
found in the prose texts of this period. As a learned literary language, Classical
Modern Irish was no-one’s native tongue. The language of the prose tales, although
still archaic, is considered closer to the language spoken during this period, and so is
of greater use for grammatical study.
The main stages of Irish are summarised in the table below:
Table 1: The main stages of Irish
400–600 Primitive Irish
600–700 Archaic Old Irish
700–900 (Classical) Old Irish
900–1200 Middle Irish
1200–1600 Early Modern Irish
1600–Present Modern Irish
2.2 Theoretical background
The analyses of the Old Irish verbal system and the changes it underwent that are
considered in this dissertation are based within the framework of generative grammar,
specifically the latest version of Chomsky’s principles and parameters framework, the
minimalist programme (Chomsky 1993, 1995a, 1995b, 2000, 2001, 2004, 2005,
2006). This section has two aims. The first is to provide an introduction to the basic
architecture and assumptions of minimalist syntax for non-specialists.9 This is the
topic of section 2.2.1. Section 2.2.2 considers the status of head-movement, an
important concept in the chapters to follow, within minimalist syntax.
9 For a more detailed introduction to minimalist syntax see Adger (2003).
CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION
7
2.2.1 An introduction to the minimalist programme
The main difference between minimalism and earlier models of generative grammar
is the focus on economy and simplicity. The minimalist programme works from the
assumption that language is an optimal system (the ‘Strong Minimalist Thesis’ see
Chomsky 2000, 2001 for detailed explanation of this view). If language is optimal it
will contain only components and operations that are “virtually conceptually
necessary”. As the primary function of the language faculty, in Chomsky’s view
(Chomsky 2002: 105–109), is to link sound and meaning, the parts of the language
faculty that are needed for this are (virtually) conceptually necessary; those parts that
are not are imperfections. This idea can be seen in the minimalist conception of the
architecture of the language faculty, shown in (6) below. Minimalism eliminates the
intermediate representational levels of earlier versions of principles and parameters
theory, maintaining that the only relevant levels of representation are the interfaces
with phonology (PF) and semantics (LF).
6.
Lexicon
syntactic derivation (‘narrow syntax’)
Spell-Out
PF LF
In addition to the interface levels, the language faculty has two further components, a
lexicon containing all the lexical items for the language in question and a
computational system (CHL), which puts these lexical items together to build syntactic
structures. Crucially, the lexicon differs from language to language, but CHL is
considered invariant cross-linguistically (Chomsky 1995a: 170). Let us consider each
of these components in turn.
The lexicon consists of two types of lexical item, substantive (or lexical) categories
such as nouns, verbs and adjectives, and functional categories. Chomsky (2000: 102)
proposes that the core functional categories are “C (expressing force/mood), T
CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION
8
(tense/event structure) and v (the “light verb” the locus of argument structure)”. 10 11
Both substantive and functional lexical items are stored as bundles of features,
encoding semantic, phonological and grammatical information. For the purposes of
narrow syntax, only the grammatical features are relevant, with semantic and
phonological features not playing a role until the derivation reaches the interfaces.12
The primary function of CHL is to build syntactic structures through the operation
Merge (Chomsky 1995a: 226). Lexical items are taken from the lexicon and placed in
a numeration or lexical array.13 CHL then takes these lexical items and merges them in
a pairwise fashion to build a sentence. So, if we take the sentence ‘John kisses Mary’,
the numeration (ignoring any functional structure) contains the lexical items [John],
[kisses] and [Mary]. The computational system takes the verb [kisses] and the object
[Mary] and merges them to form a verb phrase (VP):14
7. VP
kisses Mary
The computational system then merges the subject [John] with the VP to form the
structure below, where the verb kisses is the head of the VP, the object Mary is the
complement and the subject John is the specifier:15
10 Light v has been assigned many different functions since its introduction by Chomsky (1955/1975). Since Chomsky (1995a: 312–16) it has been assumed (although not universally) that v is present in all clauses except unaccusatives, passives and raising contexts, being the locus for Accusative Case and the external theta role. 11 These core functional categories can be seen as umbrella terms for the wider variety of categories found cross-linguistically (Chomsky 2005: 17). See Pollock (1989), Cinque (1999) on the articulated TP and Rizzi (1997) on the articulated CP. 12 It is generally assumed that phonological features play no role in narrow syntax. Under a Distributed Morphology view (Halle & Marantz 1993, 1994) this results from the fact that phonological features are added only at the point of Spell-Out. We will return to this idea below. 13 See Chomsky (2004: 107) on the difference between these two concepts. 14 The use of labels such as V’ and VP are associated with X-bar theory rather than the minimalist Bare Phrase Structure (Chomsky 1995b, Chametzky 2000). However, these labels will be retained throughout this dissertation for clarity of exposition. They should not be taken to have any theoretical significance. 15 The functional structure is omitted from this diagram for expository reasons. As discussed above, argument structure is associated with light v, so v would need to be merged before the subject is merged.
CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION
9
8. VP
John V’
kisses Mary
The operation outlined above is called External Merge as it merges lexical items from
the numeration, which is external to the derivation. However, it is also possible to
copy a lexical item that has already been merged, or a syntactic structure that has
already been formed and remerge it higher in the structure. This operation is Internal
Merge or Move. For example, in a passive clause, such as ‘Mary is kissed’, the
derivation begins in the same way as before. The verb kiss and the object Mary are
merged together from the numeration. Then the auxiliary verb (a T element) is
merged. The object Mary is copied and remerged in the subject position (Spec-TP).
9. TP
Mary T
is VP
kissed tMary
In passive clauses, then, the object moves to become the subject of the clause.
Descriptively this is reasonably uncontroversial; however, it is not explanatory. We
need an explanation as to why this movement takes place. In the case of passives, the
object is forced to move because the clause needs a subject. In English every clause
must have a subject – this is the Extended Projection Principle (EPP – Chomsky
1981). In minimalist terms, T in English has an EPP-feature and so its specifier
position must be filled. When nothing is merged there from the numeration, some
element will be moved from within the existing syntactic structure to fill this position.
Within the minimalist programme the notion of EPP is extended such that all
CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION
10
movement operations are a result of EPP-features (Chomsky 2000: 102–3).16 17
Within the lexicon each functional category is specified as being [±EPP]. Different
word orders in different languages are a result of different categories having different
EPP values; therefore, whether a given functional category is [±EPP] will vary from
language to language. We will return to this issue in some detail in chapter 3.
So whether or not movement takes place is determined by the presence of an EPP-
feature on the functional category; however, this does not explain which constituent is
moved. In order to explain this we must introduce a new operation: Agree (Chomsky
2000, 2001). When a lexical item is taken from the lexicon it has some features that
are intrinsically valued and some that are unvalued. If we consider a verb, for
example, it has no intrinsic values for tense or person and number agreement. These
values are determined by the clause in which the verb appears. This suggests that
these features are valued during the syntax. Chomsky argues further that all unvalued
features must be valued during narrow syntax due to the principle of Full
Interpretation (Chomsky 1995a: 194). Unvalued features cannot be interpreted by the
interfaces, and so if any features remain unvalued at the end of narrow syntax the
derivation will crash, i.e. be ungrammatical. Under this view, then, the Agree
operation is crucial.
To initiate an Agree relation, a category with an unvalued feature, the Probe,
searches for a category with a matching (identical) valued feature, the Goal. The Goal
must be in the domain of the Probe, i.e. it must be contained within the
sister/complement of the Probe. Moreover, the Goal must be the closest possible
target, i.e. no other categories with matching features can intervene between the Probe
and the Goal. Furthermore, the Goal must be active (Chomsky 2001: 6). A Goal is
only active if it has unvalued features of its own. This ensures that the Agree relation
is reciprocal, with the unvalued features of both the Probe and the Goal receiving
values. If these conditions are met, then Agree can take place, and the unvalued
features of both the Probe and the Goal are valued.18
16 See the following section on the distinction between head- and phrasal-movement. 17 Chomsky (2005) proposes that phase heads are assigned an Edge Feature (EF) that can trigger movement. The relationship between EF and EPP is not entirely clear, see Chomsky (2005: 22–3; 2006 for discussion). 18 Chomsky (2001: 5) argues that unvalued features are intrinsically uninterpretable and remain so after they have been valued. As a result, after a feature is valued it is deleted. This idea of deletion is problematic. Although certain unvalued features are uninterpretable at LF they may still be realised at PF. For example, subject agreement on the verb is uninterpretable at LF, but is realised phonologically in English as the suffix -s. If this feature were deleted in narrow syntax as part of the Agree operation
CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION
11
Feature valuation and the operation Agree build on earlier ideas about feature
checking (Chomsky 1993, 1995a). However, there is one crucial difference. In earlier
versions of the minimalist programme movement and feature checking were
intrinsically linked such that the only way to check and eliminate uninterpretable
features was through movement. In the latest formulation of minimalism (Chomsky
2000, 2001, 2004, 2005) this is no longer the case. Feature valuation via Agree can
take place in situ, independently of movement. An Agree relation will only result in
movement if the Probe, the target of movement, has an EPP-feature. Although Agree
and feature valuation is a necessary condition for movement, it is no longer sufficient.
There is one more fundamental difference between the recent version of
minimalism and its predecessors. Chomsky (2000, 2001) proposes that derivations
proceed cyclically, via phases. Under this system, only a restricted amount of the
structure, specifically one phase, is available to CHL at any one time. This has the
result of reducing computational complexity. The introduction of the concept of phase
has interesting implications for the operation Agree and, by association, Move. As
only a certain amount of structure is available to the computational system at one
time, the space over which a Probe can search for a Goal is limited. This has the effect
of imposing locality restrictions on Agree and Move. Let us consider how this works.
According to the Phase Impenetrability Condition (PIC) (Chomsky 2000: 108,
2001: 13–4), once a phase is complete, the domain (complement) of the phase head is
spelled-out and sent to the interfaces, leaving only the phase head and its specifier(s)
available for syntactic operations (i.e. Agree and Move). On the standard assumption
that CP and vP are phases, once the vP phase is complete, its domain/complement VP
will be sent to Spell-Out, and so will no longer be available. If any material from
within the VP, e.g. the verb or the object, is to move to a higher position in the clause
(e.g. T or C) it must move to either the head position (v) or Spec-vP before the phase
is complete to escape the phase. We will return to the concept of phases and the PIC
in more detail in chapter 2.
Having outlined the architecture and operations of the minimalist programme that
will be assumed throughout this dissertation, let us now turn our attention to a specific
theoretical issue that will play an important role in what is to follow, namely the
concept of head-movement and its status within minimalist syntax. then it could not have any effect at PF. It seems more likely that feature deletion takes place at the interfaces.
CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION
12
2.2.2 The status of head-movement within the minimalist programme
In the previous section it was argued that syntactic structures are built by the
operations Merge and Move. In this section we will consider the operation Move in
more detail. Two types of movement are empirically attested, movement of an entire
phrasal category, an XP, and movement of the head of a phrase. The existence of XP-
movement as a syntactic operation is widely accepted. Head-movement, on the other
hand, is more controversial. In recent work Chomsky (2000, 2001) has argued that
head-movement plays no part in narrow syntax and is in fact a PF phenomenon.
Chomsky invokes both empirical and conceptual arguments to support his claim. Let
us examine each in turn.
Chomsky’s main empirical argument against head-movement as a syntactic
phenomenon is that it has no semantic effects (Chomsky 2001: 37). If head-movement
took place in narrow syntax we would expect it to play a role at LF; however,
Chomsky argues, this does not seem to be the case. A verb, for example, tends to be
interpreted the same way in languages that show verb-movement to T or C and those
where the verb remains in situ. Matushansky (2006: 103) argues that this is
unsurprising as head-movement involves movement of a predicate and predicate
movement does not tend to have any semantic effects. We should only expect to find
semantic effects with head-movement that involves quantified heads, such as modal
verbs. There is ample evidence to show that movement of these heads does in fact
show semantic effects.
Roberts (2005: 148–9) argues that the possible interpretations of the English modal
may differ depending on whether or not it has undergone head-movement. In the T
position may is ambiguous between a permission and an epistemic interpretation,
(19a). If the modal is moved to the C position to form a question, it can only have the
permission reading, (19b).
19. (a) John may (well) leave permission/possibility
(b) May John (?*well) leave permission only
(Roberts 2005: 149)
CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION
13
Matushansky (2006: 104) observes along similar lines that different modal verbs can
have different scope properties. In example (20a) negation has scope over the modal
can whereas in (20b) the modal should has scope over negation.
20. (a) Yolanda can’t leave Neg > Mod
(b) Yolanda shouldn’t leave Mod > Neg
(Matushansky 2006: 104)
Both modals in (20) occupy the same structural position, however, they are
interpreted differently. Only in (20b) does the interpretation correspond to the surface
scope. In (20a), assuming that movement of the negative element is either impossible
(see Lechner 2005 for empirical arguments) or will have no semantic effect, the
interpretation corresponds to the reconstructed position of the modal. In (20a) scope is
determined on the basis of the position of the modal before head-movement, whereas
in (20b) it is determined according to the position of the modal after head-movement.
This suggests that head-movement can have semantic effects.
Lechner (2005) provides similar evidence from scope splitting constructions. In the
example in (21) below the modal can can take scope over the quantified subject,
splitting negation from its surface host.
21. Not every pearl can be of average size ¬◊ > ∀
(it is not possible that every pearl is of average size)
(Lechner 2005: 3)
Due to restrictions on where the subject can be interpreted, the only way to obtain this
reading, Lechner argues, is for the modal to be interpreted in its moved position. In
simplified terms, on the assumption that the subject originates in Spec-vP, and the
modal originates in light v, the only way that the modal will be able to have scope
over the subject is if the modal is interpreted in its moved position, T, and the subject
is interpreted in its base position, Spec-vP (see footnote 15).19
Matushansky (2006: 104–5) argues that head-movement also has syntactic effects.
If head-movement feeds syntactic processes, then it must be part of narrow syntax and 19 See also Lechner (2004) for evidence from comparatives to suggest that V2 cannot be a PF phenomenon.
CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION
14
not phonology. For example, Chomsky (2004), building on work by Marantz (1997)
proposes that verb-movement to v is necessary to assign a syntactic category to an
otherwise acategorial root. This seems to suggest that this movement should take
place in the syntax. Furthermore, Harley (2004), following among others Chomsky
(1993) and Bobaljik (1995), argues that since Scandinavian object shift, a syntactic
movement operation, depends on head-movement (cf. Holmberg’s Generalisation),
head-movement must also be syntactic.20
So, it seems that there is evidence to suggest that head-movement can have both
semantic and syntactic effects, and so cannot be simply a PF phenomenon; at least
some head-movement must take place in narrow syntax. Furthermore, Matushansky
(2006) argues that the analysis of head-movement as a phonological process creates
more problems than it solves. The main problem with such approaches, as observed
by Zwart (2001), is that we have no real understanding of how head-movement as a
phonological process would work. If head-movement is phonological it must be
determined what triggers the movement and how it is constrained. If it is a
phonological process, then we would expect it to be triggered by phonological
properties of the heads involved. Matushansky (2006) argues that this does not seem
to be the case. V-to-C movement in Germanic V2 clauses only takes place when C is
unfilled. However, V-to-T movement in French, according to Pollock (1989),
involves movement to a filled head position. It seems that for head-movement to take
place, the target can be either realized or null suggesting that the phonological
properties of a head position cannot influence head-movement.
Matushansky (2006: 99–100) argues that analysing head-movement as a
phonological phenomenon faces an even more serious problem, in that it violates the
PIC. As noted above, when a phase is complete the complement of the phase head is
sent to PF and unavailable for further syntactic operations. So, for example, when the
vP phase is complete the complement of v, i.e. VP, is spelled-out. In a language such
as French, where the verb moves to T (Pollock 1989), in order to conform to the
Head-Movement Constraint (Travis 1984 – HMC), the verb must move via light v.21
The crucial question is, when does V-to-v movement take place? If head-movement is
a phonological operation then it must take place after Spell-Out. However, at the end
20 Matushansky expresses the reservation that all of these syntactic effects of head-movement are theory-dependent and so cannot be decisive. 21 The status of the HMC in minimalist syntax is discussed below.
CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION
15
of the vP phase, only the VP is spelled-out; the light v head is still part of the syntax
and so is unavailable for movement. If head-movement takes place after the
completion of the CP phase then the phonological computation must deal with two
phases at once. This defeats the original purpose of introducing phases, namely to
decrease computational burden. Matushansky argues that what this shows is not that
head-movement must always occur before Spell-Out, but that if a head must move
across a phase boundary then it must do so in narrow syntax. Therefore, head-
movement cannot be purely a PF phenomenon.
From the arguments presented above it seems that not only is Chomsky’s main
empirical argument for abolishing syntactic head-movement invalid, but attempting to
account for head-movement as a phonological process creates more problems than it
can solve. This suggests that head-movement should be considered a syntactic
operation on a par with phrasal-movement.22 Let us turn now to Chomsky’s
conceptual arguments. Head-movement differs from phrasal-movement in a number
of ways, suggesting that it should not be part of narrow syntax.
One crucial way in which head-movement differs from phrasal-movement is that
head-movement violates the Extension Condition (Chomsky 2000: 136–8). The
Extension Condition states that the structure building operations Merge and Move
must always apply at the root, the highest point of the tree. When a head moves it
adjoins to a head position and not to the root and so does not extend the tree. This
means that unlike phrasal-movement, a moved head does not c-command its trace.
Within the minimalist literature, two main attempts have been made to account for
this distinction, namely Matushansky (2002, 2006) and Roberts (2005).
Matushansky and Roberts both point out that head-movement can be argued to
obey the extension condition if it in fact consists of two operations, one syntactic and
one morphological. Within the syntax head-movement proceeds in the same way as
phrasal-movement, targeting a specifier position. So, for example, in languages such
as French where the verb moves to T, the verb in fact targets Spec-TP, rather than the
head position.23 The syntactic movement operation is followed by a morphological
22 A further option that has been proposed to banish head-movement from narrow syntax is to suggest that all instances of head-movement should be reanalysed as remnant vP movement (Mahajan 2000, 2003; Boeckx & Stjepanovic 2001). Although in some cases there is good evidence for vP remnant fronting, it seems unlikely that it can replace head-movement across the board. This issue will be discussed in chapter 2, and so will not be dealt with in any detail here. 23 Spec-TP is the position typically associated with the subject (see section 2.2.1 above). However, according to Bare Phrase Structure (Chomsky 1995b) it is possible to have multiple specifiers. To
CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION
16
operation, m-merger (Matushansky 2002, 2006) or incorporation (Roberts 2005),
which merges two adjacent heads to form a single constituent. As the syntactic
movement operation is identical to phrasal-movement, a moved head will obey the
extension condition and c-command its trace in the syntax.24
If head-movement involves a combination of syntactic and morphological
operations it must be determined what drives these operations and when they can take
place. This is most problematic in terms of the m-merger/incorporation. The operation
m-merger converts two heads in a spec-head configuration into a single head
(Matushansky 2006: 94). Does m-merger affect all cases of this spec-head
configuration? This seems unlikely. If not, however, then there must be some way of
determining which cases will be affected and which will not.25 Roberts (2005)
proposes that his Incorporation operation will take place as a result of an Affix-feature
on the Probe. This Affix-feature is a type of EPP-feature that attracts a head rather
than a phrasal category. When the derivation reaches PF, this same Affix-feature
provides an instruction to incorporate the two heads. One single feature, then,
motivates both the syntactic movement and the morphological operation.26
We have seen in this section that there are good empirical and theoretical reasons
for allowing head-movement to be part of the syntax, and so for the remainder of this
dissertation we will assume that this is the case. Head-movement will be treated on a
par with XP-movement. It will be assumed that both processes are a result of Agree
and (re-)Merge.27 The difference between them is simply a matter of how much
material is pied-piped. This depends on the type of EPP-feature present on the Probe.
Following Roberts (2005) we will assume that head-movement is motivated by an
Affix-feature, a subtype of EPP-feature, that specifies that the head rather than an XP
must be moved. However we will leave the exact nature of this head-movement, i.e.
obtain the correct order in French, the verb must target the inner specifier and the subject the outer specifier. This being the case, an explanation is needed as to why head-(verb)-movement precedes XP-(subject)-movement. See Matushansky (2006: 82–3) on this issue. 24 This morphological operation is also argued to account for incorporation effects, which differentiate head-movement from XP-movement. 25 Marantz’s (1988) concept of morphological merger faces similar problems. 26 Matushansky’s m-merger operation does not drive the movement operation. She argues that head-movement is triggered by c(ategorial)-selection (Matushansky 2006: 75–77). This accounts for the fact that c-selection and head-movement show the same locality restrictions, but says nothing about the link between head-movement and morphology. 27 See Pesetsky & Torrego (2001) who also argue that head-movement and XP-movement are two sides of the same phenomenon.
CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION
17
whether it involves movement directly to a head position or combines movement to a
specifier and m-merger/incorporation, for further research.
One final issue that must be dealt with is the apparent locality conditions on head-
movement. Head-movement seems to be more local than XP-movement, as head-
movement cannot skip intervening heads. It is unclear, however, what role the HMC
should play in the minimalist programme. Such a specific condition does not seem in
keeping with minimalist ideas. It would be preferable if the HMC could be explained
in independent terms. If as argued above, head-movement is based on Agree in the
same way as XP-movement, then it must also be subject to the PIC. Unlike the HMC,
the PIC is independently motivated (see Chomsky 2001 et seq; Richards 2004). It will
be assumed here, then, that the PIC is the only formal locality constraint operating on
head-movement.
If the PIC is the only locality operation operating on head-movement, then how are
we to account for the locality effects that the PIC does not cover? For example, the
PIC will ensure that verb-movement always goes through light v to escape the phase,
however, it will not force the verb to move through T on its way to C. If, as argued in
section 2.2.1, movement always occurs as a result of Agree and the presence of EPP-
features, then for a head to move via an intervening head position, this position must
have the requisite features. For V-to-C movement to proceed via T, then, T must have
an Affix-feature that attracts the verb. This accounts for the effects of the HMC in
minimalist terms. However, under this view, it is also plausible that the HMC could
be flouted. If T did not contain the appropriate features, then the verb could move
directly from v to C (under the right version of the PIC – see the discussion in chapter
2) without moving via T. There is evidence to suggest that this may be the case in the
Continental Germanic languages, where although the verb moves to C in verb second
clauses, there is no evidence that it ever moves to T (Holmberg & Platzack 1995). It
will be argued in chapter 5 that this is also true for the history of Irish.
Having outlined the theoretical background for the analyses that are to follow, let us
now turn to the main subject of this dissertation: the Old Irish verbal system.
CHAPTER 2
A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT OF THE OLD IRISH VERBAL SYSTEM
1. INTRODUCTION
Before we can consider the diachronic aspects of the development and loss of the
double system of inflection, it is first necessary to gain an understanding of how the
system functions in Classical Old Irish, the language of the eighth and ninth centuries.
The aim of this chapter, then, is to provide a synchronic account of the double system
of verbal inflection within the framework of Chomsky’s minimalist programme.
A necessary prerequisite for the development of a generative account is an
understanding of the data under discussion. Section 2 provides an introduction to the
main features of the Old Irish verbal system. Of course this dissertation is not the first
work to attempt an analysis of the Old Irish double system within a generative
framework. Previous accounts have attempted to show that the different
morphological forms shown by the verb in Old Irish reflect different syntactic
structures. Section 3 reviews these previous syntactic accounts and argues that they
are faced with serious empirical and theoretical problems. As a result, it seems that
the different verbal forms cannot be a result of syntax alone. Section 4 investigates
how syntax and phonology can be combined to explain the different verbal forms, and
presents a new synchronic account of the double system of verbal inflection in Old
Irish.
2. THE OLD IRISH VERBAL SYSTEM
Like Modern Irish and the other modern Celtic languages,1 Old Irish has unmarked
verb-initial word order. The finite verb is in initial position in both main and
embedded clauses as can be seen in the examples below.
1. béoigidir in spirut in corp in fect so
vivifies.PRES.3SG the spirit the body the time this
‘The spirit vivifies the body now’ (Wb 13d7)
1 Except maybe Breton, which is argued to be a verb-second language (Stephens 1982; Borsley, Rivero & Stephens 1996; Borsley & Kathol 2000; Wilford 2005).
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
19
2. as-rubart día friu-som ara celebartis a sollumnu2
say.PERF.3SG God to.3PL that celebrate.PAST.SUBJ.3PL his feasts
‘God said to them that they should celebrate his feasts’ (Ml 102d3)
However, Old Irish differs from its modern counterpart in a number of ways. First,
Old Irish has a double system of inflection, whereby the verb has a different
morphological ending depending on its position in the clause. Secondly, in addition to
the simple verbs found in Modern Irish, Old Irish also has a number of compound
verbs consisting of a verb and one or more preverbs. Thirdly, Old Irish has enclitic
object pronouns that appear in second position. This section will examine each of
these features in turn.
2.1 Simple verbs: absolute and conjunct
Simple verbs in Old Irish consist of a verbal stem and an inflectional ending. Each
verb has five stems, which distinguish the present indicative, future, present
subjunctive, preterite active and preterite passive tenses. Further tense and aspect
distinctions can be achieved through the combination of these stems with the so-
called secondary inflectional endings. Combining secondary endings with the present
stem gives the imperfect, with the future stem gives the conditional and with the
present subjunctive gives the past subjunctive. The table below shows the weak verb
léicid ‘lets, allows’.3 Reading across the table, each row has the same (or very similar)
endings. Reading down the table, each column shows the same stem.4
2 In this example the conjunction aran ‘in order that’ functions as a generic ‘that’ complementizer. This usage is not very frequent in Old Irish. See Ó hUiginn (1997) for discussion. 3 In Old Irish the 3sg present indicative is traditionally used as a citation form instead of the infinitive. 4 See Thurneysen (1946: 326–440) and McCone (1997a) for more details on stems and endings.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
20
Table 1: Conjugation of the weak verb léicid ‘lets, allows’
primary tenses Present future present subjunctive
preterite active
preterite passive
1sg 2sg 3sg 1pl 2pl 3pl
léiciu léici léicid léicmi léicthe léicit
léicfea léicfe léicfid léicfimmi léicfide léicfit
léicea léice léicid léicmi léicthe léicit
léicsiu léicsi léicis léicsimmi ------- léicsit
------- ------- léicthe ------- ------- léicthi
secondary tenses Imperfect conditional past subjunctive 1sg 2sg 3sg 1pl 2pl 3pl
no léicinn no léicthea no léiced no léicmis no léicthe no léictis
no léicfinn no léicfeda no léicfed no léicfimmis no léicfide no léicfitis
no léicinn no léicthea no léiced no léicmis no léicthe no léictis
The combination of stems and inflectional endings to mark tense, aspect and subject
agreement in Old Irish is similar in many ways to the verbal systems of other early
Indo-European (IE) languages. However, there is one significant feature of the Old
Irish verbal system that differentiates it from all the other early IE languages, namely
its double system of verbal inflection. In each tense for each person there are two
possible inflectional endings: the absolute and conjunct. These are shown in the
paradigms below for the verbs léicid ‘lets, allows’, marbaid ‘kills’ and berid ‘bears,
carries’.5
Table 2: Absolute and conjunct inflection
Absolute Conjunct Absolute Conjunct Absolute Conjunct
1sg léiciu -léiciu 1sg marbu -marbu 1sg biru -biur
2sg léici -léici 2sg marbai -marbai 2sg biri -bir
3sg léicid -léici 3sg marbaid -marba 3sg berid -beir
1pl léicmi -léicem 1pl marbmai -marbam 1pl bermai -beram
2pl léicthe -léicid 2pl marbthae -marbaid 2pl beirthe -berid
3pl léicit -léicet 3pl marbait -marbat 3pl berait -berat
The distribution of the absolute and conjunct endings is determined by the position of
the verb in the clause. When the verb is in absolute initial position it has absolute
5 The only exceptions to this are the secondary tenses, which have only conjunct inflection.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
21
inflection, as in (3). When the verb is preceded by a so-called conjunct particle it has
conjunct inflection, as shown in example (4).6
3. léicid-som cloich asa tailm
release.PRES.3SG.ABS-emph.part.3SG.M stone out-of-his sling
‘He releases a stone out of his sling…’ (LU 6210–6211)
4. cenid leci in metur…
although.NEG allow.PRES.3SG.CONJ the metre…
‘Although the metre does not allow…’ (Ml 30a10)
2.2 Compound verbs: deuterotonic and prototonic
In addition to simple verbs, Old Irish also has numerous compound verbs consisting
of a simple verb preceded by one or more preverbs. Preverbs are particles,
etymologically related to prepositions, that change the meaning of the verb. In some
cases this change in meaning is predictable from the combined meaning of the
preverb and the verb. For example, the verb do-beir ‘gives, brings’ consists of the
verb berid ‘carries’ and the preverb do ‘to’.7 Usually, however, the meaning is not
transparently compositional. The meaning of the verb fo-reith ‘helps’, for example, is
not a sum of its parts, the verb rethid ‘runs’ and the preverb fo ‘under’. Similarly,
many compound verbs contain a simple verb that is not independently attested. In the
case of the verb ad-cí ‘sees’, the simple verb -cí does not exist independently of the
compound.
Like simple verbs, compound verbs have different forms depending on their
position in the clause. However, unlike simple verbs, it is the stem rather than the
ending that shows the alternation. Compound verbs always have conjunct inflection
regardless of their position in the clause. When a compound verb is in absolute initial
position in the clause it is deuterotonic, the stress falls on the second syllable. When a
compound verb is preceded by a conjunct particle it is prototonic, showing the normal
Old Irish stress pattern of stress on the first syllable. The deuterotonic and prototonic
6 The verb also has conjunct endings in so-called Bergin’s Construction. We will return to this construction in section 3.1 and chapters 4 and 5. 7 Although see Dillon (1962) on the prehistory of the preverb do.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
22
forms of the verbs do-beir ‘gives’, ad-cí ‘sees’ and do-gní ‘does’ are shown below for
the present indicative.
Table 3: Deuterotonic and prototonic forms
Deuterotonic Prototonic Deuterotonic Prototonic Deuterotonic Prototonic
1sg do-biur -tabur 1sg ad-cíu -aicciu 1sg do-gníu -dén(a)im
2sg do-bir -tabair 2sg ad-cí -aci 2sg do-gní -dén(a)i
3sg do-beir -tabair 3sg ad-cí -aicci 3sg do-gní -dén(a)i
1pl do-beram -taibrem 1pl ad-ciam -accam 1pl do-gníam -dénam
2pl do-berid -taibrid 2pl ad-ciid -accid 2pl do-gníith -dénid
3pl do-berat -taibret 3pl ad-ciat -accat 3pl do-gníat -dénat
As can be seen from these paradigms the deuterotonic and prototonic forms differ
greatly in terms of their phonological shape. The majority of these differences can be
explained by the difference in stress.8 Because the deuterotonic and prototonic forms
are stressed on different syllables, processes of sound change affected them
differently. For example, in the history of Irish unstressed vowels were liable to vowel
affection.9 Between two palatal consonants an unstressed vowel is raised to /i/.
Similarly, between two non-palatal consonants an unstressed vowel is lowered to /a/.
In the deuterotonic form, the second syllable is stressed and so unaffected; however,
in the case of the prototonic form the second syllable is unstressed and so susceptible
to vowel affection. This can be seen in the examples in (5) below, where the original
vowel /e/ remains in the deuterotonic forms do-bert ‘gave’ and as-beir ‘says’, but is
lowered and raised respectively in the corresponding prototonic forms.
5. (a) do-bert vs. -tubart ‘gave’
(b) as-beir vs. -epir ‘says’
(McCone 1997a: 5)
Another stress related change is that of syncope. Starting from the stressed syllable,
syncope eliminates the vowel of every second syllable. Because the stress is in
8 For more details see McCone (1997a: 4–9). 9 Stressed vowels underwent a different process of vowel affection whereby the vowel was lowered or raised depending on the quality of the following vowel, e.g. nom sg fer<*uiros ‘man’ vs. gen sg fir<*uirī (see Thurneysen 1946: 46–55).
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
23
different places in the deuterotonic and prototonic forms, different syllables were lost
(*).
6. (a) for-cenna vs. -foirc*nea ‘finishes’
(b) do-rósc*(c)aifet vs. -der*scaig*fet ‘they will excel’
(McCone 1997a: 6)
The other major phonological differences between the deuterotonic and prototonic
forms seem to suggest that the initial preverb of the deuterotonic compound is in
some sense separated from the remainder of the verb. So, whereas in the prototonic
form, an initial preverb ending in a vowel causes lenition of the following segment,
this lenition is blocked in the case of the deuterotonic (7).
7. (a) fo-fera vs. -foírea ‘causes’ (f > ø)
(b) do-cuaid vs. -dechuid ‘he had gone’ (‘c’ /k/ > ‘ch’ /x/)
(McCone 1997a: 4)
Although the differences between the deuterotonic and the prototonic can be
explained historically in this way, McCone (1997a: 191) argues that the forms differ
to too great an extent to be derived synchronically from a single underlying form and
were essentially a collection of irregularities. From an observational point of view,
this seems the most likely scenario; however, to prove that this is the case a full
analysis of the phonology of Old Irish as a whole and of compound verbs in particular
is necessary. As the main focus of this dissertation is on the syntactic aspects of the
double system, such an analysis will not be attempted here.10 For the remainder it will
be assumed, following McCone, that the deuterotonic and prototonic cannot be
derived synchronically from a single underlying form; however, this will be by no
means crucial to the analysis that is to follow.
2.3 Object pronouns
Aside from the double system of verbal inflection, the most striking feature
differentiating the Old Irish verbal system from its modern counterpart is the use of 10 See McCloskey (1978) and Eythórsson (2003) for analyses of the double system from a phonological perspective.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
24
enclitic object pronouns. Object clitics in Old Irish behave similarly to those in other
IE languages, appearing in second position in the clause in accordance with
Wackernagel’s Law (Wackernagel 1892). At first sight this seems to suggest that the
clitic will always appear enclitic to the verb, because, as we saw above, the verb is in
initial position. However, this is not the case. The verbal complex in Old Irish can
contain of a number of different parts, such as a conjunct particle and multiple
preverbs in addition to the verb. Although it is not always attached to the verb, the
enclitic pronoun always appears second within the verbal complex. This is known as
Vendryes’ Restriction (Vendryes 1908).
When there is a conjunct particle, the pronoun is enclitic to it, and appears before
the verb, which has dependent (conjunct or prototonic form):
8. (a) Ní-s n-ágathar (cf. DT ad-ágathar)
NEG-INF.3PL fear.PRES.3SG.PT
‘He does not fear them’ (Thurneysen 1946: 255)
(b) Ní-m charat-sa
NEG-INF.1SG loves.PRES.3PL.CONJ-emph.part.1SG
‘They do not love me’ (Wb 5c6)
When there is no conjunct particle, and the verb is compound, the pronoun appears
infixed between the initial preverb and the remainder of the verb:
9. du-s n-gní
PVB-INF.3SG makes.PRES.3SG.DT
‘He makes it (f)’ (Ml 29a3)
When there is no conjunct particle and the verb is simple there are two possible
options. Either the object pronoun is suffixed to the verb in initial position, (10a), or a
dummy particle no is inserted and the pronoun is infixed between no and the verb, in
conjunct form, (10b).
10. (a) beirth-i
carry.3SG.ABS-SUFF.3SG.M
‘carries it’ (Ml 42b7)
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
25
(b) no-m ísligur
PVB-INF.1SG abase.PRES.1SG.CONJ
‘I abase myself’ (Wb 17d22)
In the Old Irish period, suffixed pronouns are of restricted use. They can only be used
when the pronoun and the verb are third person, or in more archaic texts, when the
verb is 1pl. Even then, this usage is not consistent, and the construction using the
dummy preverb no may be used instead with no difference in meaning (Thurneysen
1946: 271).11 The other forms of the pronoun are used regularly with the 3sg form of
the substantive verb at-tá ‘be’ to indicate possession (like Modern Irish, Old Irish has
no verb meaning ‘have’).
11. táth-ut12 ‘you (sg) have’ (lit. there is to you)
táth-(a)i ‘ he has’ (lit. there is to him)
táth-us ‘she has’ (lit. there is to her)
táth-unn ‘we have’ (lit. there is to us)
táth-uib ‘they have’ (lit. there is to them)
(Thurneysen 1946: 271)
With other verbs, there are a few examples of the first and second persons, but these
are restricted to poetic language (Thurneysen 1946: 271). These traces of first and
second person forms suggest that at one time suffixed pronouns were productive and
could be used more freely. However, in the Old Irish period, it seems to be the no
construction that is productive and suffixed forms are archaisms of restricted use.13
Having outlined the main features of the Old Irish verbal system we are now in a
position to examine the existing theories that deal with the double system of verbal
inflection.
3. SYNTACTIC ANALYSES OF OLD IRISH
As discussed in section 2, Old Irish differs from most other IE languages in two main
respects in having unmarked verb-initial word order and a double system of verbal 11 Although see Cowgill (1987), who argues that this is not the case. 12 Thurneysen (1946: 478) suggests that this -th- reflects the earlier absolute ending of the substantive verb *táith, which has been lost in other contexts. 13 See Breatnach (1977) for more detail on suffixed pronouns.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
26
inflection. A successful synchronic analysis must be able to account for both of these
features. The different verbal forms are related to different positions in the clause,
with the independent (absolute and deuterotonic) forms appearing in absolute initial
position, and the dependent (conjunct and prototonic) forms appearing after a
conjunct particle. This suggests that the form of the verb could reflect the syntactic
structure in which the verb is contained. This is the basic idea behind the two existing
syntactic accounts of the double system, to which we turn in the sections below.
3.1 Old Irish as a residual V2 language: Doherty (1999, 2000)
Doherty (1999, 2000) claims that like Modern Irish (see, among others, McCloskey
1996a, Carnie 1995, Harley 1995, Duffield 1995) the verb in Old Irish is always in T.
However, he claims that this was not always the case. At some earlier period Irish was
a verb-second (V2) language, whereby the verb raised to C and one constituent was
fronted to the Spec-CP.
It is widely accepted that pre-Old Irish was not a verb-initial language (Watkins
1963, McCone 1979b). Archaic Irish texts show examples where the verb is not in
clause-initial position, but appears clause-medially or clause-finally. These examples
are known as Bergin’s Construction, as Bergin (1938) was the first to observe that in
all cases where the verb is not in clause-initial position it has conjunct inflection.
Doherty proposes that all the examples of Bergin’s Construction are in fact V2.14
Bergin’s examples are generally verb-final; however, there is usually only one
constituent preceding the verb, as in (12).
12. (a) ceso femmuin m-bolgaig m-bung
although seaweed blistered reap.PRES.1SG.CONJ
‘Although I reap blistered seaweed’ (Corm 1059/Bergin 1938: 197)
(b) fri aingel n-acallastar
to angel speak.PRET.3SG.PT
‘He spoke to an angel’ (LU 1148/Bergin 1938: 201)
According to the standard analysis (den Besten 1983), in asymmetric V2 languages
the verb is in C. If Bergin’s Construction shows V2 and all verbs in Bergin’s
14 See also Carney (1977–9); Koch (1991).
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
27
Construction have conjunct inflection then, under Doherty’s analysis, whenever the
verb is in C it will have conjunct inflection.
Leaving aside for the moment the validity of Doherty’s claim that Bergin’s
Construction is V2 (we will return to this in chapter 5), let us examine how this relates
to the distribution of absolute and conjunct forms in Old Irish. As discussed in
sections 2.1 and 2.2 above, the verb has dependent form (conjunct or prototonic)
when it is preceded by a conjunct particle. On the assumption that conjunct particles
are complementizers, or at least elements merged in the C position (Chung and
McCloskey 1987), Doherty draws a parallel between Bergin’s Construction and the
synchronic double system of verbal inflection, summarised below:
“Verbs are in dependent form (conjunct, prototonic) when CP is projected.”
(Doherty 2000: 19)
When there is a conjunct particle, it appears in C and so C is projected, resulting in
conjunct inflection. Similarly, in Bergin’s Construction, the verb is in the C position,
and so C is projected. In all other cases, C is not projected and so the verb has
absolute inflection.
The major drawback of Doherty’s account, in synchronic terms, is that it is
essentially the equivalent of saying ‘the conjunct form is used after a conjunct
particle’; it is descriptive not explanatory. It is not entirely clear why the projection of
a particular category in the syntax should influence the morphological form of the
verb, especially if this category is not the one that actually contains the verb in
question. Furthermore, in minimalist terms the C-projection is assumed to always be
present, regardless of whether it has any phonological realisation. In this case, there
will be no structural difference between a clause that has a conjunct particle and one
that does not.
Further problems arise if we consider the Old Irish data in more detail. In Old Irish
there are certain particles that do not cause the verb to appear in dependent form. For
example the particle ma ‘if’ is followed by independent verb forms, as shown in (13).
13. ma dud-esta ní dibar n-iris
if PVB-is.lacking.PRES.3SG.DT anything of.your faith
‘If aught is lacking in your faith…’ (Wb 25a30)
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
28
Although it may be the case that in Old Irish this particle does not appear in the C
position (see Newton 2005 for such an analysis), cross-linguistic evidence suggests
that such particles should be part of the C complex. If this is the case then CP will be
projected and, given Doherty’s assumptions, we would expect the verb to have
dependent form.
Similarly if we consider relative constructions, we find that in most cases the verb
has independent form. There are various ways of marking the relative, which will be
discussed in more detail in section 3.3.2. However, as can be seen in the examples in
(14), the verb in a relative construction is clearly independent (Thurneysen 1946:
312f).
14. (a) a n-ad-chiam (cf. non-rel ad-ciam)
that PVB-see.PRES.1PL.DT
‘that which we see’ (Ml 112b13)
(b) is oinfer gaibes búaid
COP one.man seize.PRES.3SG.REL victory
‘it is one man who seizes victory’ (Wb 11a4)
Cross-linguistically relative constructions show certain similarities to interrogatives,
and so are viewed as a feature of the C-projection (Chomsky 1977). In that case,
whenever the clause is relative we would expect to find a C-projection, and, under
Doherty’s analysis, a dependent verb form. This is clearly not the case.
It seems, then, that Doherty’s account of the double system of verbal inflection
falls down on both theoretical and empirical grounds, and so cannot be maintained.
3.2 Two types of raising: Carnie, Harley & Pyatt (2000)
Carnie, Harley & Pyatt (2000 – CHP) propose an alternative syntactic account of the
double system of verbal inflection whereby the morphological form of the verb is
linked directly to the verb’s syntactic position. CHP argue that Old Irish has both V-
to-T and V-to-C raising as a result of a filled C requirement. When there is a conjunct
particle, this is merged in C and so the filled C requirement is met and the verb moves
only as far as T. When C is not filled by a conjunct particle, some verbal element
must move to fill it. If the verb is simple, then the verb itself moves to C. If the verb is
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
29
compound, then only the first preverb moves to the C position and the remainder of
the verb is in T. This can be seen schematically in the trees below:
15. (a) C (b) C (c) C C T C T C T ní berid do T V T V T V beir tV beir
The morphological ending of the verb reflects the verb’s syntactic position. When the
verb is in C it has absolute morphology and when it is in T (or simply not in C) it has
conjunct morphology. Absolute morphology, then, can be seen as the realisation of a
C feature on the verb. When the verb is in T, this C feature will not be present and so
the default conjunct morphology will appear.
CHP account for compound verbs in a similar fashion, with the difference in
phonological form reflecting a difference in the syntax. When a conjunct particle fills
C, the two parts of the compound verb appear in T and so are spelled-out together as
the prototonic form. When there is no conjunct particle, and the initial preverb is in C,
the preverb and verb are in separate syntactic positions, and so are spelled-out
separately, resulting in the deuterotonic form.15
Linking the morphological form of the verb to the syntactic positions in which it
appears is pleasing from a theoretical perspective, as it provides an interesting account
of the different forms. A further theoretical advantage of CHP’s theory is that it draws
an interesting parallel with the Germanic V2 languages. As mentioned in section 3.1,
following den Besten (1983), asymmetric V2 languages such as German and Dutch
are generally analysed as involving verb-movement to C. In German the verb only
moves to second position in the clause in clauses with no overt complementizer.
When a complementizer is present, V-to-C movement is blocked and so the verb
remains in situ. The filled C requirement postulated by CHP for Old Irish is identical
to that found in V2 languages. When C is not filled by a conjunct particle, some
verbal element, either the verb or the first preverb, moves to fill C. The main
difference, then, between verb-initial orders in Old Irish and V2 in Germanic is that in
15 The situation with compound verbs is by no means as straightforward as this suggests. We will examine it in detail in section 3.4.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
30
Germanic there is an additional topicalisation operation that attracts an XP to Spec-
CP.16
So it seems that there are certain theoretical advantages in adopting CHP’s theory.
However, the crucial test is to see how it accounts for the data. The next section
considers the evidence from simple verbs; compound verbs are the subject of section
3.4.
3.3 Are simple verbs in C? Empirical evidence
CHP invoke two types of evidence to support their claim that simple verbs in Old
Irish raise to the C position, namely object pronouns and relative constructions. We
will examine each of these in turn.
3.3.1 Object pronouns
As discussed in section 2.3, object pronouns in Old Irish are enclitic and always
appear in second position. If the verb form is simple and in initial position, the object
pronoun is suffixed to it, as in (16). If the verb follows a conjunct particle, the object
pronoun is infixed between the conjunct particle and the verb, as in (17). If there is no
conjunct particle and the verb is compound, the object pronoun is infixed between the
initial preverb and the remainder of the verb, as shown in (18).
16. Eorum is do apstalaib beirth-i
Eorum COP to apostle.DAT.PL carries-SUFF.3SG.M
‘The Eorum he applies it to the apostles’ (Ml 94b1)
17. Ní-m charat-sa
NEG-INF.1SG loves.PRES.3PL.CONJ-emph.part.1SG
‘They do not love me’ (Wb 5c6)
16 A further interesting parallel is found in East Netherlandic dialects of Dutch, where the verb shows different morphological endings in subject and non-subject V2 clauses. Zwart (1997) argues that this reflects the different position of the verb in each case. When the topicalised constituent is a non-subject the verb raises to C and shows C-morphology. When the topicalised constituent is a subject, the verb is in T and shows T-morphology. This is directly parallel to CHP’s proposal for Old Irish.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
31
18. du-s n-gní
PVB-INF.3SG.F makes.3SG.PRES.DT
‘He makes it (f)’ (Ml 29a3)
According to syntactic accounts of clitic placement, object clitics have a set position
in the clause (Kayne 1991). In many languages object pronouns seem to appear
between C and T (see Kayne 1975, 1991, 1994, Cardinaletti & Roberts 2002 on
Romance; Grohmann 2000 on dialects of German; Ackema & Neeleman 2005 on
Middle Dutch). As clitics appear between these two functional projections, it is not
entirely clear to which they belong. Cardinaletti & Roberts (2002) argue that clitics
move to the left edge of the T complex. Uriagereka (1995) argues that they move to a
projection, FP, which encodes point of view and is part of the C-projection. A full
discussion of the target for and motivation behind clitic placement is beyond the
scope of this dissertation. Crucially, object pronouns in Old Irish seem to occur in a
similar position to those found in other European languages. If we consider the
example given in (17) above, we find that the pronoun appears between the conjunct
particle, a C element (Chung & McCloskey 1987) and the verb, in T. This suggests,
that as in other European languages, object clitics in Old Irish appear between C and
T. For concreteness it will be assumed that these pronouns occupy the lowest
projection of the CP, equivalent to Rizzi’s FinP. If this is the case, and the position of
the clitics remains constant, then this supports CHP’s analysis of simple verbs. CHP
argue that when the verb is simple object pronouns appear to its right and are suffixed
to it; this is what we would expect if the verb had raised to C.
The evidence from object pronouns, however, is not as clear-cut as CHP suggest.
As was seen in section 2.3, use of suffixed pronouns in Old Irish is restricted.
Generally only third singular forms of the pronoun are found attached to third singular
indicative verb forms, and even in these cases suffixed pronouns are not used
consistently. The productive pattern in Old Irish seems to be infixation using the
dummy preverb no.
The restricted use of suffixed pronouns in Old Irish is problematic for CHP in two
respects. First, the fact that suffixed pronouns are not productive and are only used in
restricted contexts means that they do not provide convincing evidence that simple
verbs move to C. The second, and perhaps more serious, problem is that CHP must be
able to account for the productive pattern. It seems to be the case that when there is an
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
32
object pronoun present V-to-C movement is blocked. One way to explain this could
be to say that the infixed pronoun satisfies the filled C requirement (except in certain
numbers and persons). However, if this is the case, then we would expect movement
of the initial preverb to C also to be blocked when there is a pronoun and that does not
seem to be so (see section 3.4 below). Similarly it could be argued that the dummy
preverb no is merged into the C position whenever there is an infixed pronoun, and
this satisfies the filled C requirement and prevents verb-movement to C. However,
again this does not occur with compound verbs. If no were inserted with the pronoun
we would expect this to be the case across the board, and so again movement of the
initial preverb of the compound verb would also be blocked.
It seems, then, that instead of providing evidence to support CHP’s view, object
pronouns pose a significant problem for it. In the regular, productive case simple
verbs clearly do not move to C when there is an object pronoun, as they appear with
the dummy preverb no. Under CHP’s theory there seems to be no satisfactory
explanation as to why V-to-C movement is blocked in these cases. If, on the other
hand, there is no filled-C requirement in Old Irish so the verb never moves to C and
only ever moves as far as T, then the productive system is easily accounted for and it
is only the irregular suffixed forms that require extra explanation.17 A theory that
accounts primarily for the regular construction seems clearly preferable to one that
focuses on the irregular one. The evidence from object pronouns, then, is better
accounted for if it is assumed that there is no filled-C requirement and the verb in Old
Irish only raises as far as T.
3.3.2 Relative clauses
The second piece of evidence invoked by CHP is that of relative marking. In Old Irish
there are many different ways to mark a relative clause (see Thurneysen 1946: 312–
325; McCone 1980; Ó hUiginn 1997). One way that a clause can be marked as
relative is to use a special relative form of the verb. This can be seen in example (19)
below, where the non-relative form would be gaibid ‘takes, seizes’.
17 This is reasonably straightforward. The irregular nature of suffixed pronouns can be accounted for if we assume that the combination of verb+suffix is learnt by rote as an irregularity and inserted into the appropriate syntactic context, rather than being derived through a regular syntactic process of cliticization.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
33
19. is oinfer gaibes búaid diib inna chomalnad
COP one man take.PRES.3SG.REL victory of.3PL in its completing
‘It is one man of them that gets victory for completing it’
(Wb 11a4)
As noted above, relative clause marking is associated with the C position so the fact
that special relative morphology is only found on simple verbs in absolute clause-
initial position supports the idea that simple verbs move to C in Old Irish.
Like suffixed pronouns, special relative verb forms in Old Irish are restricted in
distribution to verbs in the third person and, in the earliest texts, first plural
(Thurneysen 1946: 313). In all other persons when there is no special relative form,
the dummy particle no is inserted, which either lenites or nasalizes the initial segment
of the verb and causes it to have conjunct inflection, as shown in the examples in (20).
20. (a) is hed in so no chairigur (non-rel cairigur)
COP it this PVB reprimand.PRES.1SG.CONJ
‘This is what I reprimand’ (Wb 11d1)
(b) cid no mbetha (non-rel betha)
why PVB be.PAST.SUBJ.2SG.CONJ
‘Why (is it that) you should be?’ (Wb 4c24)
It seems on closer inspection, then, that instead of supporting CHP’s theory, the
evidence from special relative forms is problematic. As is the case for suffixed
pronouns, the special relative verb forms are so restricted that they cannot provide
convincing evidence that simple verbs move to C. Moreover, CHP must be able to
account for these restrictions, explaining why movement to C is blocked in the
majority of relative contexts. This could perhaps be explained if we argue that a
relative feature in C satisfies the filled C requirement or that no is inserted into the C
position in relative contexts, preventing verb-movement to C. However, as was the
case with object pronouns, a relative feature in C does not stop the initial preverb of a
compound verb from appearing in C. As with object pronouns, it seems that in
relative contexts, the productive pattern seems to be that where the verb only moves
as far as T and the cases that seem to demonstrate V-to-C movement are exceptions,
suggesting that we should not postulate a filled-C requirement for Old Irish.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
34
There is further evidence from relative clauses to suggest that the verb only moves
as far as T in Old Irish. The most common way to mark a relative clause in Old Irish
is through lenition. When the verb is compound, lenition affects the segment after the
initial preverb, as shown in (21).
21. a n- ad-chiam (non-rel ad-ciam)
that NAS PVB-see.PRES.1PL.DT
‘That which we see’ (Ml 112b13)
When the verb is simple and a special relative form is unavailable, the dummy
preverb no is inserted and the initial segment of the verb is lenited, as in (22) below.
22. is hed in so no chairigur (non-rel cairigur)
COP it this PVB reprimand.PRES.1SG.CONJ
‘This is what I reprimand’ (Wb 11d1)
These data can be made sense of if we assume that when C is specified as relative it
causes lenition of the initial segment of the following word.18 Crucially, the particle
that appears in the C position is not lenited. If special relative verb forms move to C,
then, we would expect them not to be lenited. Although this is the case in the earliest
sources of Old Irish, by the time of the Milan Glosses (AD 800) we find that simple
relative verb forms begin to undergo lenition. This becomes widespread by the St Gall
Glosses (AD 850) (Thurneysen 1946: 315):
23. (a) indí chomallaite (non-relative comallait)
those fulfil.PRES.3PL.REL
‘Those who fulfil.’ (Ml 114b7)
(b) cisí aimser derb thechtas (non-relative techtaid)
what time definite possess.PRES.3SG.REL
‘What is the definite time that he has?’ (Sg 26a6)
18 A similar analysis has been provided for relative clauses in Modern Irish. The main difference is that in Modern Irish relative C is phonologically realised as a particle a that either lenites or nasalizes the following word (McCloskey 2001b, 2002)
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
35
This development suggests that although historically special relative verb forms were
in the C position and so unlenited, by the time of the Milan Glosses this is no longer
the case. The fact that such verb forms are unlenited in the Würzburg Glosses written
some fifty years earlier could imply that V-to-C movement was lost between these
750 and 800. Alternatively, and perhaps more likely, V-to-C movement may have
been lost before the time of the Würzburg Glosses, but it was not until the time of the
Milan Glosses that the full effects of this change came to be seen in the written
language.
3.3.3 Interim summary
Although CHP’s analysis of absolute and conjunct inflection in Old Irish is
theoretically appealing, the empirical evidence does not seem to support it. The
evidence that CHP provide from object pronouns and relative constructions, when
considered more closely, not only fails to support their analysis but also poses
significant problems for it. It is difficult to account for the use of no to infix pronouns
and mark relative clauses within a theory that postulates across the board V-to-C
movement. In both cases the productive pattern seems to show that the verb only
moves as far as T. The examples that seem to show V-to-C movement are marginal
and irregular in the Old Irish period. These data seem better accounted for if the verb
only moves as far as T in Old Irish. The irregular forms that appear to demonstrate V-
to-C movement are archaisms from an earlier period, when V-to-C movement was
productive.
Before we move on there is a further piece of evidence that could be taken to
support the view that simple verbs only raise as far as T in the syntax, namely stress
patterns. Generally all other elements that CHP propose can fill the C position in Old
Irish are unstressed, i.e. conjunct particles and the initial preverbs of deuterotonic
compound verbs (Thurneysen 1946: 28–30). This being the case, if a fronted verb
appears in the C position we might expect it to be unstressed. If, on the other hand,
the verb only ever moves as far as T, then we have a unitary explanation for the stress
patterns of the Old Irish verbal complex, namely stress always falls on the first
syllable of TP.
So it seems that there is good reason to believe that simple verbs do not move to C
in Classical Old Irish. However, if simple verbs only ever move as far as T in the
syntax, then the different morphological endings cannot reflect different syntactic
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
36
positions. This means that we need an alternative explanation for the different
morphological forms. This will be the topic of section 4 below. First, let us consider
compound verbs.
3.4 Deriving compound verbs: a problem for syntactic accounts
3.4.1 Initial preverbs are in C
CHP argue that the initial preverb of a compound verb can satisfy the filled C
requirement and appear in the C position. In order to investigate the validity of this
claim we must consider the evidence from Old Irish. Initial preverbs behave
phonologically and syntactically like conjunct particles, which suggests that both
appear in the same position, namely C.
Let us consider first the phonological features of initial preverbs. The most notable
characteristic of the initial preverb of a compound verb is that it is unstressed, hence
the irregular deuterotonic stress pattern of independent compound verb forms (see
section 2.2). Conjunct particles are also unstressed (Thurneysen 1946: 30). If we
consider the form of preverbs, they again show similarity to conjunct particles.
Preverbs, like conjunct particles, tend to be short words, consisting in most cases of
only one syllable.19
Turning to the syntactic characteristics of initial preverbs and conjunct particles we
again see similarities. The first piece of evidence that conjunct particles and initial
preverbs compete for the same syntactic position is that they are in complementary
distribution. It is only when there is no conjunct particle present in the clause that a
preverb can appear independent from its verb. When a conjunct particle is present the
initial preverb appears as a prefix on the verb. It cannot be independent. This can be
seen by comparing the independent form ad-cí with its dependent counterpart aicci.
24. (a) Ad-cí ind rígain Conaire
PVB-see. PRES.3SG.DT the queen Conaire
‘The queen sees Conaire’
19 This surface similarity is due to the fact that all preverbs and many conjunct particles developed from prepositions. See chapter 4 below.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
37
(b) Ní aicci ind rígain Conaire
NEG see.PRES.3SG.PT the queen Conaire
‘The queen doesn’t see Conaire’ (Quin 1975)
The fact that independent preverbs and conjunct particles do not co-occur suggests
that they compete for the same syntactic position.
The evidence from object pronouns used by CHP also suggests that initial preverbs
and conjunct particles appear in the same syntactic position. When there is a conjunct
particle in the C position, the object pronoun appears to its right, between the conjunct
particle and the verb, (25a). When the verb is compound and in initial position the
object pronoun is infixed between the initial preverb and the remainder of the verb
(25b).
25. (a) Ní-m accai
NEG-INF.1SG see.PRES.3SG.PT
‘He does not see me’
(b) Atom- chí
PVB-INF.1SG- see.PRES.3SG.DT
‘He sees me’ (Quin 1975)
If we assume, following CHP, that the clitic has a set position in the clause, namely
between C and T, then any element which appears to the left of the enclitic must be in
the C position. As both conjunct particles and initial preverbs appear to the left of the
enclitic, they must both be in the C position.20
Evidence from relative clauses also suggests that initial preverbs and conjunct
particles occupy the same syntactic position. As noted above, the most common way
to mark a relative clause is through lenition. When the verb is compound and in initial
position the first segment following the initial preverb, i.e. the first segment of the
stressed syllable of a deuterotonic compound, is lenited (26a). Similarly when a
relative conjunct particle, for example the relative negative nad, is in clause-initial
20 The evidence from clitic pronouns should not be taken in isolation. It could be the case that the enclitics are placed post-syntactically by Prosodic Inversion (Halpern 1995) or Local Dislocation (Embick & Noyer 2001, Adger to appear). Local Dislocation will be discussed in more detail in section 4 below.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
38
position, this lenites the first segment of the following verb, i.e. the first segment of
the stressed syllable of the conjunct or prototonic verb (26b).
26. (a) a n- ad-chiam (ch=/x/, cf. non-relative ad-ciam)
that.NAS PVB-see.PRES.1PL.DT
‘That which we see’ (Ml 112b13)
(b) sillab nad ṡluindi (ṡ=/ø/, cf. non-relative sluindi)
syllable NEG express.PRES.3SG.CONJ
‘A syllable that does not express’ (Sg 25b13)
In section 3.3.2 it was argued that in Old Irish relative C lenites the following
segment. Therefore the fact that these relative marking mutations follow the initial
preverb suggests that the preverb must in fact be in the C position. If the preverb were
lower than C then relative C would lenite or nasalize the preverb and not the
remainder of the verb.
In sum, the initial preverb of a deuterotonic compound verb resembles a conjunct
particle in terms of both phonological form and syntactic behaviour. This suggests
that initial preverbs and conjunct particles occupy the same syntactic position, namely
C. However, in spite of these similarities there is one significant difference between
conjunct particles and preverbs. If conjunct particles are complementizers then they
will be merged directly into the C position. Preverbs, on the other hand, are
semantically part of the verb (see section 2.2 above), and so we expect them to be
merged lower in the clause as part of the vP. If the preverb originates in vP, we must
explain how it gets from its base position to C.
3.4.2 Head-movement
If preverbs appear in the C position, a head position, then the most straightforward
analysis is to suggest that they originate in a head position further down in the
structure and move to C via head-movement. CHP argue that compound verbs are an
example of a Hale & Keyser (1993) type complex VP and so the preverb is the head
of light v. This is appealing because it captures the fact that the preverb and the verb
seem to form a single semantic unit (see section 2.2 above). If the verb originates in
light v it must move to C via head-movement; however, this is by no means
straightforward.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
39
3.4.2.1 Traditional head-movement
Under the traditional formulation of head-movement, a moved head is subject to the
Head-Movement Constraint (Travis 1984 – HMC). When a head moves it must move
through each intervening head position. In Old Irish when the verb is compound and
C is filled by a conjunct particle the verb seems to move according to these
conditions. The verb moves from V to light v and incorporates with the preverb. This
newly formed verbal complex of verb+preverb will then move to T and be spelled-out
as the prototonic form.21
27. CP C TP ní T vP tabair v V tdo V DP tbeir
When C is not filled by a conjunct particle, the situation is more complex, as the
preverb and verb are in different syntactic positions. The preverb must move on from
T to C. One possibility, suggested by Carnie, Harley & Pyatt (1994) and Eska (1996),
is that the verb incorporates with the preverb and moves up to T, as is the case when
C is filled, but when C is empty the preverb excorporates and moves to fulfil the filled
C requirement. Even if we accept that excorporation is possible, the excorporation
needed here would be of a different class entirely from that found in other languages.
Roberts (1991) argues that it is possible for a moved head to excorporate from a head
with which it has incorporated and continue to move up the structure to a higher
position without the other head. In the Old Irish case, it is not the originally moved
21 According to Baker (1988), when a head moves through another head position and incorporates with it the higher head will appear as a suffix on the moved head. This can be seen as a result of Kayne’s (1994) Linear Correspondence Axiom, which specifies that adjunction must always be to the left. To get the desired order in Old Irish, we need to employ right adjunction, and argue that the higher head, the preverb, appears as a prefix to the verb. One way around this problem is to adopt a DM approach whereby the status of each morpheme as a suffix or a prefix is lexically encoded, and not purely a result of syntactic operations (Embick & Noyer 2001). However, this does not enable us to make the kind of predictions that Baker’s theory of incorporation does.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
40
head (V) that must excorporate, but the head with which the moved head incorporated
(v). To account for the Old Irish data, then, we would have to not only allow
excorporation in our grammar, but also significantly alter the conditions under which
it can take place, making it even less restrictive. This is clearly undesirable.
If excorporation is impossible then the only other option is for the preverb and verb
simply not to incorporate in the first place; the preverb must move independently of
the verbal stem. If this is the case then the verb must move from V to T, without
incorporating light v and the preverb must move straight to C, skipping the T position,
as shown in the tree below.
28. CP C TP do T vP beir v V tdo V DP tbeir
Such movement is clearly prohibited by HMC and so this derivation is impossible
using traditional head-movement.22
3.4.2.2 Head-movement in the minimalist programme
As discussed in chapter 1, it is unclear whether the HMC plays a role in minimalism.
Of course, if we follow Chomsky (2001) and argue that head-movement is not part of
narrow syntax then it is clearly redundant. However, if we admit head-movement into
the syntax and make the assumption that it proceeds in the same way as XP-
movement then we would expect both head- and XP-movement to be subject to the
same locality conditions, namely the Phase Impenetrability Condition (PIC). Let us
assume that the PIC is the only locality constraint relevant for head-movement in
minimalism and explore whether this can help with the analysis of the Old Irish data.
22 CHP argue that independent preverb-movement can be explained using Long Head-Movement (LHM). However, they admit that the LHM necessary to account for Old Irish would have to be very different from that found elsewhere. See Adger (to appear) and Newton (2005) for further arguments against this view.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
41
The PIC has two forms, which following Müller (2004) we will refer to as PIC1
and PIC2. PIC1 from Chomsky (2000: 108, 2001: 13) is given below:
Phase Impenetrability Condition 1 (PIC1)
In a phase α (HP) with head H, the domain of H is not accessible to operations
outside α (HP); only H and its edge are accessible to such operations.
The domain, or complement, of H is spelled-out as soon as the phase, HP, is
complete, i.e. as soon as the next probe is introduced. So, if following Chomsky, we
take C and light v to be phases, under PIC1 the complement of v, i.e. VP, will be sent
to Spell-Out as soon as T is merged. As a result T will not be able to probe the
contents of VP, and so nothing can move directly from V to T.
If we consider the Old Irish data in terms of the locality conditions imposed by
PIC1 we find that the result is essentially the same as it was according to the HMC.
The verb cannot move to T directly, as according to PIC1 VP becomes unavailable
when T is merged, so the verb must first move first to light v and then on to T.
If we consider now the second formulation, the locality conditions are somewhat
different. PIC2 as given by Chomsky (2001: 14) is provided below:
Phase Impenetrability Condition 2 (PIC2)
[Where Z and H are phases, in the configuration [ZP…[HPα[H YP]]] – GEN]
The domain of H is not accessible to operations at ZP; only H and its edge are
accessible to such operations.
According to PIC2 the complement of H is only inaccessible to the next phase head.
The complement of H is not spelled-out until the next phase head is merged. So, if C
and v are phases, then the complement of v, i.e. VP will not be sent to Spell-Out until
C is merged. The main difference, then, between PIC1 and PIC2 is that in the case of
PIC1 VP is sent to Spell-Out as soon as T is merged, so T cannot probe VP directly,
whereas in PIC2 VP is not sent to Spell-Out until C is merged, and so T can probe VP
directly.
Let us consider the implications of PIC2 for the Old Irish data. Under PIC2 T can
probe VP directly; this means that the verb does not have to move via light v to
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
42
escape the phase. V can move straight to T without moving through and incorporating
with the preverb in light v. In addition, no part of the PIC demands that movement
from v to C must go through T, and as we are assuming that the PIC is the only
locality condition on movement, then movement directly from v to C also seems
possible. As a result, the derivation given in (28) above and repeated below as (29),
which was prohibited by the HMC, is now possible.23
29. CP C TP do T vP beir v V tdo V DP tbeir
By abandoning the HMC and invoking PIC2 it is possible for the preverb and verb to
move independently of one another without incorporation. The syntactic derivation of
deuterotonic verb forms has become possible. However, we are faced with a further
problem, namely how to derive the prototonic form. According to the PIC2-based
account of head-movement proposed here we would predict that if C is filled then V
will move to T as before, but movement of the preverb will be blocked, so the preverb
will remain in light v. This would result in the order C-verb-preverb. Such orders are
not attested at any stage of Irish. To obtain the attested orders, when C is filled both
the preverb and the verb must be in T.
There are two possible ways for the preverb and the verb both to be in T. When C
is filled either V moves to T via light v and incorporates, or both V and v move
independently to T. Neither of these options is attractive. For the first scenario, it is by
no means clear why the verb would move through v when C is filled and straight to T
when C is unfilled. Even if there were a reason, it seems likely that this reason would
23 Although these movement processes are all possible under PIC2, they will only take place in this manner under the appropriate feature configurations. T must probe for a feature present only on V and not on v. If the relevant feature is present on v then T will enter into an Agree relation with v rather than V as a result of locality. Similarly, for C to probe light v, T cannot contain the relevant features.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
43
involve theoretically undesirable look-ahead. In the second case, the idea of a
functional category attracting two heads independently is not theoretically
appealing.24 For this to be the case T would have to have two separate Affix-features.
Furthermore, under such an analysis T would only attract both heads when C was
filled. Again, this presumably would involve look-ahead.
To summarise this section, it seems that although from a semantic and syntactic
point of view the analysis of the initial preverb of the compound verb as a light v head
is appealing, the attested syntactic patterns involving the preverb and verb in Old Irish
cannot be derived via head-movement. Traditional head-movement adhering to the
HMC cannot account for the deuterotonic case where the verb and preverb need to
move separately. If we abandon the HMC and assume that the PIC is the only locality
condition on head-movement, then we are still no better off. If head-movement
proceeds according to PIC1 then the preverb can move directly from v to C, but the
verb must still move via v and incorporate with the preverb. If head-movement
proceeds according to PIC2 then we can obtain the derivation of the deuterotonic form
shown in (29) whereby the verb moves to T skipping v, and v moves to C skipping T;
however, if movement proceeds in this manner, then we have no account of the
prototonic form, when the verb moves via v, and both the verb and the preverb are in
C.25
It seems that if the initial preverb is a light v head, then there is no way to derive
the attested forms by head-movement.
3.4.3 XP-movement
As there seems to be no adequate solution in terms of head-movement, let us explore
an alternative scenario. If, instead of being a light v head, the preverb is in fact an XP
then it will not be subject to the HMC and so will be able to move longer distances.
Analysing the preverb as an XP has the advantage that it enables us to draw a
cross-linguistic parallel with Germanic. Like Old Irish, German has compound verbs
consisting of a preverb (referred to as a particle in the Germanic literature) and a verb
that form a single semantic unit, but are syntactically independent. In German, the 24 Although this is proposed for Romance languages where T attracts both the finite verb and a clitic (Belletti 1999). 25 PIC2 has a further disadvantage in that it is incompatible with Chomsky’s (2004) proposal that the verb must move to light v to become verbalized. If this is the case, then V-to-T movement cannot be possible, as the verb would not be verbalized. In the remainder of this dissertation we will adopt the more restrictive PIC1 over PIC2.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
44
verb can move independently of the particle, leaving the particle in the base position
in the VP, as shown by the examples in (30).
30. (a) Er steht um 7 Uhr auf
He stands at 7 o’clock up
‘He gets up at 7 o’clock.’
(b) Weil er um 7 Uhr aufsteht, ist er immer müde.
Because he at 7 o’clock up-stands is he always tired
‘Because he gets up at 7 o’clock he is always tired.’
There are two main analyses of this construction in German, the small clause account
and the complex head account. In the small clause account (Kayne 1985; Hoekstra
1988; den Dikken 1995) the particle and object form a small clause that constitutes
the complement of the verb. In the complex predicate analysis, the particle and the
verb are seen as a single lexical entry, and the object is the complement of the whole
complex verb (Neeleman 1994; Ackema & Neeleman 2005; Zeller 2001). No
consensus has been reached in the Germanic literature as to which structure is
preferable.26 In both cases the necessary syntactic configurations can be derived as it
is only the verb that moves, and this is a straightforward case of head-movement. In
Old Irish, however, both the verb and the preverb move independently. Movement out
of a small clause is not well understood. For this reason we shall concentrate on the
complex head account.
Zeller (2001) argues that the particle in German is the head of a Particle Phrase
that forms the complement of the verb. In German, as in Old Irish, when the verb does
not raise and the verb and particle remain in the VP the particle precedes the verb.
This is not a problem for Zeller’s analysis, as he assumes that German is head final
and so the complement will precede the verb. If Irish compound verbs have the same
syntactic structure as particle verbs in German, then Old Irish must also be head final.
Of course, it seems plausible that in its pre-history Irish was a head-final language
(see chapter 4), however it seems unlikely that this was the case in the Old Irish
26 In fact Wurmbrand (2000) argues that both types exist, with particle verbs that are semantically compositional having small clause structure and those that are semantically opaque being complex heads. If this is the case, then the fact that compound verbs in Old Irish are in the most part semantically opaque lends further support to the claim that they should be complex heads rather than small clauses.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
45
period, where the verb precedes the object in both main and embedded clauses (see
Adger to appear). Furthermore, as Old Irish shows noun-adjective, noun-genitive
orders and prepositions rather than postpositions there is reason to believe on
typological grounds that it is a head-initial language. It seems unlikely, then, that
preverbs in Old Irish are verbal complements; however, this does not mean that we
must abandon the parallel with Germanic. It is possible that preverbs in Old Irish are
phrasal, but that instead of appearing as complements to the verb, they are in fact
specifiers.27
If the preverb is a phrasal category then we do not face the same problems as we
did when we analysed it as a head. Firstly, phrasal-movement is not subject to such
strict locality constraints as head-movement. Secondly, and perhaps more
importantly, if the preverb is a phrase then movement of the preverb and movement of
the verb will not interact. They will not move through the same positions and so will
not incorporate in the syntax.
Let us assume that the preverb originates in a particle phrase in Spec-VP. For the
preverb to fill the C position it must first move as a phrase to Spec-TP, and then as a
head to satisfy the filled C condition. At first sight this appears problematic in terms
of Chain Uniformity, as traditionally chains cannot contain both heads and phrasal
elements. Under Bare Phrase Structure (BPS – Chomsky 1995b, Chametzky 2000),
however, this is no longer a problem. If, as Zeller (2001: 127–49) proposes for
German, the particle phrase contains nothing but the preverb head, then in BPS terms
the preverb will be both a head and an XP simultaneously. As a result, there is no
problem with it moving first as a phrase and then as a head (see Sportiche 1992 who
makes such a proposal for clitic movement).
Under such an account we can derive all the required orders. When there is no
conjunct particle, the preverb moves as a phrase to Spec-TP and then as a head on to
C, and the verb moves via head-movement to T. When there is a conjunct particle in
C, the preverb moves to Spec-TP as a phrase, and the verb moves via head-movement
to T.
By analysing the verbal system in this way, movement is less constrained and so
we can derive the attested orders. However, just because the movements are possible
does not mean that they take place. Movement must be motivated, and it is unclear 27 Such an analysis is also more consistent with the diachrony of preverbs. Preverbs were originally adverbial phrases that modified the verb (see Vincent 1999 and chapter 4 below for details).
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
46
here what this motivation would be. If we maintain CHP’s filled C-requirement, then
this could motivate the movement of the preverb from Spec-TP to C, as the preverb
will be the closest verbal element when C is merged.28 Motivating the movement of
the particle phrase to the specifier of T is less straightforward. XP-movement to a
specifier position requires that the two positions be in an Agree relationship, and that
the higher position has an EPP-feature. The movement proposed here is problematic
on both counts. First, it is unclear what kind of feature would cause an Agree relation
between T and the preverb. T must be in an Agree relation with the verb in order for
V-to-T movement to take place. For T to also Agree with the preverb, we would need
to stipulate that T has unvalued preverb features in addition to V features. The second
and perhaps more serious problem is that of the EPP-feature. The EPP on T must be
optional, as Spec-TP will only be filled when the verb is compound. However,
optional EPP-features are only allowable in the minimalist program if they have some
kind of effect on interpretation (Chomsky 2001: 34). This does not seem to be the
case here; fronting the preverb does not seem to have a pragmatic or discourse effect.
Movement of the preverb to Spec-TP would have to be obligatory whenever the verb
is compound; the presence of an EPP-feature on T would have to be lexically
conditioned. This is not possible within the theory as it stands. From a theoretical
standpoint, then, although movement of the preverb as an XP is possible, it cannot be
motivated, and so cannot be maintained as an explanation for the presence of the
preverb in C.29
3.4.4 Remnant-movement
In the last two sections it has been argued that neither head-movement nor XP-
movement can provide a satisfactory account of Old Irish compound verbs. In the
case of head-movement, the required movement processes violate locality constraints
and in the case of XP-movement the movements cannot be motivated. In this section
we will examine a final syntactic account, namely VP-remnant-movement.
28 Although, as we saw in section 3.3 the status of CHP’s filled C condition is in doubt. If simple verbs do not move to C then when the verb is simple C will not be filled. Therefore, there can be no filled C condition. 29 Ian Roberts (p.c.) points out that it may be possible for the preverb to move straight to C when C is unfilled, and to Spec-TP only when movement to C is prevented by the presence of some other element in C. This again faces the same problems in terms of motivating the movement processes, especially if as argued in section 3.3 there is no requirement for C to be filled. In addition, there are also familiar problems in terms of lookahead.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
47
Remnant-movement was originally proposed by Thiersch (1985) and den Besten &
Webelhuth (1987, 1990) to account for the topicalisation of incomplete VPs in
Germanic languages. In the current syntactic climate where head-movement is
assumed by many to play no part in narrow syntax (Chomsky 2001), remnant-
movement is often employed to replace it.
Remnant-movement involves the movement of an entire phrase (usually VP or vP)
to a specifier position higher in the clause (usually the specifier of T or C). Before this
phrasal-movement takes place all the other contents of the VP apart from the verb
must be extracted from the phrase, leaving simply a VP remnant, containing the verb
and a number of traces.
There are a growing number of analyses of verb-initial languages that invoke VP-
remnant fronting (Massam 2000, 2005, Rackowski and Travis 2000, Lee 2000, 2005,
Oda 2005). It is argued that in these verb-initial languages the EPP-feature associated
with T does not target the subject as it does in subject-initial languages, but instead
targets the predicate of the clause. Verb-initial languages tend also to show predicate-
initial orders in copula clauses, as shown by the example from Niuean in (31).
31. ko’ Mele e faiaoga
COP Mele ABSL teacher
‘The teacher is Mele’ (Massam 2000: 104)
If verb-initial order results from VP fronting, then a parallel can be drawn between
verb-initial clauses and non-verbal-predicate-initial clauses, with both employing XP
fronting to satisfy T’s EPPPRED-feature.30 Old Irish shows predicate-initial orders in
copular clauses, such as that given in (32) below (Thurneysen 1946: 492–3).
32. is fota in troscud
COP long the fasting
‘The fasting is long’ (LL 13038)
So there is reason to believe that verb-initial order may involve VP-remnant-fronting.
30 Although see McCloskey (2005) who argues that this parallel is not so straightforward in Modern Irish.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
48
Let us examine now what advantages a remnant fronting analysis would have for
Old Irish. If, as suggested in the previous section, the preverb is in the specifier of VP,
then when the VP is fronted to Spec-TP, both the VP and the verb in V appear clause-
initially. This movement is consistent with locality constraints and is well motivated if
we assume an EPPPRED feature on T. However, a remnant-movement approach faces a
number of empirical problems.
The first issue concerns differentiating deuterotonic and prototonic forms. If the
entire VP moves to Spec-TP, then the preverb (Spec-VP) and the verb (V) will move
together. However, for there to be a syntactic distinction between deuterotonic and
prototonic forms, i.e. for the initial preverb of deuterotonic compounds to be in C,
then the preverb must be able to move out of the moved VP to C when C is unfilled.
This movement operation is prohibited in terms of Huang’s (1982) Condition on
Extraction Domains (CED), which forbids extraction from a specifier position.
Therefore, under a VP-remnant-movement approach the difference between
deuterotonic and prototonic forms cannot be determined syntactically.
The second issue concerns object pronouns. One of the main pieces of evidence
used by Massam (2000) to argue that Niuean is a VP-fronting language is that in
certain contexts the object fronts with the VP. The position of object pronouns could
perhaps provide similar evidence for Old Irish. As Vendryes (1908) observes, the
object pronoun always appears as part of the verbal complex in Old Irish. This could
be explained if the object pronoun moves as part of the VP to Spec-TP. However, it is
not simply the case that the object pronoun appears within the verbal complex,
crucially it always appears in clause-second position. If the object pronoun moves as
part of the VP, then we would expect it to appear as the complement of the verb, so it
would follow the verb and the preverb. In cases where the clause also contains a
conjunct particle, the object pronoun would be in clause-fourth position. If the
pronoun moves as part of the VP, it must move on to clause second position. If this
movement is syntactic, it violates the CED. If it is post-syntactic, it is unclear exactly
how it would work and why it would take place. The position of the object pronoun,
then, cannot be taken as evidence for remnant-movement. In fact such an account runs
into serious difficulty in explaining the position of the pronoun.
The third and most damaging argument against a remnant-movement account is
the position of non-pronominal objects. If we are to employ remnant fronting it is
crucial that we can motivate the movement of every other element from the VP. This
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
49
means both direct and indirect objects. Movement of the object out of VP to the
specifier of v can be motivated on theoretical grounds, however empirical evidence is
harder to come by. Bobaljik & Carnie (1996) argue that the object optionally moves
out of the VP in non-finite clauses in Modern Irish. Even if this is the case, optional
object movement in a subset of clauses in Modern Irish can by no means be taken as
evidence that the object moves across the board in Old Irish. If evidence can be found
to show that movement of the direct object takes place, it would be very difficult to
prove that all other constituents, such as indirect objects, adverbs, prepositional
phrases, small clauses, etc. move out of the VP too. The movement of the direct and
indirect object from the VP are crucial to any remnant fronting analysis and as neither
can be shown convincingly in Old Irish, the remnant fronting approach must be
abandoned.
3.5 Summary
In this section we have examined the existing syntactic accounts of the double system
of inflection in Old Irish. In section 3.2 it was argued that Doherty’s (1999, 2000)
proposal, based on the idea that Old Irish is a residual V2 language can be ruled out
on both theoretical and empirical grounds. At first sight, Carnie, Harley & Pyatt’s
(2000) account seems to fare better both empirically and theoretically. However, a
closer look at the Old Irish data in section 3.3 suggests that this is not the case.
Evidence from the placement of object pronouns and relative clauses suggests that,
although at an earlier stage in the history of Old Irish simple verbs moved to C, in the
Classical Old Irish period they only move as far as T. In section 3.4 we turned our
attention to compound verbs. Empirically, it seems that the data from Old Irish
support CHP’s analysis in this respect. The initial preverbs of compound verbs in Old
Irish behave phonologically and syntactically like conjunct particles, suggesting that
they both appear in the same syntactic position, namely C. Although the empirical
evidence supports this conclusion, it faces seemingly insurmountable theoretical
problems. Although the initial preverb is syntactically independent, it is semantically
part of the verb. Therefore, we expect it to be merged with the verb low in the
structure and to move to C. Having examined the possibilities of head-movement,
XP-movement and remnant-movement it seems that all of these options are flawed.
The only conclusion that remains to be drawn, then, is that the orders shown by
compound verbs in Old Irish cannot be derived syntactically.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
50
To reiterate, the two main conclusions of this chapter so far are that simple verbs
do not move any higher than T in Old Irish and if the initial preverbs of compound
verbs are in C, which the empirical evidence seems to suggest they are, then they
cannot move there syntactically. If the first of these conclusions is true, then the
morphological form of absolute verbal forms cannot be a result of the verb’s syntactic
position, and so an alternative non-syntactic explanation is necessary for the different
verbal endings. Similarly, if the initial preverb of compound verbs does not move to C
in the syntax then we need an alternative explanation for this too. The overall
conclusion that can be drawn at this point is that syntax alone cannot account for the
Old Irish verbal system; we need something more.
4 THE SYNTAX-PHONOLOGY INTERFACE AND THE OLD IRISH VERBAL SYSTEM
4.1 The syntax-phonology interface
If, as argued in the previous section, simple verbs only move to T and the initial
preverb of compound verbs cannot move to C in the syntax then the distribution of the
different verbal forms in Old Irish cannot be a direct result of syntactic movement
operations. For all types of verb the syntactic configuration will be identical, with the
verb (and preverb) appearing in T. To explain how the different forms come to be
inserted, then, it seems that we need more than syntax. Something must take place
post-syntactically to provide the conditions necessary for the insertion of
absolute/conjunct or deuterotonic/prototonic forms. The aim of this section is to
establish what these post-syntactic operations might be.
The first step is to consider what kinds of post-syntactic operation can take place
cross-linguistically. Post-syntactic operations can be divided into two kinds, those that
are conceptually motivated and so must occur in all languages, and those that are
empirically motivated and only occur in individual languages. Let us examine each in
turn.
According to Chomsky’s architecture of the grammar, after syntax is complete, the
derivation proceeds to the phonological component. However, the structures
manipulated by syntactic operations are somewhat different to those manipulated by
phonology. Syntactic structures are hierarchical, whereas phonological structures are
flat. Furthermore, syntactic operations refer purely to morphosyntactic features,
whereas phonological operations refer only to phonological features (Chomsky &
Halle 1968). Therefore, after syntax is complete, but before phonology begins there
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
51
are two post-syntactic operations that must take place in all cases: hierarchical
syntactic structures must be linearized and (assuming Distributed Morphology)
morphosyntactic feature bundles must be replaced by phonological feature bundles.
Chomsky (1995a: 340) argues that the operation responsible for the linearization of
syntactic structure might be Kayne’s (1994) Linear Correspondence Axiom (LCA).
For Chomsky the LCA is operative at the syntax-phonology interface and is
responsible for the conversion of the hierarchical output of syntax to the linear order
found in phonology.31 We will follow Chomsky on this point and little more will be
said about it below.
The idea that syntactic operations make no reference to phonological features, and
phonological operations make no reference to morphosyntactic features can be easily
explained if we assume that there are no phonological features present in the syntax,
and no morphosyntactic features present in phonology. This is one basic assumption
behind Distributed Morphology (DM – Halle & Marantz 1993, 1994). DM assumes
an operation Vocabulary Insertion, which takes place at the syntax-phonology
interface and replaces morphosyntactic feature bundles with phonological exponents
(more will be said on this operation below).
So far we have outlined two post-syntactic operations that must take place cross-
linguistically to convert syntactic structure to phonological structure, namely
Linearize and Vocabulary Insertion. However, there is a further conceptually
necessary post-syntactic operation, namely Chain Reduction.
If, following Chomsky (1995a, 2000 et seq.), we adopt a copy theory of
movement, then at the output of the syntax the derivation will contain multiple copies
of any element that has been moved. As noted in chapter 1, Chomsky (2001) argues
that Move can be seen as Internal Merge. The element to be moved is copied and
remerged in the higher position. So, for example in a passive construction, such as
(33), the object John is merged as the complement of the verb, in the VP, and then
copied and remerged in the subject position.
33. [TPJohn was [VPkissed tJohn]]
31 Kayne (1994) maintains that the LCA is operative throughout the syntax.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
52
At the output of syntax, then, there will be two copies of the DP John. However, only
one of these copies can be phonologically realised as sentences of the type *John was
kissed John are ungrammatical.32 This suggests that there must be some operation that
marks one copy of a set of identical elements to be realised and deletes the subsequent
copies. This operation, which we will term Chain Reduction, marks the leftmost, or
highest copy of the element in question for realization and deletes the lower copies
(see Brody 1995, Groat & O’Neil 1996, Pesetsky 1997, Nunes 1999, 2004, Bobaljik
2002 ).33
So far it has been argued then, that the syntax-phonology interface contains three
necessary operations: Linearize, Chain Reduction and Vocabulary Insertion. These
operations are conceptually motivated, and so must take place in all languages.
Within DM, however, there are a number of further operations that are argued to take
place between syntax and phonology. These operations manipulate the output of
syntax, changing the morphosyntactic feature structure of syntactic terminals and so
influencing the way that these terminals are realised phonologically (e.g. fission,
fusion, impoverishment see Halle & Marantz 1993, Harley & Noyer 1999 for further
details). These operations operate only in particular contexts in particular languages.
Having outlined the two types of post-syntactic operation it must now be
established which type should be invoked to account for the Old Irish data. Adger (to
appear) provides an analysis using language specific post-syntactic rules. This is
outlined in section 4.2. In section 4.3 an alternative approach is developed, that relies
predominantly on conceptually motivated, obligatory post-syntactic operations.
4.2 Post-syntactic movement and the Old Irish verb: Adger (to appear)
Adger (to appear), building on work by Marantz (1988) and Embick & Noyer (2001)
within the framework of DM, proposes that the different verbal forms in Old Irish
result from post-syntactic movement processes.
Marantz (1988) argues that syntactic structures can be rebracketed after syntax
through Morphological Merger, whereby the adjacency relation between two heads X
and Y is replaced by the affixation of X to Y. Embick & Noyer (2001) argue that 32 Although see McDaniel (1989) and Nunes (1999) for examples of so-called multiple Spell-Out. 33 Nunes (1999, 2004) attempts to explain why this should be the case, whereas others simply stipulate. It could simply be a principle of the grammar that the leftmost copy of identical feature sets is realised. If the Spell-Out of syntactic terminals operates from left to right, then it could simply be the case that as a maximally economical operation, Spell-Out simply ignores subsequent copies of an element it has already spelled-out.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
53
there are two types of Morphological Merger: Lowering and Local Dislocation.
Lowering adjoins a head to the head of its complement. Local Dislocation adjoins a
head to another head that is linearly adjacent to it. These two operations differ in
terms of the types of structures they act upon. Lowering specifies a hierarchical
relationship between a head and its complement, whereas Local Dislocation specifies
a linear relationship. This difference reflects the fact that these operations take place
at different points in the derivation. Lowering takes place before linearization and
Local Dislocation takes place afterwards. Adger (to appear) argues that it is the latter,
i.e. Local Dislocation, that can account for the double system of verbal inflection in
Old Irish.
Lithuanian has compound verbs that behave somewhat similarly to those found in
Old Irish. In Lithuanian the reflexive pronoun –si is a second position clitic. When the
verb is simple it appears as a suffix (34). When, however, the verb is compound it
appears between the preverb and verb (35) (Senn 1966).
34. Laikaũ ‘I consider, maintain’
Laikaũ-si ‘I get along’
35. Iš-laikaũ ‘I preserve, withstand’
Iš-si-laikaũ ‘I hold my stand’
Embick & Noyer (2001:579f) argue that the preverb is adjoined to the verb and then
this complex verb raises to T. The reflexive clitic adjoins to the left of T.
36. T
Si T V T
PV V
The first operation that takes place post-syntactically is that T undergoes Local
Dislocation with V. T is specified as a suffix, so this operation causes no change in
order, however it results in a different structure.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
54
37. T Si T V
PV V V T
The clitic then undergoes Local Dislocation with the preverb. The clitic is specified as
a suffix and so is spelled-out to the right of the preverb. In the case of simple verbs,
the clitic undergoes Local Dislocation with the entire [V+T] complex, and appears as
a suffix.
38.
T T V
PV V
PV si V T
In order to obtain this result, the Left Dislocation of V and T must take place first, and
form a complex morphological word. Embick & Noyer (2001: 580) argue that the
ordering of these two operations is predicted by the principle of cyclic application –
Local Dislocation processes always operate from the more deeply embedded structure
outward.
Adger (to appear) builds on Embick & Noyer’s analysis of Lithuanian, arguing that
the phonological and morphological distinctions between the independent and
dependent verb forms in Old Irish can be accounted for in a similar way. Adger
assumes that Old Irish has an articulated C structure (cf. Rizzi 1997), and that Force is
subcategorised to be enclitic to an X0. This Force head behaves like the clitic in
Lithuanian. During syntax, the compound verb (preverb+verb) raises to T. Assuming
that conjunct particles appear as the head of Finiteness, Force is positioned
syntactically to the left of the entire verbal complex in the syntax.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
55
39.
ForceP Force FinP Fin TP C V T PV V
When a conjunct particle is present, Force Locally Dislocates with the conjunct
particle.
40. Force-C-PV-V-T > C-Force-PV-V-T
This operation has no phonological or morphological effect on the verb, which will
then be spelled-out in conjunct or prototonic form. When there is no conjunct particle
and the verb is compound, Force Locally Dislocates with the preverb.
41. Force-PV-V-T > PV-Force-V-T
Force appears between the preverb and the verb and so the verb is spelled-out in
deuterotonic form. When the verb is simple, Force Locally Dislocates with the [V+T]
complex, resulting in absolute morphology.
42. Force-V-T > V+T-Force
Adger argues that this Force head has a number of effects. As we saw in section 2.2
the main phonological distinction between the deuterotonic and prototonic verb forms
is the difference in stress placement. To account for this Adger proposes the following
alignment constraint:
“Align the left edge of a phonological phrase (or perhaps intonational phrase) with the
right edge of Force”
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
56
This entails that the Force head will always be followed by the left boundary of a
phonological phrase. Assuming that stress is assigned to the first syllable of a
phonological phrase, stress will always follow the Force head.
The difference in phonological phrasing in compound verbs can also be used to
explain the different forms of the compound verb. When there is a conjunct particle,
the verb and preverb are in the same phonological phrase. When there is no conjunct
particle, the preverb and verb are in separate phonological phrases. This provides an
explanation as to why lenition, elision and assimilation are blocked between the initial
preverb and the remainder of the verb when the verb is deuterotonic and not when the
verb is prototonic.34 35
Let us turn now to simple verbs. When the verb is simple and there is no conjunct
particle, the Force head will Locally Dislocate with and so appear after the V+T
complex. When Force is cliticized to T absolute morphology will be inserted; in all
other cases conjunct morphology will be chosen. This provides a neat account for the
distribution of absolute and conjunct endings. Absolute endings are only found on
simple verbs in initial position. Non-initial simple verbs and both deuterotonic and
prototonic compound verbs show conjunct inflection. In the case of non-initial simple
verbs or deuterotonic and prototonic compound verbs the Force head attaches to
either a conjunct particle or a preverb. It is only when there is no conjunct particle and
no preverb, i.e. the verb is simple and in absolute initial position, that the Force head
will be attached to T.
Adger’s post-syntactic movement account provides a neat explanation of the
distribution of the different verbal forms in Old Irish. However, it also faces various
problems, both empirical and theoretical. Let us examine each in turn.
One area of the data that Adger’s analysis does not account for well is object
pronouns. As discussed in section 2.3 above, object pronouns in Old Irish appear in
clause-second position. Adger argues that in the syntax object pronouns move to the
34 Adger seems to suggest here that the deuterotonic and prototonic forms are derived from a single underlying form. As discussed in section 2.2 more research is necessary to establish whether this is the case. 35 If, as argued in section 3.4.1 above, the initial preverb of compound verbs occupies the C position, then the phonological shape of compound verbs can be accounted for if the left edge of the TP aligns with the left edge of a phonological phrase (cf. Selkirk 1986, 1995; Truckenbrodt 1995; Inkelas & Zec 1995). In this case the initial preverb of a deuterotonic compound will appear in a separate phonological phrase to the remainder of the verb. This can explain the position of the stress and also why phonological processes cannot take place between the preverb and the remainder of the verb without the need for an extra Force head.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
57
Topic position of a Rizzian articulated CP structure (see Roberts 2005: 135 for a
similar proposal).
43.
ForceP
Force Top Top FinP Pronoun Fin TP C V T PV V
The object pronouns then Locally Dislocate post-syntactically in the same way as the
Force head. So, Adger contends, there are two possible derivations. In the first case
Force Locally Dislocates first with the pronoun, forming a new compound word
which then Locally Dislocates with the preverb or the [V+T] complex (depending on
whether the verb is simple or compound).
44. Force-Pronoun-PV-[V+T]
[Pronoun+Force]-PV-[V+T]
[PV+Pronoun+Force]-[V+T]
The second option is that the pronoun Locally Dislocates with the preverb or [V+T]
and then the Force head Locally Dislocates with the [[V+T]+Pronoun] or
[PV+Pronoun] compound.
45. Force-Pronoun-PV-[V+T]
Force-[PV+Pronoun]-[V+T]
[[PV+Pronoun]+Force]-[V+T]
Adger prefers the first option. In the case of simple verb, when the object pronoun is
suffixed to the verb the verb always has absolute morphology, and never special
relative morphology (see section 3.3.2 above). Adger argues that special relative
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
58
morphology appears on the verb when the Force head that has Locally Dislocated and
attached to T is specified as relative. If the Force head were closer to the verb we
would expect the verb to show relative inflection in relative clauses; however, this is
not the case. Therefore, this supports the view that it is the pronoun that is closer to T,
and that the pronoun conditions absolute morphology and overrides Force. Similarly,
if Force intervened between T and the pronoun, we would assume that suffixation
would be impossible as Force marks the left edge of a phonological phrase, and so the
verb and the clitic would be in separate phonological phrases.
Although Adger’s analysis can account well for simple verbs, compound verbs are
more problematic. When a pronoun is infixed between a preverb and the rest of the
verb, or between a conjunct particle and the verb, the pronoun causes the initial
segment of the verb to mutate. Each pronoun has its own mutation (e.g. first and
second singular lenite, third singular masculine nasalizes etc.). Adger (to appear: 39)
describes the situation as follows:
“If the pronoun were to dislocate first, adjoining to the preverb, and then Force were
to further adjoin, Force would be hierarchically superior, and might be expected to
exert its own mutation [on the rest of the verb – GEN] overriding that of the
pronouns.”
There are multiple problems with this argument. From an empirical point of view, the
structure Adger proposes does not make the right predictions. If the Force head
linearly follows the pronoun we would expect it to block processes such as lenition
and nasalization rather than facilitate them. The pronoun and the following verb will
be in separate phonological domains and therefore such processes will be blocked as
they are between the preverb and verb of compound verbs. In fact, from a historical
perspective it would be preferable for the Force head to precede the pronoun. One of
the puzzles that philological accounts of the double system of verbal inflection have
to deal with is the fact that the enclitic pronouns themselves are not lenited. We would
expect the pronouns to be lenited after preverbs ending in a vowel, yet they are not.
This suggests that if there was ever any kind of element that conditioned the different
sets of inflectional endings, it must have appeared between the preverb and the
pronoun and not between the pronoun and the remainder of the verb.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
59
Adger’s account of object pronouns also faces a theoretical problem. For Local
Dislocation to proceed as Adger suggests, we must abandon Embick & Noyer’s
insight that Local Dislocation affects the most deeply embedded structures first. If the
pronoun Locally Dislocates with the Force head first and then this Dislocates with the
preverb and verb lower in the structure this is counter-cyclic. If post-syntactic
movement exists, it must be properly constrained. If we adopt Adger’s account then
the strict ordering of Local Dislocation processes as proposed by Embick & Noyer
cannot be maintained and so the operation becomes less constrained.
Rejecting the cyclic operation of Local Dislocation is not the only way that
Embick & Noyer’s conception of post-syntactic movement must be altered to account
for the Old Irish data. For the Force head to have a noticeable effect on the verbal
morphology Local Dislocation must occur before Vocabulary Insertion, i.e. before the
phonological forms are inserted into the derivation. However, Embick & Noyer
(2001: 562) maintain that Local Dislocation must take place after Vocabulary
Insertion, as it affects linearized strings, and in their view, linearization and
Vocabulary Insertion occur at the same time. Adopting this view, then, if Local
Dislocation precedes Vocabulary Insertion and linearization, as it would have to
under Adger’s account, then it acts on the same structures as Lowering. This again
has the effect of making post-syntactic movement less constrained and conceptually
less desirable.36
A further theoretical problem with Adger’s analysis is the postulation of an enclitic
Force head. In some languages an articulated CP structure is well supported as the
proposed syntactic positions receive overt phonological realisation. For example, in
Italian the distribution of certain complementizers alongside topics and focussed
elements provides good motivation for an articulated CP (Rizzi 1997). No such
evidence is available for Old Irish. Adger’s Force head has no phonologically overt
counterpart and it seems no real semantic, pragmatic or discourse function. Its only
role is to achieve the desired forms in the syntax. The fact that the Force head seems
to have no interface properties leads to the question of how it would be acquired.
Furthermore, even if the Force head itself could be acquired, how would children
36 This problem disappears under a different conception of Spell-Out that allows more middle ground between Linearization and Vocabulary Insertion, such as that proposed by Ackema & Neeleman (2005). In this case, the distinction between Lowering and Local Dislocation can be maintained, as both will precede Vocabulary Insertion, but Lowering will precede Linearization and Local Dislocation will follow it.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
60
acquire the fact that this phonologically null element is enclitic? Although this Force
head seems to derive the required forms in most cases, neither the Force head itself
nor its consequences can be independently motivated.
In sum, Adger’s account faces various problems. Most notably, from a theoretical
perspective, the changes that need to be made to Embick & Noyer’s theory of post-
syntactic movement to account for the Old Irish data lead to a less restrictive theory.
However, even in its original form, it is not clear that post-syntactic movement is
sufficiently restrictive in terms of what motivates the operations and what constrains
their operation. In addition, a level between syntax and phonology that duplicates
syntactic movement is conceptually undesirable. Both Lowering and Local
Dislocation involve downward movement, an operation that is strictly forbidden in
the syntactic component. Allowing such operations detracts from the explanatory
force of syntax. Furthermore, Local Dislocation has essentially the same effect as
Prosodic Inversion (Halpern 1995). Embick & Noyer maintain that the two are
different, and that both need to be maintained. If this is the case, then the
Morphological level seems to duplicate not only syntactic operations, but also
phonological ones. Such duplication should not exist in an optimal system. The
conceptual problems faced by post-syntactic movement suggest that an alternative is
needed. This is the aim of the following sections.
4.3 A new post-syntactic account
4.3.1 Simple verbs and do-support: a cross-linguistic parallel
We saw in section 3.3 above that one piece of the Old Irish data that is particularly
problematic for CHP is the use of object pronouns with simple verbs. CHP assume
that suffixed pronouns are regular and productive, however, a closer look at the Old
Irish data shows that this is not the case. As noted above, suffixed pronouns are only
used when the pronoun and the verb are both third person, and even then this usage is
not consistent. The productive pattern in Old Irish is to insert the dummy preverb no
and infix the pronoun between the preverb no and the verb, which, as it is not in initial
position, appears with conjunct inflection, as shown in (46).
46. (a) no-s nguid-som
PVB-INF.3PL beseech.PRES.3SG.CONJ-emph.part.3SG.M
‘He beseeches them’ (Wb 25b9)
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
61
(b) ni hed no-t beir í nem
NEG it PVB-INF.2SG carry.PRES.3SG.CONJ in heaven
‘It is not this that brings you into heaven’ (Wb 6c9)
The use of the preverb no in this case bears some resemblance to the use of do-
insertion in English. It is well known that verbs do not move to T in English, and what
is often said is that verbs are united with their inflections through some kind of
downward movement from T to V, so-called Affix-Hopping (Chomsky 1957). When
Affix-Hopping is impossible, for example when a negative head intervenes, the
inflections are stranded in T and do is inserted in order to provide a host for them. A
parallel situation could be envisaged for Old Irish. In Old Irish the verb does not raise
to C; instead absolute inflections Affix-Hop from C to T. When an infixed pronoun is
present, this prevents Affix-Hopping and so the dummy preverb no must be inserted
to host the absolute inflections in C.
Traditionally Affix-Hopping has been viewed as problematic as it involves
downward movement. Downward movement is prohibited in the syntax, as a moved
element must c-command its trace.37 Under the current version of minimalism,
however, an alternative analysis is available. The appearance of tense and subject-
agreement-(φ)-features on the verb in its base position can be seen as a result of the
operation Agree. T and V both have tense and φ-features. The operation Agree values
unvalued features, therefore, after Agree has taken place the tense and φ-features on T
will be identical to those on V. At the point of Spell-Out, one set of these features
receives a phonological realisation. What appears to be downward movement, then, is
the realisation of these tense and φ-features on V rather than T. The implementation
of an Agree relation between V and T can explain how tense and φ-features can be
present on both V and T, and so can potentially be realised in either position;
however, this does not explain why these features are sometimes realised in V and
sometimes in T.
It is perhaps possible to account for the position in which tense and φ-features are
realised through the operation of Chain Reduction. In section 4.1 we saw that in
canonical cases Chain Reduction marks the leftmost copy of a moved element for
37 Embick & Noyer (2001: 584–591) and Bobaljik (2002) account for Affix-Hopping via Lowering. As argued in section 4.2, post-syntactic movement is conceptually undesirable. As a result we will discuss this approach further here.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
62
realisation and deletes all subsequent copies. To account for Affix-Hopping as
proposed above, the concept of Chain Reduction needs to be extended so that it
applies not only to movement chains but also to features in an Agree relation. At first
sight this seems problematic. Once feature valuation has taken place between two
features there is no link between them; therefore, we cannot talk about chains between
valued features. However, Chomsky also makes such a claim about moved elements.
Chomsky (2001: 11) suggests that chains cannot be considered ‘real’, as the
postulation of chains or indices to mark multiple instances of a moved element would
violate the Inclusiveness Condition. If there is no concrete link between moved
elements how does the operation Chain Reduction know which of these elements
form a chain and should be subject to deletion? The two main possibilities are identity
and c-command.38 After feature valuation has taken place, a pair of features in an
Agree relation will by necessity be identical. Furthermore, in order for an Agree
relation to take place in the first place the Probe and Goal must be in a c-command
relation.39 So, it seems that the identical features resulting from Agree fulfil the same
requirements as moved elements in terms of Chain Reduction.40
Under this revised view of Chain Reduction then we would expect the tense and φ-
features to be realised in the highest or leftmost position, namely T. However, as we
saw above, this is not always the case. Let us consider the operation Chain Reduction
in more detail. So far it has been assumed that Chain Reduction is a post-syntactic
operation, and the decision as to which copy is marked for realisation is determined at
the PF-interface.41 If this is the case, then it seems plausible that this decision should
be determined by PF requirements (Landau 2006: 54):
38 Nunes (1999) argues that chains cannot be determined in terms of identity as, if this were the case, why is one occurrence of John not deleted in sentences such as Johni hit Johnj. Clearly each instance of John has a different referent, and they are, therefore, distinct. However, it is not clear how this should be accounted for within the syntax. 39 Chomsky does not explicitly mention c-command in his definition of Agree, however, he does state that the Probe searches for a Goal in its domain/complement. This will result in a c-command relation between Probe and Goal. 40 It is plausible that in some situations more than one instance of a pair of valued features will be phonologically realised. However, this also occurs in movement chains, for example in cases of multiple Spell-Out in German (McDaniel 1989). This can be explained through some independent phonological requirement demanding that the lower copy be realised (Landau 2006). 41 Landau (2006) argues that this is a result of the modular nature of the grammar – the decision as to which copy to pronounce/interpret is determined at PF/LF respectively, as there can be no interaction between the two.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
63
47. (a) PF copies that are demanded by PF requirements cannot be deleted
(b) PF copies that are excluded by PF requirements must be deleted
For example, Franks (1999) argues that second-position clitics in Serbo-Croatian
move to C in the syntax and are usually spelled-out there. However, these clitics need
a host to their left. If no such host is available the top copy, i.e. that in C, cannot be
realised, and a lower copy is spelled-out instead. Similarly, Bobaljik (2002) argues
that in cases of object shift, the highest copy of the object cannot be realised if it
appears between V and T. V and T must be string adjacent in order for morphological
merger to take place. An intervening object that interrupts this adjacency requirement
cannot be realised, and so a lower copy will receive a phonological realisation instead.
It seems that a similar argument could be made for the spell-out of tense and φ-
features in English. If, as is often assumed, tense and φ-features in English are affixes,
then in order to be realised they must have a host, i.e. they must satisfy the Stranded
Affix Filter (SAF – Lasnik 1981, 1995). The SAF can be seen as a PF requirement
(Halle & Marantz 1993; Lasnik 1995; Bobaljik 2002; Landau 2006). Therefore, if at
PF, tense and φ-features have no host and are stranded in T they cannot be realised
there, and so the lower copy in V will be spelled-out instead, resulting in Affix-
Hopping. So, it seems then we have the beginnings of an explanation as to why tense
and φ-features are sometimes spelled-out in T and sometimes in V. However, there
are several aspects of the above proposal that are in need of further clarification. First,
what exactly does it mean for a feature to be an affix? Second, what constitutes ‘a
host’? In other words, how is the SAF satisfied? Let us examine each of these issues
in turn.
The first issue to be addressed is what it means for an entity to be an affix. If, as
suggested above, the SAF is a PF-requirement, operative at the syntax-phonology
interface, then [affix] cannot be a purely phonological property, as the SAF must be
satisfied before the phonological features enter the derivation. Halle & Marantz
(1993) argue that Vocabulary Insertion, i.e. the replacement of morphosyntactic
features with phonological features, is the last stage in the post-syntactic component,
marking the beginning of phonology proper (see also Ackema & Neeleman 2005:
185–6). At the point of Chain Reduction, then, phonological information is not yet
available. Therefore, the property [affix] must be encoded in the morphosyntactic
features.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
64
There is empirical evidence to suggest that affixation is not purely a phonological
process. In addition to their obvious phonological deficiency, affixes also seem to
show a certain level of syntactic dependency. Unlike clitics, which can in many cases
appear freely with any type of host, affixes tend to be restricted in their distribution,
appearing only in a particular syntactic position with a particular type of host (Zwicky
& Pullum 1983: 504–5). Often, if a clitic’s phonological requirements are not met, it
seems that it can move in the phonology to find an appropriate host (so-called
Prosodic Inversion – Halpern 1995). This is not generally true of affixes.42 This
suggests that affixation, or at least part of affixation, takes place before the insertion
of the phonological material, and so the property [affix] must be specified in the
morphosyntactic features. It will be assumed in what is to follow that [affix] is a
morphological property that is associated with individual features, i.e. a
morphological subfeature relevant at the PF-interface.43
Having established what it may mean for an entity to be an affix, let us now
consider what may constitute a host and how the SAF can be satisfied at PF. It was
argued above that [affix] is, at least in part, a morphosyntactic property, therefore
affixation must be, at least in part, a morphosyntactic operation. A feature that is
specified morphosyntactically as [affix] requires a morphosyntactic host. What this
means, I propose, is that it must be able to combine in the syntax or the post-syntactic
component with another morphosyntactic feature. In the simplest case, what this
means is that a feature with the property [affix] will satisfy the SAF if it appears
under the same syntactic terminal node as another morphosyntactic feature.44 One
final question that must be raised is whether the morphosyntactic feature that provides
a host for the affixal feature requires any specific properties. I would suggest that the
only requirement is that the feature in question has a positive value. As discussed in
chapter 1, by the PF-interface, where the [affix] feature is relevant, all
morphosyntactic features will necessarily have been valued by the syntactic operation
Agree. However, these values are not necessarily positive. If a feature has its default
42 The distinction between affixes and clitics is not clear-cut. There is a tendency within the DM literature to assume that there is no distinction between them. It is perhaps possible that a distinction can be drawn between entities that are specified as morphosyntactically affixal and those that are phonologically affixal. However, we will not go any further into this issue here. 43 It should be emphasised at this point that this is entirely distinct from the syntactic Affix-feature that motivates head-movement during the syntax. 44 This does not rule out the possibility of post-syntactic operations such as Morphological Merger in the sense of Marantz (1988). This may be an alternative way in which the affixation requirement can be met. However, we will not investigate this possibility further here.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
65
value, then it could be argued that its feature specification is 0. For example, present
tense, third person, singular number could all be seen as a lack of a positive value.
Features that lack a positive morphosyntactic value can have an LF interpretation and
can also be realised at PF; however, I propose, they cannot play a role in the post-
syntactic, morphological component (see Harley 1994, Harley & Ritter 2002 for a
similar proposal).
Having outlined our basic assumptions regarding the nature of affixation, let us
return to the case in hand, namely tense and φ-features in English. These features in
English are morphosyntactically specified as [affix]; therefore, in order to satisfy the
SAF and receive a phonological realisation they must occur under the same terminal
node as at least one other non-default-valued feature. When there is an aspectual or
modal auxiliary in English, there will clearly be aspectual or modal features in T.
Therefore, the [affix] property will be satisfied, and the tense and φ-features will be
realised in T and deleted in V. When there is no aspectual or modal auxiliary, for
example in the simple present or simple past tenses then there will be no positively-
valued features with which the tense and φ-features can combine, and as such they
cannot be realised in T and are spelled-out in V. It seems, then, that by implementing
the SAF Affix-Hopping in English can be accounted for by the operations Agree and
Chain Reduction, crucially without recourse to post-syntactic movement. Before we
consider the related phenomenon of do-support, let us turn to Old Irish.
It was argued in section 3.3 above that the verb in Old Irish does not raise above T.
Therefore, to account for the appearance of absolute morphology on the verb we seem
to have a case of downward movement parallel to Affix-Hopping. When C is not
filled by a conjunct particle the absolute verbal endings move from C to T. As with
Affix-Hopping above, this could also be seen as a result of Chain Reduction. If the
feature conditioning absolute inflection appears in both C and T, and like tense and φ-
features in English has the property [affix], the position in which it appears will be
determined by the morphosyntactic features contained in C and T. When C contains
positively-valued morphosyntactic features, these will provide a morphosyntactic host
for the affixal features, satisfying the SAF and allowing the realisation of these
features in the leftmost position. When C contains no positively-valued features,
however, the affixal features cannot be realised in C, as a result of the SAF, and so
will be spelled-out in T. Let us consider this proposal in more detail.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
66
The first issue to consider is what the feature(s) shared by C and T in Old Irish
might be. Absolute inflections express subject agreement; therefore we would expect
them to be a realisation of φ-features. However, conjunct inflections also mark subject
agreement, and so there must be some factor that distinguishes the two. Under CHP’s
view, the difference between absolute and conjunct inflection could simply be a result
of the fact that the verb occupies different syntactic positions, with φ-features being
spelled-out as absolute inflection when they appear with a verb in C and as conjunct
when they appear with the verb in T. However, as we saw in section 3.3 above, there
is evidence to suggest that the verb does not raise above T in Old Irish. If this is the
case, then φ-features will always be realised on the verb in T, and so the distinction
cannot be explained in this way.
A further possibility is that absolute endings are the realisation of φ-features
combined with some other feature. It is difficult, however, to determine exactly what
this feature might be, as the double system of verbal inflection seems to have no clear
function in the Old Irish period.45 One possibility is that it is a force feature. As we
saw in section 3.3.2 above, in certain numbers and persons absolute verb forms can
show special relative endings. The existence of relative and non-relative absolute
endings could be seen as the presence of relative and non-relative force features in the
T position. When a relative force feature combines with T’s φ-features this results in
special relative morphology, and when a non-relative force feature combines with T’s
φ-features this results in absolute morphology. We will assume for what follows that
the relevant feature that is shared by C and T is a force feature.46 47
In the case of Affix-Hopping in English it was argued that tense and φ-features
were shared by T and V as a result of Agree. This may also be the case with the force
feature in Old Irish. However, as this feature is shared by C and T there is an
alternative possibility. Chomsky (2005, 2006) proposes that T enters the derivation
with no features of its own and instead receives its features from the phase head C.
Under this view, it is plausible that certain features could be shared by both heads.48 It
45 Although see Koch 1987; Isaac 2001. 46 There is also diachronic evidence to support the idea that absolute inflection results from a force feature. In chapter 4 it is argued that absolute endings developed due to the presence of a declarative clause-typing particle that was reanalysed as a verbal affix. 47 Invoking a force feature here draws a parallel with Adger’s account. Crucially, however, we are not postulating an extra syntactic position, simply a force feature, that is assumed to be present universally. 48 Chomsky is not entirely clear as to whether ‘spreading’ means ‘sharing’ or simply ‘passing on’. The data seems to suggest, however, that sharing is a possibility.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
67
seems likely that this will be a matter of cross-linguistic variation. In English for
example, tense and φ-features appear on T and not on C and so do not seem to be
shared. In Germanic complementizer agreement constructions, however, we find φ-
features on C, suggesting perhaps that they are shared by C and T (48). Similarly, in
Modern Irish we find tensed complementizers alongside tensed verb forms,
suggesting a shared tense feature (49).
48. (a) ob-st (du) noch Minga kumm-st
whether-2SG (you) to Munich come-2SG
‘Whether you come to Munich’ (Fuß 2005: 159)
(b) wem-ma (mia) aaf Minga fon
when-1PL (we) to Munich drive
‘When we drive to Munich’ (Fuß 2005: 165)
49. (a) Níor oscail Cáit an geata
NEG.PAST open.3SG.PAST Cáit the gate
‘Cáit did not open the gate’
(b) Deir sé gur oscail Cáit an geata
say.3SG.PRES he that.PAST open.3SG.PAST Cáit the gate
‘He says that Cáit opened the gate’
Let us assume, then, that the force feature in Old Irish, like tense in Modern Irish, is
shared by both C and T. However, unlike tense in Modern Irish, force in Old Irish can
only be realised in one position, like tense and φ-features in Modern English.
Furthermore, like tense and φ-features in English, the force feature has the property
[affix] and so can only be realised in a position where it satisfies the SAF.
It was argued above that in order to satisfy the SAF a feature that is specified as
[affix] must appear under the same terminal node as an additional positively valued
morphosyntactic feature. When a conjunct particle or the initial preverb of a
compound verb (see section 4.3.2 below) appears in the C position this will provide
positively valued morphosyntactic features with which the affixal force feature can
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
68
combine. Therefore the SAF will be satisfied and the force feature will be realised in
C and deleted in T, as shown in the tree below.49
50. CP
C TP ⇒ [Cco-ø [Tléici…]]
Conj/Pvb until-FORCE allows.PRES.3SG.CONJ [ForceAFF] ‘Until he allows’
T VP Verb [T, φ] [ForceAFF]
When there are no other morphosyntactic features present in C, i.e. no conjunct
particle and no preverb, force will have no host, and so as a result of the SAF cannot
be realised there. In this case, C will be completely empty, and so will receive no
realisation, and force will be realised in T, in conjunction with the φ-features, giving
rise to absolute verbal inflection. This is shown in the tree below:
51. CP
C TP ⇒ [Cø [Tléicid]]
[ForceAFF] ø allows.PRES.3SG.ABS T VP ‘He allows’
Verb [T, φ] [ForceAFF]
So far in this section it has been argued that the appearance of absolute morphology in
Old Irish is conditioned in a similar way to the well-known phenomenon of Affix-
Hopping in English. Both constructions can be explained in current theoretical terms
through the use of Agree (in the English case) or feature spreading (in Old Irish) and
the post-syntactic operation Chain Reduction. In the second half of this section we
turn to the second parallel between English and Old Irish, namely in the use of do in
English and no in Old Irish.
49 When force is declarative it has no phonological realisation when it is spelled-out in C. When force is relative it can be realised as a special relative form of the preverb (see section 3.4.1 above) or as a relative complementizer, such as the negative relative nad.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
69
Both do in English and no in Old Irish seem to have the status of last resort
elements, used to provide a phonological realisation for a functional projection that
for some reason needs to be realised, but has no phonological realisation of its own.
Neither do in English nor no in Old Irish are associated with a single meaning or
function, and both can be used in a variety of environments. Let us consider each in
turn.
There are 4 main constructions in which the dummy auxiliary do appears in the T
position: namely negative clauses, emphatic clauses, VP ellipsis and VP raising,
shown in the examples in (52).
52. (a) John does not know
(b) John DOES know
(c) John knows and Mary does too
(d) Bob asked Mary to leave John, and leave him she did
Biberauer & Roberts (to appear) argue that in all these contexts T contains a
[+affective]-feature, a type of polarity feature. Polarity is often argued to be
associated with T cross-linguistically (Laka 1990, Zanuttini 1997).50 The example in
(52a) is a negative clause, so it could be argued that T contains a negative polarity
feature. In (52b) the auxiliary do is emphatic. In this case then, T could be argued to
contain an emphatic-positive polarity feature. Although the auxiliary in (52c) and
(52d) is not stressed as it is in (52b), there is evidence to suggest that in these
environments, the auxiliary is still emphatic. For example, in cases of VP ellipsis and
VP raising the auxiliary cannot be phonologically reduced, so sentences such as those
in (53) are ungrammatical.
53. (a) *John has left and Mary’s too
(b) *She said she had left and left she’d
Emphatic auxiliaries cannot be phonologically reduced. This could explain why we
do not find reduced auxiliary forms in VP ellipsis and VP raising constructions.
50 Although see also Déchaine & Wiltschko (2003) who propose a parametric difference between T- and C-related PolP.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
70
Clearly a [+affective]-feature on T will not always result in the insertion of do.
When there are modal or aspectual features in T then T will be realised as a modal or
aspectual auxiliary rather than do. In DM terms, this can be explained by the
elsewhere principle. The auxiliary that matches the largest number of features in T
will be inserted there. So, when there are modal or aspectual features on T, the more
highly specified modal and aspectual auxiliaries (e.g. will, can, must, is, have) match
the feature specification of T more closely and are chosen in place of do. When,
however, there are no aspectual or modal features in T, then do will be inserted.
Biberauer & Roberts’ account of do-insertion works well with the account of
Affix-Hopping provided above. When T contains a [+affective]-feature there will be a
positively valued morphosyntactic feature with which the affixal tense and φ-features
can combine. Therefore, in all the environments where we find do-insertion the tense
and φ-features can be realised in T and deleted in V.51 Let us consider now whether
we can account for no-insertion in Old Irish in a similar way.
The environments in which we find no in Old Irish are considerably more diverse
than those in which we find do in English. The dummy preverb no is used with object
pronouns, in relative clauses and when the verb has a secondary tense. We saw in
sections 2.3 and 3.3.1 above that suffixed pronouns are no longer productive in the
Old Irish period and are used only in restricted circumstances. When there is no
available suffixed form, the dummy preverb no is inserted and the pronoun is infixed
between them as in (54). In this case no seems to be associated with the presence of
an enclitic object pronoun.
54. (a) no-s nguid-som
PVB-INF.3PL beseech.PRES.3SG.CONJ-emph.part.3SG.M
‘He beseeches them’ (Wb 25b9)
(b) ni hed no-t beir í nem
NEG it PVB-INF.2SG carry.PRES.3SG.CONJ in heaven
‘It is not this that brings you into heaven’ (Wb 6c9)
51 Biberauer & Roberts (to appear) propose a different view of Affix-Hopping.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
71
Turning to the relative clauses, we find that when there is no special relative form
available, a relative clause is marked through the use of the dummy preverb no
followed by either lenition, (55a), or nasalization, (55b).
55. (a) is hed in so no chairigur (non-rel cairigur)
COP it this PVB reprimand.PRES.1SG.CONJ
‘This is what I reprimand’ (Wb 11d1)
(b) cid no mbetha (non-rel betha)
why PVB be.PAST.SUBJ.2SG.CONJ
‘Why (is it that) you should be?’ (Wb 4c24)
Due to cross-linguistically observed similarities with interrogative marking, relative
marking is associated with the C position. As a result, we can assume that whenever
the clause is relative, the C position will be specified with a feature [+wh]. So, in this
case, no seems to be associated with a wh-feature.
The third case is that of secondary tenses. When a simple verb appears in the
imperfect (56a), past subjunctive (56b) or the conditional (56c) and there is no
conjunct particle, the dummy preverb no is inserted.
56. (a) no scarinn friu
PVB part.IMPF.1SG.CONJ to.3PL
‘I should part with them’ (Wb 24a4)
(b) cia nu tiastais huaim
although PVB go.PAST.SUBJ.3PL.CONJ from.1SG
‘Although they should go from me’ (Ml 117d3)
(c) no comallaibthe
PVB fulfil.COND.PASS.SG.CONJ
‘It would be fulfilled’ (Ml 105b14)
In these cases, no seems to be an aspectual particle.
It seems, then, that unlike English do there is no one feature that can account for all
occurrences of no, not even a very general feature like Biberauer & Roberts’
[+affective]. It seems, then, that Biberauer & Roberts account of do-insertion cannot
be carried over to Old Irish. There are two possible alternatives. First, it could be
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
72
argued that for each different environment in which no appears no is a different
vocabulary item (VI), so in Old Irish there are three homophonous VIs no, one that
realises C [+wh], one that realises C[+objectCL] and one that realises C[+aspect]. At
first sight, this seems possible, but unappealing. If we consider the analysis in more
detail, however, there seems to be a more serious problem. If the VI for no contains
feature specifications of this kind, we might expect it to behave more like a conjunct
particle; so whenever C contains an aspect or wh-feature we might expect no to be
inserted. However, this does not seem to be the case. The particle no appears only
when there is no other element that could appear in the C position. This includes not
only conjunct particles, but also, as we shall see in the next section, the initial
preverbs of compound verbs.
An alternative is to characterise the particle no as an elsewhere morpheme. In this
case, the appearance of no is not conditioned by any one feature in particular. The VI
for no has no feature specifications, apart from the fact it can appear in C. In DM
terms, no will always compete for insertion into the C position, but will only be
inserted when there are no more highly specified VIs (i.e. conjunct particles or initial
preverbs) that match the feature content of C more closely. When C contains a
negative feature, or a conjunction feature or a preverb feature (see (57) below), the
corresponding VI will be inserted. However, if none of these features are present, the
elsewhere morpheme no will be inserted.
57. [C [+negative]] → ní
[C [+conjunction]] → con, dian, aran
[C [+preverb]] → do, fo, as, ro
[C] → no
The characterization of no as an elsewhere morpheme accounts well for the intuition
that it appears simply whenever it is needed; however, the VI for no listed above is
perhaps slightly misleading. C is not, as (57) suggests, realised as no in all clauses
where there is no conjunct particle and no initial preverb. We saw in the first half of
this section that when C contains no features other than a declarative Force feature C
receives no realisation at all. Let us consider now how these two scenarios can be
reconciled.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
73
The crucial point is that C is only realised as no when C contains an extra feature
in addition to its default features. When C contains only its default features it receives
no phonological realisation. One way to account for this could be to argue that there is
a specific VI, such as that given below, that is in effect more specific than the
elsewhere case, specifying that when C has its default features it is realised as null.
58. [C [Force0 Finiteness0 v0]] → ø
However, this is problematic. Under the principles of Vocabulary Insertion, (Halle &
Marantz 1993) the VI that matches the feature content of the terminal node most
closely is inserted. When the C node is specified with an object clitic feature, it will
have the feature structure given below (assuming it is non-relative and the verb is
simple):
59. [C [Force0 Finiteness0 v0 ObjectCl]]
This feature structure is more closely matched to the VI in (58) than that for no and so
we would expect ø to be inserted rather than no.
If we return to the account of Affix-Hopping and absolute inflection presented
above a new solution emerges. It was argued above that when C contains only an
affixal Force feature this feature cannot be realised due to the SAF, as the affix does
not have a host. If we further assume, however, that the SAF prevents not simply the
Force feature, but the entire C head from receiving a phonological realisation, then we
can perhaps explain the distribution of the null C and the elsewhere particle no. When
C contains only an affixal Force feature, C is marked for deletion as it violates the
SAF. Therefore, C cannot receive a phonological realisation and so is simply not
considered during the spell-out of the syntactic terminals at Vocabulary Insertion. In
this case, then, C is necessarily null as it does not even have the option of being
spelled-out. When C contains an extra feature, the SAF is satisfied as the affixal Force
feature has a host. Therefore, C is marked for realisation. It is considered by the
operation Vocabulary Insertion and so is realised as the elsewhere particle no. Viewed
in this way the alternation between ø and no reflects whether the C head reaches the
point of Spell-Out, and whether or not it is marked for deletion during the process of
Chain Reduction. It seems then that the postulation of an affixal Force feature can
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
74
account not only for the distribution of absolute and conjunct endings but also for the
distribution of the particle no.
4.3.2 Compound verbs
In section 3.4.1 above it was argued that the initial preverbs of deuterotonic
compound verbs behave phonologically and syntactically like conjunct particles,
therefore it seems likely that, like a conjunct particle, this initial preverb is in the C
position. Similarly in sections 3.4.2–4 it was argued that the preverb cannot move to
C independently of the verb in the syntax, due to certain well motivated constraints on
syntactic movement operations. As deriving the necessary orders within narrow
syntax is seemingly impossible we need an alternative explanation, preferably one
that does not rely on conceptually undesirable post-syntactic movement.
The basic problem is this: the initial preverb of a compound verb behaves as if it is
in C, but how does it get there? The semantic relation between the preverb and the
verb suggests that they are merged together in the vP, therefore the initial preverb
cannot be merged in C. Similarly, it was shown in section 3.4.2 that movement of the
preverb to C, independently of verb-movement to T is impossible due to syntactic
movement constraints (either the HMC or the PIC). So, if the preverb is not in C as a
result of Merge or Move, then the only remaining possibility is Agree. It is possible to
maintain the insight that the preverb is merged in light v and the idea that it is in C, if
C has a verbal feature, that is valued by Agree with light v and then under certain
circumstances spelled-out in the C position rather than lower in the clause. As was the
case with Affix-Hopping in section 4.2, apparently illegal movement can be explained
through Agree and Spell-Out.
Before we examine this proposal in more detail, let us consider how it might work
in general terms. Conventional movement approaches run into problems in accounting
for compound verbs in Old Irish because of the behaviour of the initial preverb. When
C is filled by a conjunct particle, movement of the verb to T seems to proceed in the
expected fashion, moving through and incorporating the preverb in light v. However,
when C is not filled, the verb moves to T without incorporating light v and light v
moves independently to C. Movement approaches must explain why when C is filled
incorporation takes place, and when C is unfilled incorporation does not take place. If
the preverb never moves to C in the syntax, but is only realised there as a result of
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
75
Agree, then we no longer face this problem. In the syntax, the only movement that
takes place is the movement of the verb to T via light v.
Independent of the syntactic movement operation from V to T there is an Agree
relation between C and light v. C has an unvalued verbal feature that must be valued.
Although this verbal feature is always present on C and is always valued, it is only
realised phonologically when there are no other more specific features in C. When
other features, such as [neg] or [Q], or lexical items such as the conjunctions when or
so are present in C, then these are spelled-out in preference to the verbal feature. This
proposal can be seen schematically in the tree in (60) below:
60. C C T
[u v] T v
V T tv V
v V tV D From the tree above we might expect that if the preverb is spelled-out in C it will be
spelled-out twice, in both C and T, resulting in forms like *do-tabair rather than the
attested do-beir.52 However, this is clearly not the case. When some element other
than the preverb appears in C, the preverb is spelled-out with the verb in T. However,
when the preverb is spelled-out in C, the lower copy in T is deleted, resulting in the
deuterotonic verbal form. Let us look at each stage of the proposal in detail. First we
will consider the Agree relation between C and v. Secondly we will examine what
exactly a preverb is under this analysis and how it comes to be realised in the different
positions. Thirdly we will consider the deletion operation that affects the initial
preverb and how the two forms of the compound verb are derived.
4.3.2.1 Agree between C and v
The syntactic operations involved in this proposal are relatively uncontroversial. First,
the idea that the verb moves to v, incorporates with the preverb and then moves onto
T is straightforward and requires no complications to the syntax. This is head-
52 Forms such as do-tabair are found in early Middle Irish. See Strachan (1895–7).
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
76
movement according to the HMC or the PIC1, motivated by an Affix-feature in T.
Similarly, the Agree relation between C and v is an operation that receives cross-
linguistic support. Since den Besten (1983) it has been assumed that in the Germanic
V2 languages the verb moves to the C position. Under the theoretical assumptions of
this dissertation, this movement will be motivated by an Affix-feature on C. However,
for the verb to move to this position, there must be an Agree relation between the verb
and the C position. As a result of the PIC, C cannot be in an Agree relation directly
with the verb. To move to C, the verb must move via light v. Therefore, there must be
an Agree relation between C and light v.53 It seems a reasonable step to postulate such
an Agree relation for Old Irish, especially as it seems that at an earlier stage Old Irish
demonstrated V-to-C movement (see section 3.3 above and chapter 4 below).
Although it seems reasonable to suggest that there is an Agree relation between C
and light v, an Agree relation is dependent on the presence of features that need to be
valued. The next stage, then, is to establish what these features might be. Den Besten
(1983) proposes that verb-movement to C in V2 languages occurs because tense is
located in the C position.54 This view has received recent theoretical support from
work by Chomsky (2005, 2006). Chomsky argues that C is the true locus of tense and
agreement features. Biberauer & Roberts (2005) argue that although in the Romance
languages these features are transferred to T (resulting in V-to-T movement), in
Germanic these features remain on C and motivate V-to-C movement. This
suggestion could also apply to Old Irish. However, it does not explain why C is active
and acts as a probe. The reason for this, I suggest, is that C also has an unvalued
verbal feature. As light v is the closest head containing an appropriate valued verbal
feature, an Agree relation between C and v is established to value this feature.
4.3.2.2 A closer look at preverbs and the status of light v
Under the analysis presented here preverbs are the phonological realisation of a verbal
feature. This verbal feature can be realised either in C separate from the remainder of
the verb, resulting in the deuterotonic form, or with the remainder of the verb in T (or
lower in the clause in Bergin’s Construction – see section 4.4 below) resulting in 53 If the verb can be shown to move via the T position perhaps C might Agree with T rather than v. However, there is reason to believe that the verb does not move via T in at least some of the Germanic V2 languages. In this case, the Agree relation must be between C and light v. 54 Another prominent suggestion in the V2 literature, first proposed by Holmberg & Platzack (1995) is that the verb moves to C to check finiteness features. See Vikner (1995) for an overview of C/T approaches to V2.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
77
prototonic form. Crucially for this analysis it is assumed that this feature is also
associated with light v. By making this assumption it is possible to account
straightforwardly for the different positions in which the verbal feature occurs. First,
as we saw in the previous section, there are both theoretical and empirical arguments
to support the existence of an Agree relation between C and v. Therefore, if the verbal
feature is associated with v we can account for its appearance in C. Secondly, verb
movement is generally assumed (according to the HMC, PIC1 or Chomsky’s (2004)
proposal the verbs need to be verbalised by movement to light v) to proceed via light
v resulting in incorporation,. Therefore if, as suggested here, Old Irish has V-to-T
movement, then we would expect the verb to move through and incorporate light v.
This accounts for the appearance of the verbal feature in T.
Although there are theoretical reasons for assuming that the verbal feature that is
realised as a preverb is associated with light v, if we consider the exact nature of this
feature in further detail it seems likely that it is in fact unvalued on light v and is
valued through an Agree relation with a corresponding valued feature on the verb.
In recent minimalist work, light v seems to have the status of a verbaliser.
Following Marantz (1997), Chomsky (2004) argues that verbs (and nouns and
adjectives) are stored in the lexicon as acategorial roots. It is only through association
with a light v head that these acategorial roots become verbalised. Chomsky argues
that in order for this to take place the verb root must move to light v. It is not clear
that this is necessary as the same effect could be achieved through an Agree relation.
So, it seems that light v must be in an Agree relation with V, the acategorial root, in
order to value the root’s categorial feature; however, as discussed in the previous
section, Agree relations are reciprocal; for an Agree relation to hold between v and V,
v must also have some unvalued feature that the verbal root can value. One possibility
is that in the same way as the verbal root needs functional, i.e. categorial, information
the v head needs to be specified for lexical content. Let us explore what this lexical
content could be.
It seems unlikely that the verbal root will pass on its entire semantic content to
light v. A more plausible suggestion, perhaps, is that the root simply passes on
information regarding the class to which it belongs. In many languages verbs and
nouns are divided into conjugation and declension classes. These classes are
essentially arbitrary, they have no semantic or grammatical justification; it is simply
the case that during language acquisition when a child learns a verb or noun s/he must
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
78
learn to which class it belongs, so that s/he can conjugate or decline it appropriately.
In French, verbs can be divided into three conjugation classes depending on the final
two letters of their infinitive form. For example, verbs with an infinitive ending -er
such as regarder ‘watch’ belong to the first conjugation, those ending in –ir, such as
finir ‘finish’ are second conjugation and those ending in –re such as vendre ‘sell’ are
third conjugation. Each verb class has a slightly different conjugation pattern, as can
be seen in the table below.
Table 4: French verb conjugation classes in the present tense
First conjugation Second conjugation Third conjugation
1sg je regarde je finis je vends
2sg tu regardes tu finis tu vends
3sg il/elle regarde il/elle finit il/elle vend
1pl nous regardons nous finissons nous vendons
2pl vous regardez vous finissez vous vendez
3pl ils regardent ils finissent ils vendent
Embick & Halle (2005) argue that each root contains a diacritic marking its
conjugation or declension class. After syntax is complete, an extra, dissociated
morpheme (see Embick 1997) is added to the v head, and the information regarding
class is transferred from the root via a concord process. The same result, it seems to
me, could be obtained, without these extra post-syntactic operations, if the verb-class
feature appears on the v head itself, as a result of an Agree relation between v and the
root (V). This is what is proposed here.55 56
There are two pieces of evidence to support the proposal that preverbs in Old Irish
are arbitrary verb-class markers. First, as we saw in section 2.2 above, in the Old Irish
period most preverbs have no meaning independent of the verb. Therefore, it seems
likely that they are functional rather than lexical elements. Secondly, there are only a 55 Old Irish also has conventional conjugation classes. See McCone (1997a) for details. 56 One possible criticism here is that within the DM literature information regarding conjugation classes is often argued to be inserted with the phonological features during vocabulary insertion as conjugation class features do not play any role in narrow syntax. If this is the case, then the verb class features that are being proposed for Old Irish cannot be exactly the same as conjugation class markers as they do seem to play a role in the syntax. This is perhaps what we would expect, because, as noted in footnote 55, Old Irish has conjugation class markers in addition to preverbs. However, the parallel still holds to the extent that the verb class features in Old Irish are arbitrary and have no semantic or grammatical justification.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
79
handful of initial preverbs found in the Old Irish period and they are not used
productively. The fact that preverbs are a closed class again suggests they are
functional rather than lexical.
So far, then, it has been argued that preverbs are the realisation of a verb class
feature on either C or T. Each compound verb has a verb class feature corresponding
to the preverb with which it is associated. The value of this feature is determined by
the lexical verb, but is transmitted to light v via an Agree relation between v and V.
Having outlined our assumptions regarding preverbs let us consider how this analysis
is preferable to the other possibilities.
The only existing concrete proposal regarding the status of preverbs is that made
by CHP. CHP argue that preverbs are merged into the structure as light v heads, part
of a Hale & Keyser (1993) complex VP. CHP’s analysis resembles that presented
here in that it assumes that preverbs are associated with light v. However, there are
two major differences. First, it is assumed here that preverbs are not merged as light v
heads; they are simply the realisation of one feature that appears in light v. Secondly
we assume that the feature that appears on light v is not intrinsically associated with
light v, but instead is valued by a valued verb class feature present on the verb itself.
The idea that preverbs are the realisation of a single feature that appears in light v
is preferable to the proposal that preverbs are merged as light v heads in several
respects. First, if preverbs are merged as light v heads we might expect them to
function as light v heads do cross-linguistically, for example in terms of determining
the argument structure of a verb or expressing aspect. This does not seem to be the
case. Preverbs have no grammatical function. If preverbs are simply the realisation of
an idiosyncratic verbal feature that appears on light v then there is no reason why they
should have all the properties of a light v head.
The second argument for the analysis of preverbs as a single feature rather than a
light v head is semantic. As noted in section 2.2 above, preverbs have no meaning
independent of the compound verb of which they are a part. If preverbs are merged as
light v heads, i.e. as independent bundles of features, we might expect them to have
some independent semantic content.57 If preverbs are the realisation of a single verbal
feature, then there is no reason for them to have any semantic content. Furthermore,
if, as proposed above, the value of the verb class feature is determined by the lexical
57 Although this is not necessarily the case as compound verbs could be analysed as idioms.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
80
verb itself, this provides a neat account of the fact that preverbs have no meaning
independent of the remainder of the compound verb.58
Having provided an outline and justification for the analysis of preverbs as the
realisation of verb class features we must now establish how exactly these features
come to be realised in the positions in which they do. The remainder of this section
considers how the verbal features come to receive a phonological realisation at the
point of Vocabulary Insertion. The next section examines deletion of the lower
copies.
As discussed in section 4.1 morphosyntactic features become phonologically
realised at the point of Vocabulary Insertion when phonological exponents are
inserted in place of morphosyntactic feature bundles. For each morphosyntactic
feature bundle all possible vocabulary items (VIs) that could be inserted into that
particular position compete for insertion. To be inserted in a particular context, the
morphosyntactic features associated with a VI must be non-distinct from those of the
insertion context, i.e. the VI cannot have any features that are not present in the
terminal node. However, the VI need not contain all the features of the terminal node.
The VI that wins the competition and is inserted into the derivation will be the one
with the most matching features. Let us consider how this would work in Old Irish.
In DM terms, each conjunct particle in Old Irish is an independent VI containing
morphosyntactic and phonological features. Some consist simply of C-based features
and others are independent lexical items, such as when and until.59 This is shown in
(61) below.
61. [neg] ⇔ /ní/
[Q] ⇔ /in/
[neg] [rel] ⇔ /nad/
when ⇔ /dian/
until ⇔ /con/ 58 One further option is to analyse preverbs not as v heads but as Ps. Preverbs clearly resemble and are etymologically related to prepositions, and so there is reason to support such an analysis. However, it is not entirely clear how a P head would fit into the syntactic structure and interact with C and T. It could perhaps be argued that there is a P projection as part of an articulated vP structure. However, this possibility will be left for later research. 59 The idea that lexical items such as conjunctions compete for insertion into the C position is problematic in DM. However, it is clear that such competitions take place. It is perhaps possible that these conjunctions can be broken down into morphosyntactic feature bundles. However, this will not be attempted here.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
81
At the point of Vocabulary Insertion all potential candidates for insertion into the C
position will compete, and the most specific VI, i.e. the item that matches the most
features will be inserted. So, when the C position contains the features [neg] and [rel],
either /nad/ or /ní/ could be inserted as both are non-distinct from the terminal node,
neither VI contains features that are not present in the C position. However, in this
case /nad/ will be inserted in preference to /ní/ as it is more specific; it matches two
features in C rather than one. When the C position contains only the feature [neg], it
will be impossible to insert the VI /nad/ as this contains the feature [rel], which is not
present in C, and so /ní/ is the only option.
Let us turn now to preverbs. It was argued above that preverbs are the realisation
of a verb-class feature in C. However, preverbs are only realised in C when there is no
conjunct particle. In DM terms this means that the verb-class feature will only be
realised in C when no other more specific VI can be inserted. On the assumption that
the v feature in C represents a verb-class marker, we could imagine VIs such as the
following (as verb classes are arbitrary they are marked simply by numbers):
62. [v1] ⇔ /do/
[v2] ⇔ /fo/
[v3] ⇔ /as/
etc.
The only morphosyntactic features specified for these VIs then are the valued v
features. When the C position contains no other features of the type [neg] or [Q] or a
lexical item such as when, the VI encoding the valued v feature will match the C
position most closely and so be inserted there. When the C position contains both the
feature [neg] and a valued [v1] feature, however, it is the [neg] feature that wins out.
There are two possible ways this could be explained. First, it could be that all VIs that
can potentially be inserted into the C position contain all the features that are
associated with C, such as Force, Finiteness and, crucially, v, as shown in (63) below.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
82
63. [Force] [Fin] [v] [neg] ⇔ /ní/
[Force] [Fin] [v] [Q] ⇔ /in/
[Force] [Fin] [v] [neg] [rel] ⇔ /nad/
[Force] [Fin] [v] when ⇔ /dian/
[Force] [Fin] [v] until ⇔ /con/
In this case, any conjunct particle will be inserted in preference to a preverb as the VI
contains an additional feature matching the C node, e.g. [neg], rather than simply the
default C features [Force] [Fin] [v].60
4.3.2.3 Preverb deletion
In the previous two sections it has been argued that in Old Irish in all clauses C has an
unvalued verbal feature that must be valued through an Agree relation with a
matching feature in v. This verbal feature encodes verb class, and it can be realised in
C, as an initial preverb, however, it will only be realised when there are no other C-
features in the C position. The next issue to be discussed is how, when the v feature is
realised in C, the v feature in T comes to be deleted.
It was argued in section 4.1 that the PF-operation Chain Reduction marks the
highest or leftmost copy of a certain feature bundle for realisation and deletes
subsequent copies. Although in most cases identical feature bundles arise by
movement, this does not have to be the case. If chains are determined in terms of
identity and/or c-command as discussed in section 4.3.1, then it is possible that two
identical feature bundles resulting from the operation Agree could also undergo Chain
Reduction. It is possible that this could be the case in Old Irish. When C is empty, i.e.
it contains no C-based features that will result in the insertion of a conjunct particle,
the only feature it contains will be a valued verbal feature. As this verbal feature was
valued by light v it will be identical to the light v heads lower in the structure, not
simply the original light v head, but also the light v head that incorporates with the
verb and moves to T. As a result, under Chain Reduction the higher copy will be
marked for realisation and the lower copies in T and light v will be deleted.
60 It is not clear that VIs contain all the information given in (55). DM assumes that VIs are underspecified. However, if this is the case, then we simply need to stipulate that inherent C features are spelled-out in preference to a valued v-feature (cf. Halle & Marantz 1993), or perhaps that C features are higher in a universal feature hierarchy (cf. Noyer 1997).
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
83
In the situation described above, when the C position contains nothing but a verbal
feature, this deletion operation is quite straightforward; however, this is not the only
circumstance in which the verbal feature is realised in C. C is realised as an initial
preverb when there is an object pronoun in the clause, when the verb is in a so-called
secondary tense (imperfect, past subjunctive and conditional) and when the clause is
relative. As we saw in section 4.3.1, these are all the environments that we find
insertion of the dummy particle no when the verb is simple. It was argued above, that
the insertion of the dummy particle no provided evidence that each of these
constructions involved the presence of a non-default feature in C, which provided a
host for affixal Force and prevented C from being deleted at PF. However, if these
constructions all involve extra features in the C position, then this poses a problem for
our account of compound verbs, as it means that the features in C and the features in
light v will not be identical, and so we would not expect the lower copy to be deleted.
However, if we consider each of these cases in more detail, it seems that this is not the
case, and the features in C and v can be shown to be identical.
Let us first examine the secondary tenses. It was argued above that the feature that
prevents C from being deleted in this case is an aspectual feature. Aspect marking is
typically a feature associated with light v. Therefore, for aspectual features to be
present on C, C must be in an Agree relation with light v. As a result, if C contains a
valued aspect feature, light v must contain one too. In the case of secondary tenses,
then, C will not contain a feature that is not present in v. The two positions will both
contain an aspect feature, and so will be identical. As a result, we would expect
deletion of the lower vs to take place.
A similar proposal can be made for clauses where there is an object pronoun. The
light v head is typically associated with object agreement and accusative case
assignment. Therefore, if C has object clitic agreement features, it seems likely that
these features will be valued through an Agree relation with light v. In this case, then,
as before, the extra feature present on C will also be present on v, so again, it seems
that the two heads will be identical.61
The case of relative clause marking is more problematic. Relative clause marking
is typically the result of a [wh] feature on C. These features are not typically 61 This is problematic, as we would expect object-features always to be present on C whenever there is an object. In Old Irish it seems that C is only valued for object features when the object is a clitic. This could be related to the fact that object clitics seem to raise into the C-projection in Old Irish. A better understanding of clitics is necessary before any firm conclusion can be reached.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
84
associated with v. However, this does not mean that v may not be specified as [wh].
In object wh-questions in English a wh-phrase must move to Spec-CP. If this wh-
phrase is the object of the verb, it cannot move straight to Spec-CP as this would
violate the PIC. As the object is merged as the complement of V within the VP it is
sent to PF at the end of the phase and so is unavailable for movement to C. If the
object wh-phrase is to move to Spec-CP it must move first to Spec-vP to escape the
phase. In English non-wh-clauses the object does not move to Spec-vP. Light v in
English does not have an EPP-feature that attracts the object. Therefore, we need an
explanation as to why movement of the object to Spec-vP should take place in wh-
questions. One possibility would be to suggest that when C is marked as [wh] and has
an associated EPP-feature light v will be marked in the same way. This [wh]-feature
on light v cannot be a result of Agree, as movement of the object to Spec-vP must
take place before C is merged. Therefore, light v must receive this [wh] feature (and
an associated EPP-feature) in the numeration. If a similar situation holds in Old Irish,
then both C and light v will contain [wh] features and so in relative clauses, the
features in each head will be identical and again deletion of the lower v head will be
possible.62
In this section it has been argued that when the verbal feature is phonologically
realised in C it is deleted in the lower positions, within the TP and vP. This deletion
occurs before the point of Vocabulary Insertion whenever the features in C are
identical to those in light v. It seems that C and v will be identical not only when C
contains only a verbal feature, but also when C contains aspectual, object (clitic)
agreement or relative features. Once this deletion of the lower v head has taken place,
light v and the verbal root will appear in separate syntactic positions and so will be
spelled-out separately, resulting in the deuterotonic verbal form. If C contains other
C-based features, it will not be identical with the lower vs and so the v in T is not
deleted. In this case light v and the verbal root are spelled-out together in T, resulting
in the prototonic form.
4.4 A closer look at the Old Irish data
In this section a new post-syntactic account of the double system of verbal inflection
has been developed. So far we have provided an account of the main facts, i.e. the 62 This could be extended to force in general, thus explaining why the presence of force in C does not prevent deletion of the lower v head.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
85
distribution of the different verbal forms and object clitic pronouns. In this section we
will consider some further aspects of the Old Irish verbal system and how the analysis
presented above can account for them.
4.4.1 Tmesis and Bergin’s Construction
As noted above, tmesis and Bergin’s Construction are archaic constructions where the
verb, instead of being in initial position, appears lower in the clause in verb-final or
verb-medial position. In Bergin’s Construction, the verb can be simple or compound.
In either case, the entirety of the verbal complex appears in non-initial position and
has dependent form, i.e. conjunct inflection if the verb is simple (64a) and prototonic
form if the verb is compound (64b).
64. (a) ceso femmuin m-bolgaig m-bung
although seaweed blistered reap.PRES.1SG.CONJ
‘Although I reap blistered seaweed’ (Corm 1059/Bergin 1938: 197)
(b) fri aingel n-acallastar
to angel speak.PRET.3SG.PT
‘He spoke to an angel’ (LU 1148/Bergin 1938: 201)
Tmesis involves only compound verbs. In this case, the initial preverb is spelled out
where we would expect, in initial position, and the remainder of the verb is lower in
the clause.
65. Ath (mór)cathu fri crícha comnámat -cuirethar
PVB (great)battalions to borders neighbour.GEN.PL send.PRES.3PL.DT
‘He dispatches (great) battalions to the borders of hostile neighbours’
(AM §15)
The advantage of the post-syntactic analysis of Old Irish presented here is that it can
provide a unitary account of both constructions. The basic feature of both tmesis and
Bergin’s Law is that the verb appears in non-initial position for stylistic effect. This
can be accounted for if we assume that in both cases the verb does not raise to T,
because T’s Affix feature has been omitted for stylistic reasons. The only difference
between the two constructions, then, is the position in which the initial preverb is
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
86
realised. In tmesis, the preverb is realised in C and deleted lower in the clause, in the
same way as was suggested above for all deuterotonic verb forms. In Bergin’s
Construction, where the verb is compound, the initial preverb is not realised in initial
position and is spelled out with the remainder of the verb. This is shown in the
simplified trees below:
66. (a) Bergin’s Construction (b) Tmesis:
CP CP …tabair do…beir
C TP C TP do do
T vP T vP Ø
v VP v VP do do beir beir
4.4.2 Imperatives
There is a construction in Old Irish where a verb in absolute initial position does not
have absolute or deuterotonic form. When the verb is imperative (and there is no
infixed pronoun) it has conjunct or prototonic form.
67. (a) ber brith étrunn
bear.IMPV.2SG judgement between.1PL
‘Judge between us’ (Ml 38c28)
(b) tabair digail
give.IMPV.2SG punishment
‘Inflict punishment’ (Ml 27c12)
This construction can be accounted for within the post-syntactic analysis presented
above if we postulate an imperative feature that appears in the C position. The
imperative feature combines with and provides a host for the affixal Force feature in
C, ensuring that it is realised on C and deleted in T, resulting in conjunct rather than
absolute inflection. When the verb is compound the imperative feature prevents the
realisation of the preverb in C. For this to be the case, there must be a specific
vocabulary item inserted in C when C contains the feature [imperative]. This
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
87
vocabulary item could be phonologically null, or it could instead have some kind of
suprasegmental phonological effect. Obviously, from the available evidence from the
texts it is difficult to determine which is the case.
4.4.3 Relative forms
We saw above that there are two main ways of marking a verb as relative in Old Irish,
either through the use of special relative verbal endings (68) or through the lenition or
nasalization of the initial segment of the verb (69), or in the case of deuterotonic
forms, the verbal stem (70).
68. is oinfer gaibes búaid diib inna chomalnad
COP one man take.PRES.3SG.REL victory of.3PL in its completing
‘It is one man of them that gets victory for completing it’
(Wb 11a4)
69. is hed in so no chairigur (non-rel cairigur)
COP it this PVB reprimand.PRES.1SG.CONJ
‘This is what I reprimand’ (Wb 11d1)
70. a n- ad-chiam (ch=/x/, cf. non-relative ad-ciam)
that.NAS PVB-see.PRES.1PL.DT
‘That which we see’ (Ml 112b13)
Although we have touched on the analysis of relative clauses in the preceding
sections, let us clarify here exactly how the post-syntactic analysis proposed above
accounts for these different constructions. The basic assumption is that relative
marking in Old Irish is conditioned by the presence of a wh-feature on C. Old Irish
has no relative particles corresponding to Modern Irish aL and aN, so relative C has no
realisation of its own. However, this does not mean that the wh-feature has no
phonological effects. Whenever C contains a wh-feature it will cause the initial
segment of the verb in T to lenite or nasalize.63 In Old Irish this seems to happen
across the board, not only in the examples above where C is filled, but also as we saw
in section 3.3.2, when the verb is simple and has the special relative form.
63 The exact mechanism behind the grammatical mutations in Old Irish will be left for further research.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
88
71. cisí aimser derb thechtas (non-relative techtaid)
what time definite possess.PRES.3SG.REL
‘What is the definite time that he has?’ (Sg 26a6)
Grammatical mutations are not the only phonological effect of a wh-feature on C. In
certain cases, the combination of the wh-feature with other features in C results in
special relative forms. For example, the preverbs im and ar have special disyllabic
relative forms imma/imme and ara/are. The negative particle also has a special
relative form, nad.
The special relative morphological found on simple verbs can be accounted for in a
similar way. Let us assume that the wh-feature, like the Force feature that conditions
absolute inflection, is shared by both C and T. For certain persons and tenses, the
presence of a wh-feature on T will result in the spell-out of special relative verbal
endings. This will only be the case, however, when a relevant vocabulary item exists.
In the present 3sg relative, for example, there are two possible vocabulary items that
could be inserted:
72. [present] [3sg] → /ø/
[present] [3sg] [wh] → /es/
When there is a [wh] feature on C the relative form will be inserted as it matches
more features in the terminal node. In the case of the 1sg, however, there is only one
vocabulary item available as there is no specific relative vocabulary item.64
73. [present] [1sg] → /u/
Therefore, only the non-relative form can appear.
One crucial difference between the wh-feature that conditions relative morphology
and the Force feature that conditions absolute inflection is that the wh-feature is not
affixal. The fact that simple relative verb forms are lenited in the same way as any
64 Although there is only one vocabulary item, this vocabulary item has a number of possible realisations. We shall not go into this issue here.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
89
other verb forms suggests that the wh-feature is present and, in this case realised, in
both C and T.
4.5 Summary
At the end of section 3 it was concluded that syntax alone cannot account for the
different verbal forms found in Old Irish. As a result, this section has explored the
possibility of accounting for the Old Irish verbal system through a combination of
syntactic and post-syntactic operations. Section 4.1 argued that there are two kinds of
post-syntactic operation that take place at the interface between syntax and
phonology, conceptually motivated, universal, obligatory operations such as
Linearize, Chain Reduction and Vocabulary Insertion, and empirically motivated,
language specific operations such as impoverishment, fusion and fission. Section 4.2
reviewed an attempt by Adger (to appear) to account for the Old Irish verbal system
using the second type of post-syntactic operation. It was argued that this is, in fact, the
biggest problem with Adger’s analysis. Adger relies on conceptually undesirable post-
syntactic movement operations. In section 4.3 a new post-syntactic account was
developed, relying primarily on the syntactic operation Agree and the conceptually
motivated post-syntactic operations of Chain Reduction and Vocabulary Insertion.
Section 4.4. considered how this new theory of the double system can account for
various parts of the data.
5 CONCLUSION
This chapter has reviewed the existing generative literature on the Old Irish verbal
system and attempted to develop a novel, minimalist account of the data. Having
presented a description of the main features of the Old Irish verbal system in section
2, section 3 went on to examine the existing syntactic accounts for the distribution of
the different verbal forms in Old Irish. It was argued that neither Doherty (1999,
2000) nor Carnie, Harley & Pyatt (2000) can account for all aspects of the Old Irish
data. Although at first sight, CHP’s analysis seems to be well supported by data from
object pronouns and relative clauses, a closer look at these constructions in the Old
Irish period shows that this is not the case. Moreover, CHP’s analysis faces significant
theoretical problems, particularly in the area of compound verbs. Section 3.4
attempted to show that independent movement of the preverb and the verb in the
syntax is impossible. Deriving the attested orders through head-movement is
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
90
prohibited by constraints on syntactic movement. XP- and remnant-movement
accounts, although less constrained, face problems in terms of motivation.
Having concluded in section 3 that the different verbal forms in Old Irish cannot be
a result of syntax alone, an alternative possibility was explored, namely the
interaction of syntactic and post-syntactic rules. Adger’s (to appear) post-syntactic
account was reviewed, and it was concluded that the main problem with it was its
reliance on post-syntactic movement operations. In section 4.3 a new analysis was
developed, based primarily on the conceptually motivated post-syntactic operations of
Chain Reduction and Vocabulary Insertion. Simple verbs move only as far as T in the
syntax, and the appearance of absolute endings on an initial verb is a result of a
process parallel to English Affix-Hopping. Compound verbs also move only as far as
T in the syntax, with the verb moving via light v in the expected fashion and
incorporating with the preverb. The appearance of the initial preverb of a deuterotonic
compound verb in C is a result of an Agree relation between C and v, valuing a verbal
feature in the C position. When C contains no other non-default features, this verbal
feature is realised in C as a preverb, and the lower occurrence of v in T is deleted, via
Chain Reduction under identity.
The synchronic account presented here highlights a number of interesting
diachronic questions. First, although the double system of verbal inflection is not
derived syntactically in the Old Irish period, the evidence from relative clauses and
suffixed pronouns presented in section 3.3 suggests that this was not always the case,
and that at some point in its pre-history Irish did have V-to-C movement with
absolute inflection as a result of verb-movement to C. Generalised V-to-C movement
is not a feature of PIE and so must be a Celtic innovation. How did V-to-C movement
arise in Old Irish? This is the topic of chapter 4.
If pre-Old Irish had V-to-C movement, but this is no longer the case in the Old
Irish period, we need to explain how this movement process was lost and how the
post-syntactic operations responsible for deriving the double system arose. What is
the status of these rules? It seems likely that the situation described here for Old Irish
would be relatively unstable, with the double system being learnt as irregularities.
From this we would perhaps predict that the system was difficult to maintain and so
was lost. This clearly happened between the Old and Modern Irish periods, but how
and why? These questions are investigated in chapter 5.
CHAPTER 2 – A SYNCHRONIC ACCOUNT
91
Before we can go on to examine the diachronic issues surrounding the Old Irish
verbal system we need a better understanding of the nature and operation of syntactic
change within the framework of the minimalist programme. This is the aim of chapter
3.
CHAPTER 3
SYNTACTIC CHANGE IN A GENERATIVE FRAMEWORK
1 INTRODUCTION
In the previous chapter it was argued that the reason that the Old Irish verbal system
proves so difficult to account for synchronically within the framework of minimalist
syntax is because it is not a syntactically productive system. To gain a fuller
understanding of how the verbal system of Old Irish works then we must consider the
diachronic perspective, namely how the system developed and how it was lost. This
will be the subject of chapters 4 and 5 respectively. Before we can embark on the
diachrony of Old Irish, however, it is necessary to outline some initial assumptions
regarding the theoretical framework in which the analyses developed in the following
chapters will be based. This is the primary aim of this chapter.
This dissertation is concerned with changes affecting the Irish verbal system.
Although as will be seen in the chapters to follow the verbal system has been affected
by a wide range of changes, this dissertation focuses primarily on syntactic change.
As with the synchronic account presented in chapter 2, the diachronic account
developed in chapters 4 and 5 will be based within the framework of the minimalist
programme. This chapter outlines how syntactic change can be modelled within the
minimalist framework, and how modelling syntactic change in this way can
contribute to our understanding of the mechanisms and causes of syntactic change.
Section 2 examines generative approaches to syntactic change, focussing on how
syntactic change can be modelled within the principles and parameters framework.
Section 3 considers the concept of parametric change within the minimalist
programme. In section 4 we explore how children set their parameters during
language acquisition, and how parametric changes arise. Section 5 summarises the
major theoretical assumptions outlined in this chapter that will be used to tackle the
Irish data in the remainder of the dissertation.
2 PARAMETRIC CHANGE AND THE ROLE OF LANGUAGE ACQUISITION
The minimalist programme, as outlined in chapter 1, is a version of the principles and
parameters theory of universal grammar. According to principles and parameters
theory the language faculty is seen as consisting of a number of invariant principles
that hold cross-linguistically and a number of binary parameters that encode the
CHAPTER 3 – SYNTACTIC CHANGE
93
variation between languages. So, for example, it is often argued that the extended
projection principle (EPP) holds cross-linguistically1 – every clause must have a
subject in Spec-TP. However, there is a parameter that determines whether or not the
subject must be realised overtly if it is a pronoun, namely the null subject parameter.
In English the subject must always be expressed. In Italian, however, this is not the
case. This is shown by the examples below:2
1. (a) He speaks English
(b) * Speaks English
2. (a) Lui parla italiano
(b) Parla italiano
At birth English and Italian children have the same linguistic knowledge – they are
endowed with the same principles and parameters. However, during the course of
language acquisition they are exposed to different linguistic data and so set these
parameters differently. Linguistic change between two stages of a language can be
viewed in exactly the same way. A younger generation of language learners, although
endowed with the same principles and parameters as their parents, may, for some
reason, be faced with different linguistic data to the older generation, and so set their
parameters in a different way. If we consider again the null subject parameter, Old
French behaved similarly to Italian in that pronominal subjects did not need to be
expressed:
3. (a) Einsi partirent del port de Venise come vos avez oi
Thus left.3PL the port of Venice as you have heard
(b) Si firent grant joie la nuit
So made.3PL great joy that night (Roberts 1993: 84)
Modern French, however, patterns more like English where the presence of a subject
pronoun is obligatory. Between Old and Modern French there has been a change in
parameter settings. Over time the evidence for null subjects decreased. Phonological
1 Although see McCloskey (1996b, 2001a) who argues on the basis of evidence from Modern Irish that the EPP on T is not in fact universal. 2 Expressing the subject in null subject languages is not ungrammatical, but has an emphatic effect.
CHAPTER 3 – SYNTACTIC CHANGE
94
change led to a loss of person distinctions in the verbal endings and so speakers began
to use pronominal subjects with greater frequency until the point where the use of
pronominal subjects was reanalysed as being obligatory and the parameter setting was
changed.3
Under the generative view, then, syntactic change involves a change in parameter
settings between subsequent generations. Parameters are set by a child acquiring its
language. Therefore, syntactic change must necessarily take place during language
acquisition. In this respect generativists have built on the work of Henning Andersen
(1973). Andersen observes that children do not have direct access to the grammar
they are attempting to acquire, i.e. the grammar of the older generation, but instead
they must attempt to recreate it on the basis of the linguistic evidence they hear, i.e.
the output of the earlier generation’s grammar. It is because of this discontinuity in
transmission that it is possible for changes to occur. In most cases children will
analyse the data they hear in the same way as the older generation, and language
acquisition will be “successful”. However, there is the possibility that children may
analyse the data they hear in a different way to earlier generations. This being the
case, their grammar will differ from their parents’ grammar. This difference will be
reflected in a difference in their output. This is shown schematically in the diagram
below:4
4.
The basic mechanism of syntactic change, then, under the generativist view, is
reanalysis, first proposed by Langacker (1977) and Timberlake (1977) (see also
Roberts (1993) for a discussion of the relationship between parametric change and
reanalysis). The child analyses the data that it encounters in a different way to the 3 This is a simplification. See Roberts (1993) for more details. 4 This diagram is an idealization. As pointed out by Weinreich, Labov & Herzog (1968: 145–6), children tend to acquire language primarily from their peers, i.e. other slightly older children, rather than their parents.
Grammar 1 (adult)
Grammar 2 (child)
Output 1 Output 2
CHAPTER 3 – SYNTACTIC CHANGE
95
older generation. As a result the child sets its parameters differently to the parameter
settings of the older generation. Returning to the French example, French children
reanalysed the data as suggesting that subject pronouns were obligatory, rather than
optional as specified by their parents’ grammars, and so set the null subject parameter
accordingly.
In this section it has been established that syntactic change can be modelled as a
change in parameter settings between subsequent generations. However, in order to
determine exactly what this means we must establish first what a parameter is and
what a change in parameter settings entails. This is the subject of the next section.
3 PARAMETERS IN THE MINIMALIST PROGRAM
Under the earlier government and binding style approach to the principles and
parameters model, the core of UG consisted of universal principles and a set of
parameters that were set during the process of language acquisition. Each parameter
had a specific function, for example the head parameter determined whether a
language had basic head-complement (e.g. VO) or complement-head (e.g. OV) order
or the null subject parameter determined whether languages allowed null subject
pronouns or not. In minimalism, however, cross-linguistic variation is encoded
somewhat differently.
In chapter 1 section 2.2.1 we saw that in minimalism the language faculty consists
of a computational system (CHL) and a lexicon. CHL contains invariant principles of
UG, which provide the basic mechanisms by which sentences are constructed. All
variation between languages, both lexical and syntactic, is encoded in the lexicon. In
this respect minimalism has an obvious conceptual advantage to earlier versions of
the theory. It cannot be denied that languages differ in terms of vocabulary and so to
acquire a particular language a child must acquire the lexical items that make up the
lexicon. If syntactic variation is encoded in the lexicon, then it seems likely that the
parts of syntax that need to be acquired will be acquired in the same or perhaps a
similar way to other lexical information.
Syntactic variation is encoded in a particular subset of lexical items, namely
functional categories, such as C, T and v – the so-called ‘core functional categories’
(Chomsky 2000: 102, 2001: 6). Variation is encoded in terms of grammatical features.
In different languages functional categories will contain different features or different
feature values, and this will result in different syntactic properties. Let us examine
CHAPTER 3 – SYNTACTIC CHANGE
96
how this might work. In chapter 1 we saw that there are three syntactic operations in
the minimalist programme, namely Merge, Agree and Move. Merge is the basic
structure building operation; it is not motivated by features and so is not subject to
variation.5 Agree and Move both depend on the presence of grammatical features and
so can vary both cross-linguistically and diachronically. Variation in terms of
movement is most relevant here, so let us consider this in more detail.6
We saw in chapter 1 that for movement to take place, the constituent to be moved
(the goal) and the target of movement (the probe) must be in an Agree relation.
However, although an Agree relation is necessary for movement, it is not sufficient.
For movement to take place, the probe must also contain an EPP-feature. This may be
a general EPP-feature, attracting a phrasal category, or an Affix-feature, a type of
EPP-feature that attracts a head. The presence of a particular movement operation in a
given language, then, will crucially depend on the presence of an EPP/Affix-feature.
Let us consider a synchronic example. It is well known that English and French differ
in terms of the position of the verb (Emonds 1978; Pollock 1989). In English, the verb
must appear adjacent to the direct object; no element can intervene. This is shown in
the examples in (5). In French, this is not the case, and adverbs such as souvent
‘often’ or negation, pas, can intervene between the verb and the object as shown by
the examples in (6).
5. (a) I often eat cheese
(b) *I eat often cheese
(c) I do not eat cheese
(d) *I eat not cheese
6. (a) *Je souvent mange du fromage
(b) Je mange souvent du fromage
(c) *Je ne pas mange de fromage
(d) Je ne mange pas de fromage
5 Although see Chomsky (2005, 2006) where it is argued that the operation Merge is motivated by Edge Features (EF). The recursive nature of Merge is argued to result from the fact that all lexical items have an EF that must be satisfied. Although under this view Merge is motivated by features, the fact that, according to Chomsky, all lexical items have an EF, suggests that the EF and the operation Merge will not be subject to variation. 6 For an example of variation in terms of Agree see the discussion of negative concord in Roberts & Roussou (2003: 136–154).
CHAPTER 3 – SYNTACTIC CHANGE
97
In French T has an Affix-feature, and so the verb moves to T to the left of negation
and VP-adverbs. In English T does not have an Affix-feature and so the verb remains
in situ within the VP. The cross-linguistic difference is a result of a difference in
terms of the features associated with T, specifically whether or not T has an Affix-
feature.
If we turn now to a diachronic example, we see that the same type of variation can
be found. It seems that Early Modern English was like Modern French in that it had
generalised V-to-T movement (Roberts 1985, 1993; Biberauer & Roberts to appear).
This can be seen in the examples in (7) below, where adverbs (7a) and negation (7b)
can intervene between the verb and the direct object.
7. (a) The Turkes…made anone redy a grete ordonnaunce
‘The Turks soon made ready (prepared) a great ordnance’
(Kaye, The Delectable Newsse of the Glorious Victorye of the Rhodyans
agaynest the Turkes; Gray (1985: 23), Roberts (1993: 253)
(b) If I gave not this accompt to you
‘If I did not give this account to you’
(J. Cheke, Letter to Hoby; Görlach (1991: 223). Roberts (1999: 290))
In minimalist terms this means that in Early Modern English T had an Affix-feature.
In Modern English, however, as seen in the examples in (5), T does not have an
Affix-feature. Between Early Modern English and Modern English T lost this Affix-
feature and the associated V-to-T movement. This type of parametric change, then,
can be seen as the change in value of an EPP or Affix-feature associated with a
particular functional head.
So far it has been argued that within the minimalist programme parameters are
encoded in terms of formal features on functional heads. Parametric differences in
terms of movement operations result from the presence or absence of EPP and Affix-
features on functional heads. Viewed in this way, then, during language acquisition
children must determine for each functional head which formal features are associated
with that head and whether it has an EPP- and/or an Affix-feature.7 The next question
7 In terms of EPP/Affix-features this view is quite simplistic. A given functional head will actually not have the same EPP/Affix-feature values in all contexts. For example, in declarative clauses C in English has neither an EPP- nor an Affix-feature. In root wh-interrogative clauses on the other hand, it
CHAPTER 3 – SYNTACTIC CHANGE
98
that arises is how a child determines this, how does a child set its parameters? This is
the topic of the next section.
4 HOW TO SET PARAMETERS
In section 2 above it was argued that at birth all children are endowed with the same
linguistic knowledge and it is only through exposure to different linguistic data that
children in different environments acquire different languages. The principal question
then is how do children use this evidence to set their parameters? Parameters are
generally argued to be abstract entities, far removed from the structures that make up
the linguistic data. How then do children know that a particular construction they hear
in the linguistic data corresponds to a particular abstract parameter setting? We need
something to bridge this gap. For our purposes we will adopt the cue-based model of
language acquisition to provide a link between the linguistic data and abstract
parameter settings.8
4.1 Cue-based models of language acquisition
According to cue-based models (Dresher & Kaye 1990; Dresher 1999) UG specifies
not only a set of parameters, but also a cue for each parameter, that is a piece of the
input data that provides the child with evidence for a particular parameter setting. If
this specific structure is not found in the linguistic data then the parameter will revert
to its default setting.
Dresher (1999) illustrates the cue-based theory with reference to a phonological
parameter, namely Quantity Sensitivity (QS). In English the position of word stress
depends on the distribution and location of heavy syllables within a word. Stress falls
on the penultimate syllable if that syllable is heavy, i.e. contains a long vowel (8b) or
is closed by a consonant (8c). If not, then stress falls on the antepenultimate syllable
(8a).
has both, leading to wh-movement and inversion. There are two solutions to this. Either the different types of C are different lexical items and during acquisition a child must acquire all the possible types of C. The alternative is to suggest that certain features have their own EPP/Affix specification and when C contains such a feature, this feature overrides C’s default EPP/Affix-feature values. In the present context it is not necessary to decide between the two. 8 For summaries and critiques of various other approaches to language acquisition see Dresher (1999), Lightfoot (1999: 144–149)
CHAPTER 3 – SYNTACTIC CHANGE
99
8. (a) álgebra, Cánada, América
(b) Vancóu:ver, aró:ma
(c) agénda, appéndix
In order to acquire this stress system, the child must determine that English
distinguishes between light and heavy syllables. Dresher proposes that this involves a
parameter. Children start from the assumption that all syllables are equal with regards
to stress, i.e. the default setting is for Quantity Insensitivity (QI). However, when they
encounter words of the same number of syllables with different stress patterns (i.e. the
specified cue) they change this parameter setting, and so acquire quantity sensitivity.
This is summarised in (9) below:
9. Quantity (in)sensitivity
(a) Parameter: the language does/does not distinguish between light and
heavy syllables
(b) Default: assume all syllables have the same status (QI)
(c) Cue: Words of n syllables, conflicting stress contours (QS).
(Dresher 1999: 31)
Lightfoot (1999, 2006) adopts Dresher & Kaye’s notion of cue and applies it to the
acquisition of syntax.9 Lightfoot utilises cues to explain the loss of V2 in English. The
main feature that distinguishes V2 languages from SVO languages is that in V2
languages any constituent can appear before the finite verb, whereas in SVO
languages only the subject can occupy this position. Therefore, it seems likely that the
cue for the V2 parameter (assuming for now that such a parameter exists) should be
the presence of a non-subject XP in initial position followed directly by the verb. The
child scans the input and if it finds sufficient evidence of XVS order then the V2
parameter is set positively.10 If it does not find this evidence then the V2 parameter
9 Lightfoot’s concept of a cue differs from that proposed by Dresher & Kaye as he argues that cues and parameters can in fact be seen as one and the same thing: ‘cues which are realised only in certain grammars constitute the parameters, the points of variation between grammars’ (Lightfoot 1999:149). However, it is unclear what advantage Lightfoot hopes to achieve by amalgamating these two concepts. See Roberts & Roussou (2003: 13–14) for criticism of this view of cues. 10 This notion of ‘sufficient’ or ‘robust’ evidence is employed frequently in the generative literature on syntactic change; however, it is problematic. How much evidence is sufficient? No satisfactory answer has been given to this question, and it seems unlikely that one ever will. Lightfoot (1999: 154) suggests that for the V2 parameter to be robustly cued XVS clauses must make up 30% of the trigger
CHAPTER 3 – SYNTACTIC CHANGE
100
remains in its default setting, i.e. it is set negatively.11 We will return, in detail, to the
application of the cue-based model of language acquisition to syntactic change in the
next section.
One advantage of the cue-based model of language acquisition is that it reduces the
cognitive burden on the learner compared to input matching models, such as Gibson
& Wexler (1994). If children are pre-programmed with specific information about
which structures they need to find in the trigger experience in order to fix their
parameters, then this could account for the fact that language acquisition seems to
take place so quickly and effortlessly. This is more difficult to account for if it is
assumed that children must ‘try out’ numerous different parameter settings or
competing grammars before converging on the correct one. However, the reduction in
cognitive burden is accompanied by a significant increase in the amount of
information that must be innate. If for each parameter UG specifies a cue then this
doubles the information that must be innate.12
A further advantage of the cue-based approach is that it allows us to account for
one of the problems concerning the linguistic data. Lightfoot (1991) argues that
during language acquisition children make no use of negative data. This means that
they make no use of constructions they do not hear. Lightfoot observes that this is
particularly problematic in the case of the null subject parameter. A child learning
English must learn that omitting subject pronouns is not allowed. How is this possible
without reference to information that such constructions are ungrammatical? Within a
cue-based model a child scans the linguistic data for a cue. If the child finds this cue,
then the parameter is set positively. If the child does not find the cue, then the
experience. Even if this figure is correct for the acquisition of V2 (see Westergaard to appear), it seems unlikely that the necessary level of robustness will be the same for every parameter. This dissertation will add nothing further to this issue. 11 The information the child needs to set the V2 parameter cannot come directly from the input data. In order to set this parameter, the structure needs to be at least partially parsed. For example, in order to determine whether there are examples of the structure XVS in a language the child must have some notion of categories and constituency. She must be able to determine what is a verb and what is a noun. More importantly she must have some way of determining that the subject is not a relevant initial constituent. Dresher & Kaye acknowledge this, and propose that parameter setting proceeds in an order determined by UG. This creates a learning path (see also Lightfoot 1989 and Baker’s 2001 ‘parameter hierarchy’). Initially cues are based entirely in the input, but as the child progresses along the learning path cues become increasingly abstract and grammar-internal. 12 A further question here is whether there can be a one-to-one correspondence between cues and parameters. From an acquisitional point of view this is clearly desirable. However, it is not entirely clear that this is the case. We will return to this issue in the next section.
CHAPTER 3 – SYNTACTIC CHANGE
101
parameter receives the default setting.13 The acquisition of the English setting for the
null subject parameter can be explained if the English setting is the default. The child
will scan the linguistic data for evidence of omitted subject pronouns. If the child
finds evidence of null subjects, then the parameter will be set positively, giving the
Italian setting. However, if the child finds no evidence (or insufficient evidence) for
null subjects then the parameter will have its default setting, i.e. the English setting.14
4.2 A cue-based model of syntactic change
If, following Lightfoot, we are going to invoke a cue-based model to account for
syntactic change, then we must establish what can constitute a possible cue. In this
section we will focus on the type of parameter most relevant to the topic of this
dissertation, namely head-movement. It was argued in section 3 that during language
acquisition children set their movement parameters by establishing whether a given
head is ±Affix or ±EPP. Under the cue-based approach each parameter must have a
default and a positive setting. If parameter setting is seen as assigning functional
features to functional heads, then it seems reasonable to suggest that the ‘default
parameter setting’ is for the functional head to contain no (non-default) features.15
This being the case, for a child to assign an EPP- or an Affix-feature to a functional
head, there must be positive evidence. EPP- and Affix-features must be robustly cued.
If EPP- and Affix-features are associated with cues, we must establish what the
relevant cues might be. In his discussion of the V2 parameter in the history of
English, Lightfoot (1999, 2006) argues that the relevant cue is a syntactic one. In
order to acquire V2 (in our terms, for C to be assigned +EPP and +Affix-features)
children must hear sufficient structures of the type XVS, where a single constituent
that is not the subject precedes the verb. This is clearly a syntactic cue, specifying
particular structure. If we consider an alternative parameter, namely the V-to-T
parameter, a similar structural parameter can be proposed for this. It was argued in
section 3 above that when the verb raises to T it appears to the left of any material
13 The concept of default parameter settings is somewhat controversial, as in many cases it is difficult to determine what the default is. For movement parameters in the framework developed here, however, the notion of default is relatively straightforward. The default setting involves no movement features being assigned to the functional head. For this reason, we will maintain the concept of default in what is to follow. 14 Although see Hyams (1986) who proposes that the Italian setting is the default. 15 It seems likely that each functional head will have a set of core features that are always present on that head cross-linguistically.
CHAPTER 3 – SYNTACTIC CHANGE
102
marking the edge of vP, such as vP adverbs and negation (in languages where
negation is marked in this way), or in verb-initial languages, the subject. The cue for
an Affix-feature on T then could be verb-adverb, verb-negation or verb-subject
orders. However, this syntactic evidence is not the only possibility for the acquisition
of V-to-T movement. It is possible that verbal morphology could also play a role.16
In both synchronic and diachronic work within the generative tradition a link is
often drawn between morphology and movement. The majority of this work focuses
on the correlation between rich verbal morphology and movement to T (Roberts 1985,
1993; Vikner 1997; Rohrbacher 1999). It tends to be the case that languages that have
rich verbal morphology also have V-to-T movement. So, as shown in example (10)
below, Italian has rich verbal morphology and V-to-T movement, whereas English, as
shown in (11), has impoverished verbal morphology and no V-to-T movement.
10. (a) leggo sempre il giornale
read.1SG always the newspaper
(b) leggono sempre il giornale
read.3PL always the newspaper
11. (a) I always read the newspaper
(b) They always read the newspaper
This correlation between morphology and verb-movement could be taken as evidence
that inflectional morphology is a cue for the acquisition of V-to-T movement. If the
verb is consistently found with inflections that are associated with a particular
functional head, this can be taken as evidence that the verb has moved to this
functional position. Children acquiring Italian will encounter verbs with rich
inflectional morphology, and so will set their V-to-T parameter positively. English
children, on the other hand, will not encounter such morphology and so will not set
the V-to-T parameter positively.
16 If this view is correct and V-to-T movement can be cued by verb-adverb, verb-negation or verb-subject orders or by verbal morphology then there cannot be a one-to-one correlation between cues and parameters. As noted in footnote 11 this is undesirable from an acquisitional perspective. One way around this would be to argue that the actual cue provided by UG for V-to-T movement is simply evidence that the verb is in T. Viewed in this way, verb-adverb, verb-negation and verb-subject constructions and verbal morphology simply provide evidence for the cue, they provide evidence that the verb is in T and so enable the child to set the V-to-T parameter positively.
CHAPTER 3 – SYNTACTIC CHANGE
103
However, the notion of morphology as a cue is not straightforward, as the
correlation only seems to hold one way. There are many languages that seem to show
V-to-T movement but do not show rich verbal morphology. The example in (12)
below is from the Celtic language Manx. In (12a) and (12b) the verb has the same
form although in (12a) the subject is 1sg and in (12b) the subject is 3pl.
12. (a) shen-y-fa haink mish bashtey lesh ushtey
therefore came I baptizing with water
‘Therefore I came baptizing with water’ (NE ch1v31)
(b) As haink ad gys Ean
and came they to John
‘And they came to John’ (NE ch3v26)
In languages such as Manx, then, the morphological cue for V-to-T movement clearly
plays no role. V-to-T movement must be acquired purely from syntactic evidence,
such as the fact that the verb precedes VP-adverbs, or in verb-intial languages such as
Manx perhaps, that the verb precedes the subject. From this it seems that a
morphological cue is by no means necessary for the acquisition of V-to-T movement.
The status of verbal morphology as a cue for acquisition would perhaps be on
firmer ground if evidence could be found of a case where morphology is the only cue
causing the acquisition of V-to-T movement. However, all languages with rich
inflection that could utilise a morphological cue also show the relevant syntactic
configurations such that V-to-T movement is also syntactically cued. So, for example,
in languages such as Italian that show rich verbal inflection, the verb also appears to
the left of VP-adverbs. So, it seems that in the case of V-to-T movement at least there
is no clear synchronic evidence to support the postulation of an independent
morphological cue. At best, morphological evidence can only reinforce the syntactic
evidence, making the evidence for V-to-T movement more robust. Let us now
consider the relationship between morphological and syntactic cues from a diachronic
perspective.17
17There is a third possible cue that may play a role in the setting of syntactic parameters. It is possible that the acquisition of an Affix- or EPP-feature on a given head could be cued by the feature specification of a related head. This is a kind of implicational cue, so if C is +Affix, then we might expect T and v to also be +Affix. It is often assumed in work on the history of English (Roberts 1993; Lightfoot 1999) that the presence of V-to-C movement requires V-to-T movement, due to the HMC.
CHAPTER 3 – SYNTACTIC CHANGE
104
It was argued in the previous section that children set their parameters by scanning
the linguistic data for specific cues provided by UG. If the child finds the cue the
parameter is set positively. If the cue is not found in the data then the parameter
receives its default setting. It seems that there are two possible ways in which a
parameter can change: either a cue is lost, and the parameter returns to its default
setting, or a new cue develops and the parameter changes from the default to the
positive setting. In both cases, a change in parameter settings arises as a result of a
change in the trigger experience that either obscures or creates a cue. Let us examine
how changes in the trigger experience obscured the cues and led to the loss of V-to-T
movement in English, and what this can tell us about the interaction of morphological
and syntactic cues.
It was argued above that V-to-T movement could possibly be cued by the presence
of rich tense or agreement morphology on the verb. The most likely way for
morphological cues of this type to become obscured is through phonological change.
Phonological change may eradicate the phonological differences between different
endings, causing them to fall together and the morphological distinctions to be lost.
Such a change can be seen to have affected verbs in the history of English. Due to
phonological changes such as the reduction of final vowels to schwa and the loss of
final nasals, verbal endings fell together (see Roberts 1993 for more detail). It is often
argued that this loss of verbal agreement morphology led to the loss of V-to-T
movement (Roberts 1985, 1993). When the verbal morphology became impoverished,
the morphological cue for V-to-T movement became obscured, leading to a change in
the parameter setting.
At first sight, it seems that we have a strong diachronic argument for the existence
of a morphological cue. However, on closer inspection it seems that the loss of the
morphological cue cannot have directly caused the loss of V-to-T movement.
Although the loss of the morphology was perhaps a necessary condition it was not
sufficient. V-to-T movement survived in English for at least 75 years after the loss of
verbal morphology (Roberts 1999: 292). After the morphological cue was lost, the
However, as discussed in chapter 1 it is not clear what role this plays in minimalism. Furthermore, it is not entirely clear that V-to-C movement always implies the presence of V-to-T movement. It has been shown that in the mainland Scandinavian languages although the verb moves to C in V2 constructions it does not move via T (Holmberg & Platzack 1995). Implicational cues will play no further role in this dissertation, but they are perhaps a topic worthy of further research.
CHAPTER 3 – SYNTACTIC CHANGE
105
syntactic cue still enabled V-to-T movement to be acquired. It was not until the
syntactic cues were also obscured that V-to-T was finally lost.
Roberts (1993) argues that the change in the trigger experience that caused the loss
of the syntactic cue for V-to-T movement was the rise of do-insertion. In order for V-
to-T movement to be cued syntactically, the verb must appear to the left of elements
that mark the left edge of the VP, i.e. adverbs and negation. However, an increase in
the frequency of do-insertion meant that the verb raised to T less frequently.18 As a
result the cue was obscured, and the parameter reverted to its default setting. Before
the loss of V-to-T movement in English it was possible to use the do-insertion
construction in place of verb-movement. Do-insertion was a stylistic option that could
be used in a much wider range of contexts than it can today, simply as an alternative
to verb-raising. The examples in (13) below are from Shakespeare.
13. (a) Where eyes did once inhabit
(Richard III, Barber 1976: 163, Biberauer & Roberts to appear: 21)
(b) Rough windes do shake the darling buds of Maie
(Sonnet 18, Biberauer & Roberts to appear: 22)
The increase in do-insertion that led to the loss of V-to-T movement in English
provides an example of the most common way in which a syntactic cue can be
obscured. An optional construction, which carries some kind of stylistic effect,
increases in frequency to such an extent that it has an effect on the underlying
parameter settings. Often as a result of this change in frequency the optional, stylistic
operation becomes generalised and obligatory. For example Lightfoot (1999) argues
that the loss of V2 in English resulted from an increase in subject-initial clauses at the
expense of XVS clauses. As a result of this increase in frequency, V2 was no longer
robustly cued, and so the V2 parameter returns to its default, and subject-initial SVO
clause structure becomes the normal grammatical clause structure. Of course, to truly
explain what caused these changes we need to explain what caused the stylistic shifts
in frequency to occur. Why did do-support increase? Why did subject-initial clauses
become preferred? The answers to these questions are difficult to pin down. Stylistic
18 See Kroch (1989) on the progress of this change.
CHAPTER 3 – SYNTACTIC CHANGE
106
changes could be motivated by sociolinguistic factors, or perhaps by language
contact.19
So it seems that there are two main ways in which changes in the trigger
experience could obscure a cue. Phonological change can lead to the loss of
morphological cues, and changes in the frequency of certain stylistic variants can lead
to the loss of syntactic cues. It seems plausible that cues may develop in a similar
way. A morphological cue may develop as a result of morphological change, for
example, as proposed for Germanic by Fuß (2005) a clitic may be reanalysed as an
affix (see also Alexiadou & Fanselow 2002 on the development of subject-agreement
morphology). The development of a syntactic cue may result from a change in
frequency of a stylistic variant, leading to the generalisation of a previously optional,
stylistically marked construction. It will be argued in chapter 4 that both of these
changes occurred in the history of Irish, and led to a positive setting for the V-to-C
movement parameter.
The discussion of the development of V-to-C movement in chapter 4 and the loss
of V-to-C movement in chapter 5 will also enable us to consider the interaction
between morphological and syntactic cues from a different perspective. We have seen
in this section that in the case of V-to-T movement there is no evidence for an
independent morphological cue. From both a synchronic and a diachronic perspective
there seems to be no evidence of morphological cues acting independently of the
syntactic cue. The remaining chapters of this dissertation will attempt to establish
whether the development and loss of V-to-C movement provides any evidence for
independent morphological cues. This will lead to a clearer understanding of the link
between morphological and syntactic change.
6 CONCLUSION
The aim of this chapter was to provide some theoretical background for the account of
syntactic change in the history of Irish that is to follow. We have examined how
19 If we accept that implicational cues exist as discussed in footnote 16, then there is a further way that a cue could become obscured. If the Affix-feature on T is cued by the presence of an Affix-feature on C then this cue could be lost as a result of a parametric change. For example, in the history of English, while English was a V2 language this also cued V-to-T movement. However, with the loss of V2, this cue was lost. However, the loss of V2 did not result in the immediate loss of V-to-T movement (van Kemenade 1987; Biberauer & Roberts to appear). It seems that like the loss of morphology this can only have been a contributing factor, and so it is unclear that this should be considered a cue in its own right.
CHAPTER 3 – SYNTACTIC CHANGE
107
syntactic change can be modelled within a generative framework and have developed
a theory of acquisition and language change based on the ideas of the minimalist
program.
Within the minimalist program all variation between languages is encoded in the
lexicon. Specifically, syntactic variation is encoded in the features of functional
categories. This chapter focussed on the differences in basic word order between
languages and concluded that this can be encoded in terms of the presence or absence
of EPP- and Affix-features on each functional head. These features are purely
syntactic. They are uninterpretable at the interfaces and so must be eliminated in the
syntax.
When children acquire language they must determine for each functional head
whether it is ±EPP and ±Affix. To do this children utilise the linguistic data or trigger
experience that surrounds them. In this chapter we have argued for a cue-based
approach to language acquisition. For each parameter, i.e. for each Affix- and EPP-
feature associated with each functional head there is a specific cue specified by UG. If
the children locate the required cue in the trigger experience then they postulate an
EPP or Affix-feature for that head. If the cue is not found then the parameter receives
its default setting, i.e. neither an EPP- nor an Affix-feature is postulated.
A change in parameter settings can occur in two possible ways, both of which are
dependent on the trigger experience. Changes in the trigger experience can either
cause an existing cue to become obscured or ambiguous or they can cause a new cue
to develop. The former option will result in the parameter being assigned its default
setting, i.e. no Affix- or EPP-feature will be assigned. The latter option will result in a
new positive parameter setting, i.e. a new Affix- or EPP-feature will be assigned.
Examples of each type will be provided in the following chapters.
CHAPTER 4
THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
1. INTRODUCTION
The aim of this chapter is to provide an account of how the double system of verbal
inflection developed in Old Irish from Proto-Indo-European (PIE). As noted in
chapter 1, this dissertation is by no means the first work to tackle this issue. The
origins of the Old Irish double system have been hotly debated since the beginnings
of Celtic Philology in the nineteenth century, and as yet no firm conclusion has been
reached. However, this is not to say that this previous work has been fruitless. Many
interesting and important insights have been gained through the philological study of
the Old Irish verbal system. This chapter aims to combine these philological insights
with minimalist ideas about syntactic change to develop a new account of how the
double system of verbal inflection developed in Old Irish.
This chapter is structured as follows: section 2 reviews the two main philological
accounts of the development of the Old Irish double system of verbal inflection.
Section 3 begins the syntactic analysis, providing some remarks on the syntax of PIE
viewed within a minimalist framework. Section 4 looks at the development of V-to-C
movement in Old Irish, and how this was linked to the development of new verbal
morphology. Sections 5 and 6 consider how preverbs and conjunct particles
developed between PIE and Old Irish. Section 7 concludes the chapter.
2. PHILOLOGICAL ACCOUNTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
2.1 Introduction
As noted in the introduction, the existing philological work on the origins of the
double system of verbal inflection in Old Irish has provided many useful insights,
which will play an important role in the account presented in the remainder of this
dissertation. This section, then, aims to provide an introduction to the two main
theories that have been proposed to account for the origin of the double system,
namely Cowgill’s (1975, 1985) particle theory and McCone’s (1979b, 1982, 1985)
suffix-/infix-deletion theory. Before we go on to evaluate these two accounts,
however, let us first remind ourselves of what it is that any theory of the origins of the
double system must explain. There are two crucial aspects of the double system that
must be explained: its phonological shape and its distribution. The distributional facts,
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
109
although typologically odd, are descriptively straightforward. Absolute endings
appear only on simple verbs in absolute initial position, as shown in (1a). When the
verb is compound or in non-initial position it has conjunct endings, as in (1b–d).
1. (a) berid cách brith for arele
bear.PRES.3SG.ABS each judgment on other
‘Each bears judgment on the other’ (Wb 29b9)
(b) do-beir inso arnab uilib cumactib dichoissin
give.PRES.3SG.DT this for.the all powers exist(?)
‘He gives this for all the powers that exist…’ (Wb 21a13)
(c) cenid leci in metur…
although.NEG allow.PRES.3SG.CONJ the metre…
‘Although the metre does not allow…’ (Ml 30a10)
(d) ní tabair desimrechta híc
neg give.PRES.3SG.PT examples here
‘He does not give examples here…’ (Sg 214a5)
Furthermore, compound verbs show different stems dependent on their position in the
clause. In absolute initial position a compound verb is deuterotonic, (1b), and in non-
initial position it is prototonic, (1d).
Let us turn now to the phonological differences between the absolute and conjunct
inflection of simple verbs. These can be seen from the paradigms given in table 1
below of the verbs léicid ‘lets’, marbaid ‘kills’ and berid ‘carries’.
Table 1: Absolute and conjunct inflection
Absolute Conjunct Absolute Conjunct Absolute Conjunct
1sg léiciu -léiciu 1sg marbu -marbu 1sg biru -biur
2sg léici -léici 2sg marbai -marbai 2sg biri -bir
3sg léicid -léici 3sg marbaid -marba 3sg berid -beir
1pl léicmi -léicem 1pl marbmai -marbam 1pl bermai -beram
2pl léicthe -léicid 2pl marbthae -marbaid 2pl beirthe -berid
3pl léicit -léicet 3pl marbait -marbat 3pl berait -berat
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
110
As can be observed from the above paradigms, absolute verb forms tend to be longer
than conjunct forms. In the singular the absolute contains an extra syllable. In the first
and second plural the absolute has the same number of syllables as the conjunct, but
the absolute has retained a final syllable which was lost in the conjunct, instead losing
an internal syllable through syncope (e.g. 1pl absolute *beromos>ber∅mai vs. 1pl
conjunct *beromos>beram∅). Since Cowgill (1975) it has been widely accepted that
verbs in Celtic underwent a process of early *i-apocope whereby final *-i was lost
and so the IE primary and secondary endings fell together.1 2
2. *bhereti >*bheret > -beir ‘carries’ (conjunct)
As shown in (2), it seems to be the Old Irish conjunct form that developed from this
single inherited IE form. To obtain the correct absolute form, it seems that the end of
the word must have been protected from the process of *i-apocope by some kind of
phonologically overt entity. This extra phonological material would have prevented
the *i from being word-final and so would have prevented it from being apocopated.
This is shown in (3) below.
3. *bhereti+X > berid ‘carries’ (absolute)
Turning now to compound verbs, the differences between the deuterotonic and
prototonic forms are a lot more pronounced than between the absolute and conjunct.
This can be seen in the paradigms given in table 2 below for the compound verbs do-
beir ‘gives’, ad-cí ‘sees’ and do-gní ‘does’.
1 The exact phonological details of this sound change are unclear. McCone (1978) argues that *i-apocope took place across the board. However, Schrijver (1994: 159–165) argues that the only convincing evidence for *i-apocope comes from 3sg and 3pl verbal endings (-ti and -nti), the short dative endings of t- and k- stems and the prepositions fri<*writ<*writ-i ‘to’ and la<*let<*let-i ‘with’. In all these cases the final *i was preceded by a voiceless stop, suggesting that the change was phonologically conditioned. More research is necessary to determine which of these options is correct. 2 See Cowgill (1975: 41–6) for arguments against the earlier view that absolute and conjunct inflection developed from PIE primary and secondary endings.
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
111
Table 2: Deuterotonic and prototonic forms
Deuterotonic Prototonic Deuterotonic Prototonic Deuterotonic Prototonic
1sg do-biur -tabur 1sg ad-cíu -aicciu 1sg do-gníu -dén(a)im
2sg do-bir -tabair 2sg ad-cí -aci 2sg do-gní -dén(a)i
3sg do-beir -tabair 3sg ad-cí -aicci 3sg do-gní -dén(a)i
1pl do-beram -taibrem 1pl ad-ciam -accam 1pl do-gníam -dénam
2pl do-berid -taibrid 2pl ad-ciid -accid 2pl do-gníith -dénat
3pl do-berat -taibret 3pl ad-ciat -accat 3pl do-gníat -dénatar
The most important difference between the two forms of the compound verb is the
difference in stress. The prototonic form is stressed on the first syllable in accordance
with regular Old Irish stress patterns. The deuterotonic is stressed on the second
syllable. As we saw in chapter 2, this difference in stress placement led to the two
forms being affected differently by the various sound changes that affected the
language as a whole, such as syncope and vowel affection.
The other major phonological difference between deuterotonic and prototonic
forms is that when the verb is prototonic the initial preverb can lenite or nasalize the
following segment. In the case of the deuterotonic these mutations seem to be
blocked. In example (4a) below the [f] of the verbal stem fera is present in the
deuterotonic but not in the prototonic, where it has been lenited from /f/ to ∅. In (4b)
the final [n] of the preverb con has caused the initial consonant of the verb certar to
nasalise in the prototonic, so it is pronounced [g] in the prototonic and [k] in the
deuterotonic.
4. (a) fo-fera -foírea ‘causes’
(b) con-certar -coic[g]erta ‘corrects’
(McCone 1997a: 4)
The particle theory and the suffix-/infix-deletion theories account for the phonological
peculiarities of the absolute/conjunct and deuterotonic/prototonic forms in the same
way. Both theories postulate enclitic particles that appear in second position. These
particles are suffixed to simple verbs in absolute initial position and so protect the
final *i from apocope, and infixed between the initial preverb and the remainder of
initial compound verbs, separating the initial preverb from the remainder of the verb
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
112
in deuterotonic compounds. The particle theory postulates an enclitic sentence particle
with the form *es or *ed. The suffix-/infix-deletion theory derives essentially the
same effect from enclitic object pronouns. Having outlined the basic similarities
between the two theories, let us now examine each in more detail and consider how
they differ.
2.2 The particle theory
The particle theory was first introduced by Thurneysen (1907) to account for non-
lenition in compound verbs. Since then, a variety of scholars have adopted and
adapted the theory, invoking particles of varied phonological shape and function (see,
among others, Dillon 1947, Boling 1972, Kortland 1979). The most influential
version of the particle theory, however, is that of Cowgill (1975). Cowgill argues that
the morphological shape of the absolute and conjunct forms can be best accounted for
by a second position particle with the form *es. For a full account of the phonological
advantages gained by adopting the particle theory the reader is referred to Cowgill
(1975, 1985). It will be sufficient for our purposes to provide one paradigm for
illustration. The first three columns in table 3 show the development of the conjunct
forms, resulting from the loss of the final syllable between Primitive and Old Irish.
The final two columns demonstrate how the presence of the particle *(e)s prevented
apocope, giving the Old Irish absolute forms.
Table 3: The develoment of conjunct and absolute forms
Proto Celtic
Primitive Irish Old Irish Primitive Irish +*es
Old Irish
*berū > *berū > -biur * berū-s > biru *beresi > *berī > -bir * berī-s > biri *bereti > *beret > -beir * bereti-s > berid *beromos > *beromas > -beram * beromo-es > berm(a)i *beretes > *beretes > -berid * beretēs > beirthe *beronti > *berodd > -berat * beroddi-s > ber(a)it
Although it is clear that the particle theory can account for the basic distinction
between absolute and conjunct forms, namely the presence or absence of the final
syllable, many phonological objections have been raised against it (see McCone
1979b, 1982, 1985, Sims-Williams 1984, Isaac 2000). For the most part these
objections have been answered by Cowgill (1985) and Schrijver (1997). This
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
113
dissertation is not concerned with details of phonology and so will not enter into this
debate. For further details the reader is referred to the sources listed above.
The biggest objection to the particle theory is of a non-phonological nature. A
major problem with the particle theory is that no firm conclusion has been reached as
to the exact form and meaning of the particle. Thurneysen (1907) proposed that the
particle must have the shape *es and have developed from a form of the copula. The
problems with this etymology led Boling (1972) to propose that the particle was
originally a neuter pronoun of the form *ed. Cowgill (1975) returns to Thurneysen’s
*es, arguing that *ed has too many phonological difficulties, but again he cannot offer
an etymology. The issue was reopened by Schrijver (1994: 180f). Based on evidence
from the development of the prepositions fri ‘against’ and la ‘with’, Schrijver argues
that following the apocope of short *-i, the newly word-final *-t fell together with
word-final *-s. This being the case, Schrijver proposes that Cowgill’s particle *es
developed from *eti, a sentence connective cognate with Latin et ‘and’, Gothic iþ
‘but’, Ancient Greek éti ‘further, moreover’ and Sanskrit áti ‘beyond, very’.3 Clearly
none of these are subordinators and this characteristic could easily have been shared
by their Celtic counterpart, thus explaining why *es appears in main rather than
subordinate clauses (Schrijver 1994: 184). The cognates do not, however, offer an
explanation as to why the particle *es appeared in second position. The cognates are
all initial-position particles, but to have the required phonological effect the particle
*es in Celtic must have appeared in second position. Schrijver suggests that *es
became a second-position clitic as a Celtic innovation on the model of the other
connective clitics attested for Old Irish, namely ch<*kwe and d<*dè.
In conclusion to this section it seems that the main phonological objection to the
particle theory can be overcome. In addition, if we accept Schrijver’s etymology we
have provided an answer to the remaining criticism by giving a plausible explanation
for the function of the particle. In spite of the criticisms levelled against it, it seems
that, in general, the particle theory can be upheld. There is one major conceptual
problem with the particle theory, however, that has not been dealt with here. For the
particle to have the desired effect on the verbal forms it must have been a second
position enclitic, subject to Wackernagel’s Law, and the verb must have been in initial
position. However, the particle theory offers no explanation as to how the verb came 3 Eska (2002a) argues that Schrijver’s etymology is also supported by the Transalpine Celtic forms eti, etic<*eti-kwe and coetic<*ko-eti-kwe.
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
114
to be in initial position. As we will see in section 3, verb-initial order in Old Irish
cannot have been inherited from PIE, so some explanation is needed as to how it
arose. Let us leave this issue for now and consider the main alternative, namely
McCone’s suffix-/infix-deletion theory.
2.3 Suffix-/Infix-deletion theory
Having argued emphatically against the particle theory, McCone (1979b, 1982, 1985)
proposes his own account of the origins of the double system, namely the suffix-
/infix-deletion theory. McCone accounts for the morphological peculiarities of the
deuterotonic and absolute verb forms by the presence of an infixed or suffixed object
pronoun. This pronoun would have had the same phonological effect as the particle
*es, namely preventing *i-apocope in simple verbs and blocking lenition in
compound verbs. These pronouns, along with their accompanying mutations, were
then analogically deleted to give the resulting Old Irish absolute/conjunct and
deuterotonic/prototonic alternations. Initially McCone’s theory seems to have an
advantage over the particle theory as it has the same phonological effects as the
particle theory but does not invoke a historically unattested particle. However, if one
accepts Schrijver’s etymology for the particle *es as a sentence connective, then this
is no longer the case.
One area in which McCone’s theory does seem to be preferable to the particle
theory is that, building on work by Watkins (1963), it offers an account of the
development of verb-intial word order. Watkins proposes that at some earlier stage
the non-marked word order in Irish was verb-final. As unmarked verb-intial word
order is not attested in any other IE language family, it can be concluded in line with
reconstruction methodology that unmarked verb-intial order was not a feature of PIE
(see section 3 below). Therefore, it seems that the development of verb-intial order
was a Celtic innovation. Furthermore, if we consider the Continental Celtic evidence,
although fragmentary, it seems to suggest that the unmarked order in these cases was
subject-initial. This can be seen in the examples below from Gaulish (5a) and
Celtiberian (5b). 4
4 Gaulish shows some examples of VSO, such as the Voltino inscription given below: To- med- eclai obalda natina PVB- INF.1SG set.up Obalda daughter ‘(and) Obalda (their) dear daughter, set me up’. VSO seems to be a marked order. See Koch (1985); Eska (1989) for details.
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
115
5. (a) MARTIALIS DANNOTALI IEVRV VCVETE SOSIN
Martialis.NOM Dannotalos.GEN dedicated Ucetis.DAT this
CELICNON
monument.ACC
‘Martialis (son) of Dannotalos dedicated this edifice to Ucuetis’
(Lejeune 1988: 150)
(b) uTa osCues PousTom-ue Coruinom-ue maCasi[a]m-ue ailam-ue
and SUBJECT OBJECT OBJECT OBJECT OBJECT
amPiTiseTi
VERB5
‘And let him rebuild the cow stable… etc.’ (Russell 1995:283)
From this it seems then, that verb-intial order was not a feature of Proto-Celtic, and so
must be an Insular Celtic innovation.6 However, if we consider evidence from
Archaic Irish texts, it is possible that even Irish itself was not always a verb-intial
language, and that the shift may have taken place in the pre-history of Irish.7
There are two types of non-verb-intial orders in Archaic Irish poetic texts. These
examples are traditionally grouped into two types: Bergin’s Construction and tmesis.
Bergin’s Law (1938) states that “when the verb does not stand at the head of its clause
[i.e. in clause-initial position – GEN], particularly when it follows its subject or
object, it takes the dependent form, that is, a simple verb has the conjunct ending and
a compound verb is prototonic.” (Bergin 1938: 197) An example of Bergin’s
Construction is given in (6) below, where the verb do-ingaib ‘keeps’ has prototonic
form.
5 This gloss is adapted from Russell (1995). At present it is unclear what the exact meaning of each constituent is. 6 This view relies on the assumption that the Celtic languages can be divided in this fashion into Insular and Continental Celtic. It is not compatible with the Gallo-Brittonic hypothesis which assumes that the Brittonic languages are more closely related to Gaulish than to Goidelic. See chapter 1, footnote 4. 7 Of course, Welsh is also a verb-intial language. Although Middle Welsh seems to be V2 (Willis 1998), there is evidence that before this Old Welsh was verb-intial. This could suggest that the development of verb-intial order occurred before Irish and Welsh diverged, at a time of Insular Celtic unity. However, it is also possible that verb-intial order developed independently in both Welsh and Irish if we entertain the possibility that the necessary conditions for this development were in place in both languages at the point when they diverged.
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
116
6. Mortlithi márlóchet di doínib dingbatar (<do-ingaib)
plagues great-lightnings from people.DAT keep.PRES.PASS.PL.PT
‘Plagues and great lightnings are kept from the people’ (AM §12)
Tmesis is found with compound verbs. The preverb is at the beginning of a sentence,
usually infixing a pronoun, and the verb appears at the end of the clause. This can be
seen in the example in (7) below, where the two parts of the compound verb
ath-cuirethar ‘sends’ appear at opposite ends of the clause.
7. Ath (mór)cathu fri crícha comnámat -cuirethar
PVB (great)battalions to borders neighbour.GEN.PL send.PRES.3PL.DT
‘He dispatches (great) battalions to the borders of hostile neighbours’
(AM §15)
From this evidence Watkins concludes that in early Irish the unmarked word order
was verb-final, and that when the verb was in final position it had conjunct or
prototonic form.8
In addition to the unmarked verb-final orders, Watkins argues that there were
further possible unmarked orders, involving enclitic pronouns. As we saw in chapter
2, Old Irish has enclitic pronouns that are subject not only to Wackernagel’s Law
(1892) but also to Vendryes’ Restriction (1908). This means that not only must they
appear in second position in the clause, but they must also be hosted by a verbal
element, namely a simple verb, a preverb or a conjunct particle. Watkins argues that
this was also true in the prehistoric stages of Irish, so that if a clause contained an
enclitic pronoun, the verb or preverb was forced to move to clause-initial position in
order to host it. In this situation the fronted verb played no pragmatic or discourse
function, and so the construction was unmarked. The possible unmarked orders for
Irish at this stage (which are all attested in Archaic Irish texts) can be seen below:
(V=verb, P=preverb, C=conjunct particle, E=enclitic, #=clause boundary).
8 We will discuss the extent to which Bergin’s Law and tmesis constructions support the view that early Irish was a verb-final language in chapter 5. At present, the crucial point is that early Irish did not have unmarked verb-intial order.
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
117
8. (a) # … V#
(b) # … PV#
(c) #VE … #
(d) #PE … V#
(e) #CE … V#
Watkins then proposes that Irish underwent a process of univerbation, whereby the
separate parts of the verbal complex came together to form a single unit (we will
return to univerbation in detail in chapter 5). Such a process can be observed in many
other early IE languages; however, in these languages, the univerbated verb appears
in clause-final, not clause-initial position as it does in Irish. Watkins argues that
univerbation in Irish took place towards the beginning of the clause due to
Wackernagel’s Law and Vendryes’ Restriction; the enclitic had to remain in second
position and it had to be hosted by a verbal element. This led to the following
unmarked orders:
9. (a) # … V #
(b) #VE … #
(c) # … PV #
(d) #PEV …#
(e) #CEV … #9
It is easy to see that from this position the step to unmarked VSO order is perfectly
natural. If there are a sufficient number of enclitic pronouns in the language, there
will be more occurrences of unmarked verb-intial word order than unmarked verb-
final word order, and so the verb-final orders will be seen as exceptions, and
eventually verb-intial word order will be generalised.10
9 Both Watkins and McCone refer to this type as univerbation. This is problematic under the conventional view of univerbation as the conjunct particle and simple verb do not form a single semantic unit in the same way as the two parts of a compound verb. 10 A question arises here as to why there should have been so many object pronouns present in the language. In order to have the desired effect on both the phonological form of the verb and the shift in word order these pronouns must have been significantly more frequent than they are in the Old Irish period. Sims-Williams (1984) addresses this issue, arguing that in its prehistory Irish made use of anticipatory object pronouns, similar to those found in French examples such as je les aime les danseuses ‘I like (them) the dancers’.
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
118
Although Watkins’ univerbation account explains how verb-intial word order came
to be generalised it does not offer a satisfactory explanation of how the different
forms arose. The simple generalisation of verb-intial order as described above would
have resulted in prototonic and conjunct forms appearing in initial position when
there was no enclitic pronoun. This is clearly not what is found in Old Irish. McCone
(1979b) proposes a solution to this problem. McCone argues that there were two
possible ways in which this shift to verb-intial order could take place. Either the
prototonic form could shift to initial position, as discussed above, or a new initial
deuterotonic form could be created by infix deletion on the model of (9e). Learners
would have seen univerbated verbs of the form conjunct particle-enclitic-(preverb)-
verb alongside verbs of the form conjunct particle-(preverb)-verb, where there was no
change in stress pattern and the only difference between them was the presence or
absence of an enclitic pronoun. This would have then formed the model for creating
new initial compound verbs without the infix on the basis of initial preverb-enclitic-
verb forms. The enclitic and its associated mutation could simply be deleted giving
the deuterotonic form. This is shown in the proportion below:
10. #CE’(P)V…# : #C’(P)V…# = #PE’V…# : X
X = #P’V…#
McCone argues that the deletion process was “clearly preferable” as a means of
avoiding the unnecessary complication of a shift in the stress pattern depending on
whether an infix was present or not. Simple verbs then followed suit on analogy with
compound verbs.
As will be clear from the preceding paragraph, McCone’s suffix-/infix-deletion
theory is complex, and as pointed out by Cowill (1985) and Kortlandt (1994), it
requires an improbably large amount of analogy. This is a significant problem for
McCone’s theory. From an acquisitional point of view, it is expecting a lot of the
children acquiring the double system to carry out such complex analogical reasoning.
Moreover, Kortlandt (1994: 61) argues that any theory of the absolute and conjunct
based on analogy is highly implausible. He argues that if there were interaction
between the two sets of forms the most likely result would have been the replacement
of one form by the other, as happened later in Irish.
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
119
A further difficulty with McCone’s theory arises from the assumption that the
“univerbation” of conjunct particle and verb preceded the univerbation of preverb and
verb (9e). Firstly, as noted in footnote 9, the coming together of conjunct particle and
verb cannot strictly be seen as univerbation. Although in Old Irish the conjunct
particle is unstressed and so forms a single phonological word with the verb, it is not
part of the verb semantically or syntactically. The preverb and verb, on the other
hand, form a semantic unit and it seems likely that this semantic link could have
motivated the univerbation, causing them to become a single syntactic/phonological
unit. This is not the case for the conjunct particle and the verb. If the univerbation of
conjunct particle and verb occurred first then some further explanation is necessary.
We will return to this issue in chapter 5.
The Watkins/McCone model faces an additional problem from a theoretical point
of view. Although at first sight it appears to have an advantage over the particle
theory as it can account not only for the phonological shape of the different forms, but
also their presence in clause-initial position, when considered from within the
framework of generative syntax, the suffix-/infix-deletion theory seems to lose its
appeal.
Watkins argues that the presence of the pronominal clitics in second position
forces the verb to move to initial position, in order to comply with Wackernagel’s
Law and Vendryes’ Restriction. This proposal corresponds neither to cross-linguistic
observations regarding the behaviour of clitics nor to minimalist ideas about
movement. Clitics have received a great deal of attention in the generative literature,
with many different theories being proposed. The major difference between these
theories is whether clitic placement is determined by syntax (Kayne 1975, 1989,
1994, Uriagereka 1995), phonology (Anderson 1992, 1993, 1996) or a mixture of the
two (Halpern 1995, Bošković 2000). Although there are many different accounts, all
the proposed theories seem to agree in one respect – clitics move to attach to a
suitable prosodic host, they do not attract specific elements to provide themselves
with a host.11 In chapter 1, section 2.2 it was argued that in minimalist syntax
movement can only be driven by abstract features associated with functional heads,
namely EPP- and Affix-features. Within this theoretical framework, clitics can
undergo movement but they cannot cause movement of other elements. So, it seems 11 See also the discussion of Zwicky & Pullum’s (1983) criteria for distinguishing clitcs from affixes in section 4 below.
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
120
that the suffix-/infix-deletion model is incompatible with minimalist ideas about
syntax; therefore, for the purposes of this dissertation it cannot be maintained.12
2.4 Summary
In this section we have examined the two main existing accounts of the origins of the
Old Irish double system of verbal inflection. As the primary focus of this dissertation
is syntactic, the phonological debate surrounding the origins of the double system has
been put to one side and the two competing theories have been compared on
conceptual and comparative syntactic grounds. Although from a syntactic point of
view, McCone’s theory appears to be at an advantage, as it offers an account for the
distribution of the different verbal forms and the shift to unmarked verb-intial order,
this theory is not consistent with current syntactic assumptions. However, this is not
the primary argument against McCone’s theory. The excessive complexity and
implausible amounts of analogy that McCone invokes make it equally unattractive
from a pretheoretical, conceptual point of view. The particle theory has the advantage
here in that it can derive the attested forms without such analogy. After the particle
has had the necessary effect on the verbal forms it is simply lost through the process
of apocope that affected the language as a whole in the fifth century.
It was argued above that if we accept Schrijver’s etymology for the particle *es the
only remaining conceptual objection against the particle theory is that it cannot
explain the shift to unmarked verb-intial word order. The remainder of this chapter
aims to show that this objection can be overcome if the particle theory is combined
with minimalist ideas about syntactic change.
3. ASPECTS OF THE SYNTAX OF PROTO-INDO-EUROPEAN
3.1 Introduction
The aim of this chapter as a whole is to provide an account within the minimalist
framework of how the Old Irish double system of verbal inflection developed from
PIE. This section aims to provide the starting point for this account, namely an outline
of the syntax of PIE. Syntactic reconstruction is not without its problems, and we can,
12 Under this view, Vendryes’ Restriction did not cause the shift to verb-intial word order but was a consequence of it. Enclitics appear with elements of the verbal complex because the verb appears in initial position. The situation can be compared to object clitics in Romance. These appear with the verb, but this is due to independent movement of the verb and the clitic to the same functional position, namely T (Kayne 1989, 1991).
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
121
of course, never expect to gain a full picture of the syntax of PIE. However, following
Mark Hale (1996b), we shall take the view that it should be possible to reconstruct
certain features of PIE syntax. The reconstruction proposed in this section follows that
developed by Hale (1987, 1995), updating it into minimalist terms. The
reconstructions presented in this section are primarily based on points of similarity
between the oldest and most widely studied IE languages, i.e. Hittite, Sanskrit,
Ancient Greek and Latin, without reference to the directionality of syntactic change,
or one type of change being more natural than another. We will examine three
features of the syntax of PIE. Section 3.2 examines the structure of the left periphery
of the clause. Section 3.3 looks at word order patterns. Section 3.4 considers preverbs
and how they should be analysed within generative syntax. Section 3.5 draws together
the main conclusions from this chapter and provides a summary of the main features
being proposed for the syntax of PIE.
3.2 The structure of the left periphery
Before we can begin to consider the structure of the left periphery in PIE we must
first establish what is meant by this term. The left periphery is the left-most edge of
the clause. In generative terms this essentially means the highest functional
projection, the CP, which encodes discourse-related information. There seems to be
some degree of cross-linguistic variation as to the structure of the CP. In languages
such as English the CP seems to consist simply of a single functional position.13 The
C position may contain a complementizer, marking whether the clause is finite (11a)
or non-finite (11b). The C position may also mark illocutionary force through either
movement in a wh-question (12a) or merge of an appropriate complementizer (12b).
11. (a) John saw [CP Cthat [TP Mary [VP left]]]
(b) John asked [CP for [TP Mary [VP to leave]]]
12. (a) [CPWho Cdid [TPJohn [VP see yesterday?]]]
(b) I asked [CP Cif [TPJohn [VP saw me]]]
Crucially, in languages such as English all of these functions target the same syntactic
domain, a single CP projection. In languages such as Italian, however, this is not the
13 This is disputed. See, for example, Chomsky (1977), Haegeman (2000).
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
122
case. Elements that have different functions co-occur and appear in different positions
at the left edge of the clause. This led Rizzi (1997) to suggest that CP can be a cover
term for a number of independent, specialised functional projections. For example, in
Italian, it is possible to topicalise or focus a constituent by moving it to the left
periphery, as can be seen in (13).
13. Credo che a Gianni, QUESTO, domani, gli dovremmo dire
Topic Focus Topic TP
I believe that to Gianni, THIS, tomorrow we should say
(Rizzi 1997: 295)
Crucially, as shown in the example in (13) the topicalised and focussed elements can
co-occur, demonstrating that they must occupy different syntactic positions, a(t least
one) topic phrase (TopP) and a focus phrase (FocP). Italian also provides evidence for
two more functional projections. It was argued above that, in English, markers of
finiteness and force target the same generalised C position; in Italian this is not the
case. In the examples in (14) below it can be seen that the complementizers che and di
occupy different syntactic positions: che appears before the topic (14a) and di appears
after it (14b).
14. (a) Credo che, il tuo libro, loro lo apprezzerebbero molto
Force Topic IP
I believe that your book they it would appreciate a lot
(Rizzi 1997: 288)
(b) Credo, il tuo libro, di apprezzarlo molto
Topic Fin IP
I believe, your book, to appreciate-it a lot
(Rizzi 1997: 288)
Rizzi argues that che marks illocutionary force, whereas di marks finiteness, and so
two extra projections can be added to the CP, a force phrase (ForceP) and a finiteness
phrase (FinP). From this Rizzi proposes that the articulated CP with the structure
given below:
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
123
15. ForceP
Force TopP
Top FocP
Foc TopP
Top FinP
Fin TP
Both English-type and Italian-type languages have the same expressive power. In
minimalist terms, the same features are associated with the CP in both languages;
however, whereas in English these features are all contained within one generic C
position, in Italian they are spread among a number of individual functional
projections.
Let us turn now to the earliest IE languages. Kiparsky (1995a) argues that, as the
earliest IE languages have no complementizers, we cannot reconstruct
complementizers for PIE and so PIE cannot have had a CP. The first part of
Kiparsky’s argument seems to be valid. The earliest IE languages did not have
generic complementizers, equivalent to English that.14 These complementizers
developed later in each language, often from a 3sg neuter relative pronoun, for
example, Latin quod, Sanskrit yád, Hittite kuit and Ancient Greek hóti. However, it
cannot be concluded from this that PIE did not have a CP. As discussed above, the CP
is not just the phrase projected by a complementizer; it plays a number of different
roles. Only if none of the CP functions can be reconstructed for PIE can we conclude
that PIE had no CP.15 As will be shown in the remainder of this section, this does not
seem to be the case.
14 Although it seems to be the case that there are no that-type complementizers in the earliest IE dialects, there are various clause-typing particles that would be good candidates for appearing in the C head position (see, for example, Arad & Roussou 1997 on particles in Ancient Greek). Further research on the syntactic behaviour of these particles is necessary before a firm conclusion can be reached. 15 The fact that generic complementizers cannot be reconstructed for PIE could be taken as evidence to suggest that PIE had an articulated rather than a generic CP. However, the relationship between that-
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
124
Let us begin by considering the evidence from Ancient Greek. Dik (1995) argues
that Ancient Greek is a discourse configurational language where word order is
determined by pragmatics rather than syntax. In the examples in (16) below, the word
order varies in terms of grammatical relations; however, the ordering Topic-Focus-
Verb remains the same.
16. (a) Topic Focus Verb.
strouthòn dè oudeìs élaben
ostrich.ACC PTC nobody.NOM caught
‘An ostrich, NOBODY caught’
(Xenophon’s. Anabasis 1.5.3; Matić 2003: 574)
(b) Topic Focus Verb.
ho dè Kléandros oudéna epeprákei
the PTC Cleander.NOM nobody.ACC had sold
‘As for Cleander, he had not sold one of them’
(Xenophon’s. Anabasis 7.2.6; Matić 2003:575)
Matić (2003) argues that Dik’s Top-Foc-V structure, although essentially correct,
does not provide enough syntactic or pragmatic positions to account for the possible
word-order variations found in Ancient Greek. In the example given in (17) below
Kûros ‘Cyrus’ is the topic, and tônde heíneka ‘because of these’ is the focus, but what
is the status of all the elements that intervene?
complementizers and the articulated CP is not so straightforward. Italian, for example, has a generic that-complementizer, che, but no generic C position.
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
125
17. Topic
Kûros mèn toûton tòn lógon toîsi Íōsi kai toîsi Aioleûsi
Cyrus PTC this the story to.the Ionians and to.the Aeolians
Focus Verb
tônde heíneka élekse, hóti dè Íōnes próteron… ouk epeíthonto…
these because.of said that PTC Ionians before not obeyed
‘Cyrus told this story to the Ionians and the Aeolians for the reason that
the Ionians… had before disobeyed him…’
(Herodotus 1.141.3/Matić 2003: 600)
Matić argues that the intervening elements are all topics. This means that not only
does Ancient Greek seem to have clearly defined positions for topic and focus, it also
has the possibility of multiple topics, on either side of the focus position.16 17
Fortson (2004) provides evidence to suggest that the left periphery in Latin is
similar to that found in Ancient Greek. Latin also seems to have a number of possible
fronting positions in the left periphery. Fortson argues that in the example in (18)
below, si ‘if’ occupies the C position and a large number of constituents can precede
it.18
18. Perfidia et peculatus ex urbe et auaritia si exultant
Betrayal and embezzlement from city and greed if are-exiled
‘If betrayal and embezzlement and greed are exiled from the city’
(Plautus, Persa 555; Fortson 2004: 145)
The evidence from Ancient Greek and Latin, then suggests an articulated CP similar
to that proposed by Rizzi for Italian (cf. the tree in (15) above).
16 Matić further categorises these topic positions into more specific pragmatic roles, e.g. exclusive contrast topic (non-recursive), frame-setting topic (recursive) and continuous topic (recursive) and develops a highly detailed pragmatic structure for the clause. 17 Interestingly, Rizzi (1997) also proposes this for Italian. He argues that there is a recursive topic position either side of the focus position. 18 Of course, this presupposes that Latin has developed complementizers.
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
126
19.
TopP
Spec TopP
Top FocP
Spec FocP
Foc TP
If we consider the evidence from Vedic Sanskrit, a somewhat different picture
emerges. Hale (1987, 1995, 1996) proposes that there are two positions at the left
edge of the clause in Vedic.19 The inner position hosts wh-words (both relative
pronouns and interrogatives) and the outer position hosts what Hale described as
‘topicalised’ elements. Crucially, wh-elements and ‘topics’ can co-occur as shown in
(20) below, where µpnānaṃ tīrtháṃ ‘attained course’ appears to the left of the wh-
word ká.
20. µpnānaṃ tīrtháṃ ká ihá prá vocad
attained.ACC.SG course.ACC.SG WH.NOM.SG here forth speak
‘Who can proclaim here the attained course?’
(RV 10.114.7c/Hale 1996a: 170)
Hale argues that, as the inner position hosts wh-elements it must be a CP, and the
outer edge, containing topics, must be a TopP. This gives the basic clause structure
for Vedic as shown in (21) below.
19 See Hock (1996) for an alternative view of the left periphery in Vedic.
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
127
21. TopP
Spec TopP
Top CP
Spec C
C TP
The fact that Vedic appears to have two distinct positions in the left periphery
suggests that it does not have a generic CP, i.e. it patterns more with Italian than with
English. Hale’s CP only hosts wh-phrases, so it seems more likely that it is
specialized functional projection containing simply a wh-feature.20 The function of
Hale’s TopP seems somewhat less clear. This appears to be because, in Sanskrit, the
outer position can be used for both topicalisation and focussing.21 In (22a) (repeated
from (20) above) the fronted constituent is a topic. It is not emphatic. In (22b),
however, the fronted constituent seems to be fronted for contrastive focus.
22. (a) µpnānaṃ tīrtháṃ ká ihá prá vocad
attained.ACC.SG course.ACC.SG WH.NOM.SG here forth speak
‘Who can proclaim here the attained course?’
(RV 10.114.7c/Hale 1996a: 170)
(b) Diví vái sóma µsīd, átha ihá devµḥ
In heaven indeed Soma was but here gods
‘In heaven was Soma, but here the gods’
(MacDonell 1916: 284)
20 This could be construed as a ForceP, as wh-movement typically marks interrogative force. However, if the inner position is a Force position we might expect it to be the landing site of movement that marks other types of illocutionary force, such as imperatives, or the merge position of sentential question particles. Further research is necessary to see whether this is the case. For our purposes it will be assumed, following Hale, that this position can only host wh-elements. 21 This resembles the situation in verb-second (V2) languages such as Modern German, where topicalisation and focussing both target the specifier of a general CP.
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
128
It seems that Hale’s label is inadequate. This outer position in Sanskrit is not a TopP
but a less specific pragmatic fronting position that can host both topics and focus
expressions.
If we examine the evidence from Anatolian, it seems that Hittite patterns with
Vedic. In Hittite a fronted wh-word can be preceded by one constituent in the syntax,
as shown in (23) below.
23. ŠEŠ-tar kuiš kuedani hatreškizzi
brotherhood who to.another writes
‘Who always writes about brotherhood to another?’
(Garrett 1990: 35)
The pragmatic function of the outer position is not entirely clear, and further research
is necessary before anything conclusive can be said on the left periphery in Hittite
(although see Garrett (1994) for some discussion of how the Hittite system developed
into Lycian). At this stage, however, it seems that the Hittite system resembles Vedic
more closely than Greek and Latin.22
Having considered the left periphery in Ancient Greek, Latin, Vedic and Hittite,
we are now faced with the question of how we should reconstruct the left periphery
for PIE. This is not straightforward. Let us assume that either the structure provided
for Ancient Greek or that provided for Vedic should be reconstructed for PIE. If the
first of these scenarios is true, and PIE had separate Topic and Focus projections, then
Vedic and Hittite must have innovated. The inherited focus position became restricted
in function, and so could only host wh-elements. Wh-movement is often seen as a
subtype of focussing (Kiparsky 1995a, Rizzi 1997, Sabel 2000), therefore it is easy to
see how a reanalysis may have taken place, which changed the feature content on the
inner C head from [+focus] to [+wh].23 After this reanalysis the inner position could
no longer be used for focussing, and so this function was assigned to the outer
position, which became a more generalised functional position, capable of hosting
both topics and focus expressions. 22 Interestingly, the Anatolian languages also show an additional possibility for pragmatic fronting, namely left dislocation. See Garrett (1994) for a discussion of the relationship between this operation and the development of verb-intial word order in Lycian. 23 This restriction of a focus position to a wh-position also seems to have happened at a somewhat later stage in Greek. Roberts & Roussou (2003: 161f) argue that between Ancient and Modern Greek focussed indefinites became reanalysed as wh-words.
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
129
Let us consider now the alternative possibility, i.e. that Ancient Greek and Latin
systems developed from a Vedic-style left periphery. For this to be the case, the inner
position would have become less specific in terms of feature structure, changing from
[+wh] to [+focus]. Such a change is plausible, but less natural than a change in the
opposite direction. Furthermore, Ancient Greek and Latin seem to allow multiple
topics, whereas Vedic and Hittite strictly allow only two constituents to appear in the
left periphery. It seems more likely perhaps for recursive topicalisation to become
restricted to a single position than for a single topicalisation position to become
recursive, however again, this is by no means conclusive.
In sum, it seems that all four early IE languages show evidence for multiple
positions in the left periphery that are associated with specific pragmatic functions.
This suggests that we should reconstruct an articulated CP for PIE, consisting of a
number of different functional projections, rather than a single generalised CP, as
found in English. Such a conclusion is perhaps further supported by the fact that in
their earliest stages the early IE languages did not have generalised that-type
complementizers. At present no firm conclusions can be drawn about the exact
functions of these positions, and so the remainder of this dissertation will assume a
modified version of Hale’s conception of the left periphery. It will be assumed that
PIE had an articulated CP, containing two functional projections, a Top/FocP that was
the target for pragmatic fronting processes such as topicalisation and focussing and a
CwhP which is the target for wh-movement. This is shown in the diagram below:
24. Top/FocP
Top/Foc CwhP
Cwh TP
3.3 Word order
Delbrück (1893) proposed that the unmarked word order of PIE was verb-final. This
conclusion was strengthened by the discovery of Hittite (Watkins 1976), and today it
is widely accepted among Indo-Europeanists. Hale (1987, 1995) bases his
reconstruction within a theory of syntax whereby SOV word order is accounted for by
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
130
the head parameter; the subject and object are merged into the derivation in the order
subject-object-verb. This can be seen in the tree in (25a). Since Kayne (1994), the
head parameter has been largely abandoned in generative work (although see
Richards 2004 who attempts to resurrect the head parameter as a PF condition on
word order; see also Saito & Fukui 1998 and Fox & Pesetsky 2004). Under a
Kaynean analysis the verb and the object are always merged in the order verb-object.
SOV languages must be derived via movement of the object or a projection
containing the object into a higher projection (usually the specifier of vP) above the
position of the verb. This is shown in the tree in (25b).
25. (a) VP (b) vP
Subject V Subject vP
Object Verb Object v
v VP
Verb tObject
Hale’s analysis can be adapted easily to bring it into line with this theoretical
development. All that is necessary is to postulate that v in PIE had an EPP-feature
which causes the object to move to Spec-vP.24
More problematic than verb-final orders are the verb-medial clauses that are
attested in the early IE dialects, where some element appears after the verb, as in the
example (26a) from Vedic, and (26b) from Homeric Greek:
24 Although this does not account for other VP-elements that can occur preverbally, such as PPs or dative objects. One way to account for this is for the entire VP to raise to Spec-vP following movement of the verb to v. This ensures that the verb follows the entire contents of VP. See Biberauer (2003) for such a proposal.
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
131
26. (a) tam eva tābhir āhutibhiḥ śamayitvorjaṃ lokānāṃ
him.ACC thus libations power having.appeased.ACC worlds.GEN
jayati yamaṃ devaṃ
wins Yama.ACC God.ACC
‘Having appeased him, the God Yama, with these libations, he wins the
power of the worlds’
(JB 7, 3–4; McCone 1997b: 370)
(b) Trôas d' eklinan Danaoi
Trojans.ACC PTC turned Danaans.NOM
‘And the Danaans turned the Trojans’
(Il 5, 37)
Examples such as (26a) where the object follows the verb can be easily explained
under a Kaynean theory of phrase structure if we assume that the object does not raise
to Spec-vP in these cases, but remains in situ as the complement of V. For this to be
the case the EPP-feature present on v must be optional. Within the minimalist
programme, such optionality is permitted if it has an effect on interpretation
(Chomsky 2001: 34). If these deviations from SOV order are pragmatically motivated
then it will be possible to explain them in this way. A similar scenario is invoked to
account for North Germanic object shift (Richards 2004) and the apparent optionality
of object raising during the shift from OV to VO word order in Middle English
(Biberauer & Roberts 2005).
Subject-final clauses, such as that in (26b) are more problematic. The subject is
merged in Spec-vP and so will not appear to the right of the verb at any stage of the
derivation. One possibility to account for those cases where the verb precedes the
subject (or the object if object movement is obligatory) is to suggest that the verb
moves to T. V-to-T movement is common cross-linguistically (see Pollock 1989 for
French, Roberts 1985, 1993 for Middle English, McCloskey 1996a for Modern Irish).
There is no theoretical objection to postulating V-to-T movement. However, before it
can be reconstructed for PIE, there must be sufficient evidence for V-to-T movement
in the early IE languages. Hale (1995: 166–186) argues that V-to-T movement occurs
quite frequently in Vedic. In the example in (27) below, the verb precedes the object
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
132
and an adverb and a preverb (see section 3.4 below), which Hale takes to mark the left
edge of the VP, suggesting that the verb has raised.
27. diváṣ caranti pári sadyó ántān
heaven.GEN.SG wander PVB in-one-day end.ACC.PL
‘They wandered around the ends of heaven in one day’
(RV 5.47.4d/ Hale 1995:186)
The major problem with postulating V-to-T movement in Vedic is that it must be
optional, as, in clauses with SOV word order, where the verb appears to the right of
the subject and the object, it cannot have raised to T. If V-to-T is optional, we would
expect its presence or absence to have an effect on interpretation. V-to-T movement,
however, is not generally associated with pragmatic effects cross-linguistically (see
Chomsky 2001); therefore the postulation of optional V-to-T movement seems
unlikely.25
If we turn to the other early dialects, it seems that there is little evidence to support
the reconstruction of V-to-T movement. Although it is often argued that the modern
Romance languages and Modern Greek have V-to-T movement (see among others
Pollock 1989 for French, Belletti 1991 for Italian and Alexiadou & Anagnostopoulou
1998 for Greek) there is no clear evidence that V-to-T was a feature of Latin or
Ancient Greek. Hittite is more rigidly verb-final than any of the other early dialects
(Luraghi 1990) and so does not provide us with any evidence for the reconstruction of
V-to-T movement. It seems that, although from a theoretical perspective V-to-T
movement is possible and perhaps desirable as a feature of PIE, this is not backed up
by the evidence from the daughter languages.
If V-to-T movement cannot be reconstructed for PIE, then there are two further
possibilities for accounting for verb-subject orders; either the subject could have been
right-dislocated or the verb could have raised to a higher functional projection within
the articulated CP. Let us consider each of these options in turn. When a constituent is
right-dislocated its grammatical role tends to be taken up earlier in the clause, either
25 The possibility cannot be entirely disregarded, however, as there is evidence to suggest that Icelandic and Faroese show variation in terms of V-to-T movement. See Hróarsdóttir, Hrafnbjargarson, Wiklund & Bentzen (to appear) on Icelandic; Thráinsson (2003) on Faroese.
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
133
by inflections on the verb or by a pronoun. This often seems to be the case for post-
verbal subjects and objects in the early IE languages (McCone 1997b: 370)
It has also been observed that placing an element at the right edge of the clause has
a similar pragmatic effect to placing it at the left edge. The right edge of the clause
seems to provide an additional Focus position (McCone 1997b: 372, Matić 2003:
615–9). McCone also observes that a displaced subject or object is often long or
heavy. This clearly resembles the well-documented process of heavy-NP shift (Rizzi
1990).26
Let us turn now to the second possibility, namely movement of the verb into the
left periphery. It was argued above that cross-linguistically V-to-T movement does
not have pragmatic effects. However, this does not mean that verb-movement cannot
be pragmatically motivated. In section 3.2 above it was argued that movement into the
left periphery of the clause is linked to pragmatic effects such as topicalisation and
focussing. Although in the examples given above the fronted constituent is a nominal
expression, this is not always the case. Verbs can also be fronted in the earliest IE
languages, as shown in the examples in (28) below.
28. (a) átārisur bharatµ gavyávaḥ sám
cross Bharata cow-seeking together
‘The cow-seeking Bharatas have crossed over’
(RV 3.33.12a; Hale 1995:193)
(b) êe kholon pauseien erêtuseie te thumon
or wrath check curb and spirit.ACC
‘or he should check his wrath and curb his spirit’
(Il 1,192; McCone 1979a: 251)
It is possible, then, that examples where the verb precedes the subject or object could
involve pragmatic fronting of the verb to the left periphery. This could result in verb-
intial order, as in (28) or, if some other constituent is fronted to an additional
functional projection within the CP to the left of the verb, to V2, as in (26b) or even
V3 or V4. Let us examine this process of verb fronting in more detail.
26 Right-dislocation and heavy NP shift are contentious issues in current syntactic theory, which we shall not go into here. See Beerman, LeBlanc & van Riemsdijk (1997) for discussion.
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
134
Watkins (1963) observes that fronting a verb is functionally equivalent to fronting
any other constituent.
“For in such other Indo-European languages, where the normal position of the
verb is sentence final [i.e. not Old Irish – GEN], any element, subject, object,
prepositional phrase, etc. may be placed in the initial position for stylistic
emphasis; the placing of the finite verb itself in this initial position is simply
another case of the same emphasis.” (Watkins 1963: 5)
If verb fronting and DP fronting have the same pragmatic function, we would expect
both types of fronting to be a result of the same process and target the same position
in the left periphery. Topicalisation and focussing tend to involve the movement of an
entire phrase to a specifier position (Rizzi 1997). As a result, we might expect
pragmatically motivated verb fronting also to involve phrasal-movement. In some
cases, there is evidence to suggest that this is the case. In the examples given in (29)
below, both the verb and its complement appear in the outer position in the left
periphery. If, as Hale (1987, 1995) suggests, Vedic only allows two constituents in the
left periphery, then the verb and object cannot have been fronted separately. They
must have moved together to target the position to the left of the position filled by the
wh-element. This suggests that the whole vP has raised.
29. (a) gávāṃ gotrám udásṛjo yád añgiraḥ
cow.GEN.PL herd.ACC.SG up-released when Angiras.VOC.SG
‘When you released the herd of cows, O Angiras’
(RV 2.23.18b; Hale 1995: 194)
(b) hárī índrasya ní cikāya káḥ svit
steed.ACC.DL indra.GEN.SG perceived who PRT
‘Who has perceived the two steeds of Indra’
(RV 10.114.9d; Hale 1987:42)
Under a Kaynean analysis, as adopted here, in order for the object to precede the verb
the object must have moved to Spec-vP, therefore, it must be the vP rather than the
VP that has fronted to the left periphery. However, this poses the problem of why the
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
135
subject does not appear in the clause-initial position. In (29a) the subject is expressed
through the inflections on the verb, and in (29b) the subject is the wh-element, which
will have moved out of the vP to the left periphery before the vP is moved. However,
this will not always be the case. Furthermore, there are many examples where the
verb appears in initial position independently of the object. In order to maintain the vP
fronting analysis in this situation the object and the subject must have both moved out
of the vP prior to movement of the vP to the left periphery. It seems that the position
of nominals in the early IE languages is quite free (see Dover 1960 for Ancient Greek,
Luraghi 1990 for Hittite). Therefore it could be argued that the clause structure of PIE
involves a large amount of scrambling, with the object and subject being free to move
out of the vP. However, even if it is possible to explain movement of the subject and
direct object out of the vP in this way, it is not so straightforward for adverbs and
prepositional complements, which do not tend to move.
An alternative analysis of verb fronting would be as head-movement to a
functional projection within the left periphery. There is evidence to suggest that
pragmatic effects are linked to particular projections rather than specific syntactic
positions. For example, in English an embedded clause can be marked as interrogative
either through raising a wh-phrase to Spec-CP (30a) or merging if in the C head
position (30b):
30. (a) I asked [CP which film C ø [TP you Twere [VP watching twhich film]]].
(b) I asked [CPø Cif [TP you Twere [VP watching ‘Titanic’]]].
By extension, then, it is possible that an element could be marked as a topic or a focus
simply by moving as a head to the relevant topic/focus projection. The postulation of
such pragmatically motivated head-movement raises several theoretical questions.
The first of these relates to the question of how movement is motivated in the case of
topicalisation and focussing. Until now in this dissertation it has been argued that
movement is motivated by the presence of an EPP-feature on the functional head in
question, and that a distinction can be made between EPP-features, which target
phrasal categories and Affix-features, which target heads. If topicalisation can involve
either phrasal-movement or head-movement then we are faced with a problem, as the
functional head in question must have an EPP-feature in some cases and an Affix-
feature in others. In recent work Chomsky (2005, 2006) argues that movement to
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
136
phase heads is motivated by an Edge Feature (EF). In principle, there is no reason
why EF may not attract either a head or phrase.27 The only necessary condition for the
EF to be checked is that some element be merged at the edge of the phase head
bearing it; this element could be either a head or a phrase. In cases of topicalisation,
then, the EF associated with the C position targets an element from within the domain
of C, and raises it so that it is re-merged at the edge of the C-projection. Introducing
the concept of EF can perhaps provide an account of movement operations that target
both phrasal categories and heads. However, it is not entirely clear what the
relationship between EF and EPP and Affix-features should be. For our purposes it
will be assumed that EF is essentially another type of movement diacritic, comparable
to an EPP- or Affix-feature. Whereas EPP- and Affix-features are specified to attract
either XPs or heads respectively, EF can attract both categories.28
In this section it has been argued, following general consensus among Indo-
Europeanists, that PIE should be reconstructed as having underlying SOV order,
derived through movement of the object to Spec-vP. However, evidence from the
daughter languages suggests that deviations from unmarked SOV order were possible.
It seems likely that these deviations had stylistic or pragmatic effects, and so could
result from a number of different processes, such as optionality with regards to object-
raising, right-dislocation, heavy-NP-shift and pragmatically motivated movement
(topicalisation or focussing) of the verb to the left periphery. This pragmatic
movement of the verb to the left periphery could result either in verb-medial orders,
or, crucially for the argument presented below, verb-intial. Furthermore, it has been
argued that it is possible that fronting of the verb to initial or near-initial position
could have involved either vP movement or movement of just the verb. Crucially,
however, in the early IE languages, and by extension PIE, this movement process was
pragmatically conditioned and therefore optional.
3.4 Preverbs
Preverbs are particles, etymologically related to prepositions, that can appear before a
verb and modify its meaning. Both preverbs and prepositions were most likely
independent adverbs in PIE, a situation that is reflected in the Anatolian languages 27 Apart from the fact that Chomsky does not consider head-movement to play a role in narrow syntax. See chapter 1, section 2.2.2 for arguments against this view. 28 The relation between EF and EPP is by no means clear in Chomsky (2005, 2006). If EF is the only feature that can motivate movement then EPP and Affix could perhaps be seen as subtypes of EF.
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
137
(see Boley 1985 for details of so-called Anatolian ‘place words’). Typically adverbs
are adjoined to the phrase they modify. Therefore, we would expect the adverbs that
became preverbs to have originated in Spec-VP or Spec-vP. Hale (1995: 192) argues
that this is the position they occupy in Vedic; however, Hale notes that preverbs may
also appear at the beginning of the clause, modifying the whole clause. In this case,
Hale argues, the preverb is in Spec-CP as it appears between a topicalised constituent
in TopP and wh-word in CP, as shown in the example (31) below.
31. ābhogáyam prá yád ichánta aítanµ
nourishment.ACC.SG PVB when seeking.NOM.PL went.2SG
‘When seeking nourishment you went forth’
(RV 1.110.2a; Hale 1996a: 185)
However, this does not seem to be the only possible position for clause-initial
preverbs in Vedic. McCone (1997b), following Renou (1933), argues that fronting the
preverb of a compound verb plays the same functional role as fronting the verb if the
verb is simple. In example (32) below the verb in all three clauses is imperative, and
therefore we would expect it to appear at the beginning of the clause. However, the
verb only appears in clause-initial position in the final clause. In the first clause the
preverb is fronted in place of the verb and in the second clause the negative particle
appears first.
32. ā no yajñe bhajata, mā no yajñād antárgata,
PVB us sacrifice share.IMPV.2PL NEG us sacrifice exclude. IMPV.2PL
astv evá no ‘pi yajñe bhāga iti
be.IMPV.3SG thus us PTC sacrifice share PTC
‘Give us a share in the sacrifice, do not exclude us from the sacrifice, let
there be a share in the sacrifice for us.’
(McCone 1997b: 372)
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
138
If fronting the preverb has the same pragmatic force as fronting the verb, then we
would expect a fronted preverb to target the same projection as a fronted verb, i.e. the
outer left-peripheral position, Hale’s TopP.29
McCone (1979a) provides evidence to suggest that this is also the case in Ancient
Greek:30
33. hôs ephat' Atreïdês, epi d' êineon alloi Akhaioi
so spoke son-of-Atreus PVB PRT approved other Acheans
‘So spoke the son of Atreus, and all the Acheans shouted assent’
(Il 3.461; McCone 1979a: 253)
Garrett (1992) observes that in Lycian a verb is only fronted when it has no associated
preverb; fronted preverbs and fronted verbs are in complementary distribution. This
also seems to be the case in Hittite, which lacks clear cases of verb fronting that
strands a preverb.
The evidence from Vedic, Ancient Greek and Anatolian suggests that the
possibility of fronting the preverb in place of a verb to the outer peripheral position,
the Top/FocP, should be reconstructed for PIE.
3.5 Summary
In this section we have explored the possibility of reconstructing some features of the
syntax of PIE that will be relevant to the analysis of Old Irish that is to follow. The
most important features of our proposed reconstruction are summarised below.
1) PIE did not have generalised that-complementizers
2) PIE had an articulated CP consisting of (at least) two specialized C heads,
which each played a specific pragmatic function. Following Hale, we will
reconstruct an outer position that hosts topicalised and focussed elements
(Top/FocP) and an inner position that hosts wh-words (CwhP).
29 Although both preverbs and verbs target the same projection there is no necessity for them to target the same position. Whereas verbs target the head position, preverbs, as adverbial phrases, are more likely to target the specifier. 30 The Latin evidence is of little use here as in Latin preverbs have for the most part been fully univerbated and appear as verbal prefixes.
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
139
3) PIE had unmarked verb-final order; deviations from SOV order are
pragmatically marked and are the result of a variety of processes such as
optional object raising to Spec-vP, right-dislocation, heavy NP shift and verb-
movement to the left periphery.
4) verb-intial order in PIE was optional and stylistically marked. Verb fronting
in PIE targets the Top/FocP of the left periphery, and may involve fronting the
entire vP or simply the verb itself. Either way, this movement is pragmatically
motivated and optional.
5) If a verb is compound, the initial preverb can be fronted to Top/FocP in place
of the verb to achieve the same stylistic effect.
Having established the relevant features of PIE, let us now move onto the topic in
hand – the Irish verbal system.
4 FROM PROTO-INDO-EUROPEAN TO PRE-OLD IRISH: CHANGES IN THE C-SYSTEM
4.1 Introduction
At the end of chapter 2 it was concluded that although there is good evidence to
suggest that during the Old Irish period the verb only moves as far as T, this was not
always the case. Although suffixed pronouns and special relative verbal endings are
not used productively in Classical Old Irish, it seems likely that there was a stage
before the Old Irish period when they were. At this time, then, we can assume that
Irish had V-to-C movement. The remainder of this chapter will focus on this pre-Old
Irish stage and how it developed from PIE. This section considers the development of
verb-initial word order, section 5 focuses on the development of initial preverbs and
section 6 looks at the development of conjunct particles.31
Before we go on to consider the development from PIE to pre-Old Irish, let us
make clear our assumptions regarding the verbal system of the pre-Old Irish period.
In many ways the verbal system that is being assumed for this period is similar to that
proposed by Carnie, Harley & Pyatt (2000 – CHP) for Classical Old Irish. It is
31 The term ‘pre-Old Irish’ is deliberately vague. Clearly the period to which it refers is before our first written records. It seems quite plausible that the changes described in this chapter affected Insular Celtic as a whole as the Brittonic languages also show verb-intial word order and traces of a double system of verbal inflection. However, a more thorough analysis of the Welsh evidence is necessary for this to be confirmed. For the remainder of this chapter then, we will continue to use the term ‘pre-Old Irish’ in this vague sense, to refer to a period of Irish before the beginnings of the written record and after Common Celtic.
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
140
assumed that pre-Old Irish has a filled C condition, i.e. C has an Affix-feature that
attracts some verbal element, i.e. the verb or an initial preverb, when it is not filled by
a conjunct particle. However, crucially, unlike CHP, it is assumed that during pre-Old
Irish there is no V-to-T movement. When C is filled, the verb and any associated
preverbs remain in their base position further down the clause. In other words, pre-
Old Irish is the pre-univerbation stage, giving the orders shown below (where
V=verb, P=preverb, C= conjunct particle):
34. (a) #V... #
(b) #P...V#
(c) #C...(P)V#
As we saw in chapter 2, the derivation of compound verbs through syntactic
movement to both C and T faces significant syntactic problems. For this reason it will
be assumed that at no stage in the history of Irish did these two movement operations
co-occur. At the stage when the verb and preverb move syntactically to C, movement
to T is prohibited. Movement to T develops only through the reanalysis of V-to-C
movement. We will return to this topic in detail in chapter 5.
This section focuses on the development of V-to-C movement. Section 4.2
explores the nature of and motivation behind the syntactic change that resulted in the
development of V-to-C movement, namely the reanalysis of stylistically marked verb-
intial order as grammatically motivated verb-intial order. Before this reanalysis could
take place, however, a number of unrelated changes must have occurred,
predominantly in the C-system. These changes are the topic of sections 4.3, 4.4 and
4.5. Section 4.6 summarises and concludes the section.
4.2 The development of V-to-C movement: a syntactic reanalysis
In section 3.3 above it was argued that the unmarked word order pattern in PIE was
verb-final. However, verb-intial word order seems to have been a possibility in the
earliest IE languages as a stylistically marked variant. verb-intial order in the early IE
languages, and by extension, PIE seems to involve either vP or verb-movement to a
topicalisation or focus position in the left periphery, part of an articulated CP.
Following Hale (1987, 1995), it was argued that PIE had two positions in the left
periphery. The outer position hosted pragmatically fronted (i.e. topicalised or
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
141
focussed) elements, this is a Top/FocP. The inner position hosted interrogative and
relative wh-words, a CwhP. As fronting of the verb is a subtype of topicalisation or
focussing, rather than wh-movement, we can assume that it targets the outer of these
positions. This is shown schematically in the tree in (35) below.
35. Top/FocP
Top/Foc CwhP
vP/V
Cwh TP
(wh)
(Subj…Obj)
The situation we are assuming for pre-Old Irish is somewhat different. First, there is
no evidence in Old Irish for an articulated CP (although see Roberts 2005, Adger to
appear, who argue otherwise). Old Irish does not allow fronting for emphasis or in
wh-questions (see section 6 below). The only way to emphasise a constituent is to use
a cleft sentence.32 This suggests that there are no available fronting positions in the
left periphery to host topics, foci or wh-words. Second, Old Irish has unmarked verb-
initial word order. The verb obligatorily appears in clause-initial position, unless this
position is already filled. As a result, verb fronting can no longer be a pragmatically
motivated subtype of topicalisation or focussing; it must be grammatically
conditioned. Following CHP we assume that the fronted verb in pre-Old Irish targets
the C position. This is shown in the tree in (36) below.
36. CP
C TP
V
(Subj…Obj)
32 This also seems to be the case in Scots Gaelic. See Adger & Ramchand (2005).
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
142
So, it seems that from PIE to pre-Old Irish, two changes took place in the left
periphery of the clause: the articulated CP found in PIE was reanalysed as an
unarticulated CP, and pragmatically motivated verb fronting was reanalysed as
grammatically motivated V-to-C movement. This is shown schematically in (37).
37. Top/FocP CP
Top/Foc CwhP C T
vP /V V
Cwh TP (Subj…Obj)
(wh)
( Subj…Obj)
Having described the changes that distinguish the left periphery in pre-Old Irish from
that proposed for PIE, we must now attempt an explanation of why these changes
took place. As discussed in chapter 3, under a generative view, syntactic change is
primarily a result of language acquisition. So, in order to explain these changes we
must explain why children stopped acquiring an articulated CP, and reanalysed
stylistically motivated verb fronting as an obligatory, grammatically motivated
process. Let us consider each of these changes in turn.
The change between an articulated and an unarticulated CP could be seen as a
structural simplification (Clark & Roberts 1993; Roberts & Roussou 2003).33 During
language acquisition children assign the simplest possible analysis to the linguistic
data they encounter. Simplicity is often determined in terms of movement operations.
A grammar with more movement operations will be more complex than a grammar
with fewer. It seems plausible that this notion of simplicity could be extended to
phrase structure. During acquisition a child will acquire the least amount of structure
consistent with the data. Following Chomsky (2000, 2001 et seq.), let us assume that
there are three core functional categories, namely C, T and v, which are present cross-
linguistically. To deviate from this basic clausal architecture, i.e. to acquire extra
33 This is not consistent with Roberts & Roussou’s (2003) definition of structural simplification. Roberts & Roussou propose that simplicity is determined in terms of feature syncretisms. Change proceeds so as to reduce the number of functional features associated with a particular functional head. Seen in this way, then, an articulated CP should be preferable to an unarticulated CP as this involves the spread of functional features over a number of separate projections, resulting in fewer syncretisms.
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
143
functional positions, there must be sufficient evidence. In terms of the CP, then, it
seems likely that the child will only acquire an articulated CP, i.e. extra structural
positions, if there is sufficient evidence.34 Let us consider what this evidence might
be. It seems likely that the crucial evidence for the acquisition of an articulated CP is
the co-occurrence of multiple constituents with distinct pragmatic functions in the left
periphery, i.e. to the left of TP. In Italian this is clearly the case, with topics, foci and
various complementizers co-occurring. However, if, following Hale (1987, 1995), in
PIE only two constituents, a topic or focussed constituent and a wh-element, could
appear in the left periphery, why is it not simply analysed as an unarticulated CP? The
answer to this, I propose, lies in the nature of the constituents that appear in the left
periphery. If a language has an unarticulated CP, then the only two positions available
are the head position, C, and the specifier of CP. In an unarticulated CP, then, we
would only expect the combination XP-X in the left periphery.35 If we find XP-XP,
X-XP or X-X, specifically where the two heads occupy different syntactic positions,
i.e. they are not adjoined under a single C-head, then this is evidence for an
articulated CP. Section 4.3 argues that there is reason to believe that the first two
configurations were lost in Celtic, thus reducing the evidence for an articulated CP.
However, this left the third X-X configuration. This was lost at a later stage. This is
the topic of section 4.5.
Let us turn now to the second postulated change, i.e. the reanalysis of
pragmatically motivated, optional vP/verb-movement as grammatically motivated,
obligatory V-to-C movement. In terms of the theory of change outlined in chapter 3,
what we have here is the change from an optional movement feature (EF) to an
obligatory movement feature (Affix). There are two main pieces of evidence that can
be used to distinguish an optional from an obligatory movement feature. The first of
these is frequency. Movement motivated by an obligatory feature will be more
frequent than that motivated by an optional one. Secondly, an optional feature will be
associated with pragmatic or stylistic effect. When a child acquires a movement
feature associated with a particular functional category or feature it determines
whether this feature is optional or obligatory through consideration of frequency and
34 The alternative to this, of course, is that the articulated CP is universal and present in all grammars. It seems somewhat uneconomical, however, to propose that speakers of English, for example, have numerous structural positions present in their grammars that never receive any phonological realisation. 35 This is leaving aside the possibility of multiple specifiers.
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
144
pragmatic effect.36 In order for a movement feature to change from optional to
obligatory then the relevant movement process must appear to become more frequent
and lose its pragmatic function.37 Therefore, in order for pragmatic verb fronting to be
reanalysed as obligatory grammatical fronting, it must become more frequent, and the
pragmatic function associated with it must become bleached. In section 4.4 a possible
explanation for such an increase in frequency is proposed, linking the increase in verb
fronting to the increase in frequency of Cowgill’s *es particle. This increase in
frequency, in turn, leads to the bleaching of the pragmatic function.
By explaining the change in frequency and associated pragmatic function we can
account for the change from optional to obligatory verb-movement; however, this
does not account for the change in the position of the fronted verb. Whereas in PIE
fronted verbs seem to have targeted the outer position of the left periphery, in pre-Old
Irish fronted verbs occupy the C position. For this to be the case, a further change
must take place, whereby the elements that fill the inner peripheral position change in
status from clitic to affix, allowing the fronted verb to be analysed as appearing in the
inner position, i.e. in the C position. This change is linked to the loss of the final piece
of evidence for the loss of the articulated CP, and is dealt with in section 4.5.
4.3 Changes in the CP from PIE to pre-Old Irish
The aim of this section is to consider how the evidence relating to the acquisition of
an articulated CP changed between PIE and pre-Old Irish. It was argued above that in
order to acquire an articulated CP, children must encounter evidence of multiple
constituents co-occurring in the left periphery, i.e. to the left of TP. Crucially, these
constituents must be in the configuration XP-XP, X-XP or X-X. It seems, then, that a
condition for the loss of the articulated CP is the reanalysis of the inner position,
CwhP, from an XP to a head. In the non-Celtic early IE languages it seems that there
is clear evidence that the inner position is filled by an XP. Hale (1987, 1995) argues
that this position hosts wh-elements, specifically relative and interrogative pronouns.
In the early IE languages both interrogative and relative pronouns are inflected for
number, gender and case (see Fortson 2004: 126–130). A relative or interrogative
36 Of course, it will also be necessary to determine whether the movement feature attracts a head, an XP or both, i.e. whether it is an Affix, EPP or EF. 37 It is unclear at this stage whether the change from an optional to an obligatory feature should be more natural than the change from an obligatory to an optional one. As under the theory of change proposed here neither option is the default case we might expect them to be equally matched.
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
145
pronoun that is clearly inflected for number, gender and case will be analysed as a
DP, i.e. a phrasal category. This means that as long as the pronoun that appears in the
inner position is inflected, it will be analysed as an XP, giving the configurations XP-
XP or X-XP in the left periphery. This will ensure that an articulated CP continues to
be acquired. If we turn to Celtic, however, this does not seem to be the case. Neither
Old Irish nor Middle Welsh show an inflected relative pronoun.38 39
Let us consider first the relative system in Old Irish. There are many ways of
marking a relative clause in Old Irish, suggesting that relative marking is of
composite origin (Watkins 1963). In this section we will focus on the main strategies
for relative marking relevant to the discussion here. For a full account see Thurneysen
(1946: 312–325).
As we saw in chapter 2, if the verb is simple and in initial position a relative clause
can be marked by special relative morphology on the verb, as shown in (38a), where
the non-relative form would be gaibid. Similarly the preverbs im and ar have special
disyllabic relative forms imma/imme and ara/are, as in the example in (38b).
38. (a) is óinfer gaibes buáid diib inna chomalnad
COP one man take.PRES.3SG.REL victory of.3PL in-its completing
‘It is one man of them that gets victory for completing it’ (Wb 11a4)
(b) imme-rádi
PVB.REL-think.PRES.3SG.DT
‘He who thinks’ (Thurneysen 1946: 517)
In situations where relative verb morphology is impossible, the relative clause is
marked by a grammatical mutation, either lenition or nasalization. When the verb is
compound the mutation follows the initial preverb, changing the initial segment of the
verbal stem. In (39a) the initial /k/ of the verbal stem is lenited to /x/ (written ‘ch’)
after the preverb for. In (39b) the verbal stem is nasalized after the preverb do.
38 We will return to the question of interrogative wh-words in section 6 below. There is evidence to suggest that they did not occur in the inner position of the left periphery in pre-Old Irish, but appeared in the emphatic outer position. This being the case, interrogative wh-words are of little relevance to the discussion here. 39 The Germanic languages also lost the PIE inflected relative. Gothic, Old English and Old High German all have uninflected relative markers. These languages are all V2 languages and so, like pre-Old Irish, show V-to-C movement. It is not clear, however, that these two features are related.
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
146
39. (a) din gním for- chomnaccuir
to.the deed PVB- happen.PRET.3SG.DT
‘To the deed which happened’ (Ml 113d3)
(b) in tan do-mberam ar menmain intiu colleir
when PVB.give.PRES.1PL.DT our mind to.3PL diligently
‘When we give our mind to them diligently’ (Ml 21a8)
If the verb is simple, but of a person or number which does not have special relative
morphology, then the verb will be preceded by the dummy conjunct particle no and its
initial consonant will be mutated, as shown in (40) below.
40. is hed in so no⋅chairigur
COP.PRES.3SG it that PVB-reprimand.PRES.1SG.CONJ
‘That is what I reprimand’ (Wb 11d1)
The leniting relative clause is obligatory when the antecedent is the subject of the
relative clause, as in (41a) and optional when it is the object, as in (41b) (Thurneysen
1946: 314).
41. (a) ind huili doíni ro- chreitset
the all men PVB believe.PERF.3PL.CONJ
‘All men who have believed’
(Ml 60b16)
(b) ni torbe do an imdibe ad-chi cách
NEG profit to.3SG.M the circumcision PVB-see.PRES.3SG.DT everyone
‘It is no profit to him the circumcision which everyone sees’
(Wb 2a2)
The nasalizing relative has a much wider range of uses than its leniting counterpart
(Thurneysen 1946: 316–319). The most frequent use of a nasalizing relative clause is
when the antecedent is an adverbial expressing either time, manner or cause, or when
the clause follows a conjunction of time, manner or cause such as in tan, in tain
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
147
‘when’, amal ‘as’, óre ‘because’ as in example (42a).40 A nasalizing relative clause
can be used optionally in place of a leniting relative when the antecedent is the object
of the relative clause as in (42b). A further use of the nasalizing relative is to mark the
complement of verbs of saying, thinking and possibility or ‘in all contexts where the
complement of the principal clause can be more conveniently expressed by a second
clause than by a noun’ (Thurneysen 1946: 318). This is shown in (42c).
42. (a) in tan do-mberam ar menmain intiu colleir
when PVB-give.PRES.1PL.DT our mind to.3PL diligently
‘When we give our mind to them diligently’ (Ml 21a8)
(b) it hé sidi as-m-ber sís
cop.PRES.3PL they these PVB- says.PRES.3SG.DT below
‘It is these (things) that he mentions below’ (Wb 10b13)
(c) connic do-m-berthar forcell din titul
is.able PVB-NAS-give.PRES SUBJ.PASS.SG.DT testimony to.the title
‘A testimony may be given to the title (Ml 24d14)
Both the special relative verb forms and the leniting relative clause can be accounted
for by postulating an enclitic relative particle *(i)o (Thurneysen 1946: 323, Watkins
1963: 28, McCone 1980, Schrijver 1997).41 As an enclitic this particle would have
appeared in second position, according to Wackernagel’s law. This means that with
simple verbs it would have occurred immediately after the verb in initial position,
giving us the special relative forms, 3pl bertae < *beronti-io, 1pl bermae < *beromo-
io.42 When used in conjunction with a compound verb, the particle would have
appeared between the first preverb and the remainder of the verb. This accounts for
the form of the disyllabic relative preverbs imme (imma), and are (ara) and also the
leniting relative. The vocalic ending of the particle *(i)o would have phonologically
conditioned lenition of the following segment. When the final syllables were lost,
lenition became grammatically rather than phonologically triggered, and so became a
40 It seems likely that these conjunctions followed by nasalizing clauses were in origin temporal, manner or causal adverbs. We will return to this topic in section 6 below. 41 The origin of the nasalizing relative is highly disputed. See, among others, Breatnach (1980), McCone (1980), Ahlqvist (1983), Ó hUiginn (1986). 42 The third singular form is characterised by an /s/ and is more problematic. It is most often argued that this form developed analogically, although see Schrijver (1994) for a more recent analysis.
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
148
relative marker.43 In this way, the enclitic particle *(i)o can account for the leniting
relative following both preverbs of compound verbs and conjunct particles.44
Further support for the particle *(i)o can be obtained by considering the
comparative IE evidence. Vedic yá-, Ancient Greek hó, and Avestan ya- suggest that
the PIE relative also had the form *io- (Fortson 2004: 130). Therefore, it seems that
the relative marker in Celtic could simply have been inherited from PIE. However,
there are two fundamental differences between the Celtic and PIE particles. First it
seems likely that the PIE relative marker, unlike that found in Celtic, was inflected.
Secondly, the PIE relative marker was not enclitic. Let us examine each of these
issues in turn.
McCone (1980) argues that a Celtic inflected relative would have had the forms
below, yielding the mutations indicated in brackets (L=lenition, N=nasalization).
Table 4: The expected forms of an inflected relative pronoun in Celtic
Masc sg Fem sg Neut sg Masc pl Fem pl Neut pl
NOM *yos (–) *yā (L) *yo(d) (L) *yoi (L) *yās (–) *yā (L)
ACC *yom (N) *yam (N) *yo(d) (L) *yōs (–) *yās (–) *yā (L)
It could be argued that with the loss of the inflected endings, lenition spread
throughout the subject antecedent relatives and nasalization spread among object
antecedents. This provides a neat explanation for both the leniting and the nasalizing
relative, tying the Old Irish evidence to PIE. However, McCone provides statistical
evidence to suggest that this cannot be the case. In the Würzburg Glosses, dated at
around AD750, nasalization is less common than lenition when the antecedent of the
relative clause is a masculine or feminine object. By the time of the Milan Glosses, 50
years later, nasalization is used more frequently than lenition in the same
circumstances. By the St Gall Glosses, the nasalizing relative is well on its way out of
use. If, as suggested by the table above, nasalization originated with masculine and
feminine object antecedents we would not expect the use of nasalization to increase in
43 For more details on the development of the grammatical mutations in Celtic see Russell (1995: ch 7) and the references therein. 44 Thurneysen (1946: 323) suggests that the Welsh relative particle a could also provide support for the Celtic relative particle *(i)o. Although this particle appears in initial position in Middle Welsh, there is evidence to suggest this was not always the case. Evans (1964: 61) argues that in early Welsh formerly compound verbs such as digawn, cognate with Old Irish do-gní ‘makes, does’ do not co-occur with the relative particle, suggesting that originally the particle would have been infixed as it is in Old Irish.
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
149
these situations between the time of Würzburg and Milan, and then to be lost between
Milan and St Gall. This suggests that the nasalizing relative is not a reflex of the PIE
inflected relative, but an Irish innovation.45
McCone’s second main argument against the origins of the Old Irish relative
construction being in the PIE relative pronoun is that evidence from Sanskrit and
Ancient Greek suggests that this particle appeared mostly in initial position. Although
the relative pronoun can stand in second position, this only tends to occur when some
other element has been pragmatically fronted to the left of the relative marker. The
PIE relative pronoun is by no means enclitic. However, the fact that the relative
pronoun is not reconstructed as an enclitic for PIE does not rule out the possibility
that it became an enclitic in Celtic. The relative pronoun in PIE could appear in
second position when some other element was pragmatically fronted. As noted above,
one of the conditions for the shift to unmarked verb-intial order seems to be an
increase in the frequency of pragmatically fronted verbs. An increase in pragmatic
verb fronting would have resulted in the relative pronoun appearing in second
position with increasing frequency. Schrijver (1997: 104) also points out that it would
have been perfectly possible for the relative pronoun to have remodelled itself on
other types of enclitic pronominal elements.
Having established that the Old Irish relative cannot have developed directly from
the PIE relative, McCone requires an alternative etymology. Thurneysen (1946: 323)
suggests that Celtic *(i)o may be cognate with the neuter form of the PIE relative
pronoun *iod (cf. Sanskrit yád), which has lost its final *-d, or the Hittite sentence
connective ya. McCone opts for the latter, primarily on the basis that it has been
shown by Watkins (1963) that relative markers can develop from co-ordinating
conjunctions.
One problem with McCone’s account, however, is that it provides no explanation
as to what happened to the inflected relative in Celtic. Although the Insular Celtic
languages and also Gaulish (see Schrijver 1997: 105) show no evidence of an
inflected relative, there is evidence for an inflected relative in Celtiberian. In the
Botorrita I inscription, for example, we find a masculine nominative singular ios,
masculine dative singular iomui and a feminine accusative plural ias (Eska & Ellis
Evans 1993:35). This suggests that we should reconstruct an inflected relative for 45 Further support for this conclusion comes from the fact that there are no signs of a nasalizing relative in Welsh (McCone 1980: 18).
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
150
Proto-Celtic. Of course, it is possible that the inflected relative was simply replaced
by a new strategy of relative marking utilising sentential connectives in the Insular
Celtic languages and Gaulish. However, this leaves us with a somewhat striking
coincidence that the relative in Old Irish seems to have developed from a connective
that had the same shape as the stem of the PIE inflected relative.
Let us explore Thurneysen’s alternative, namely that the Insular Celtic uninflected
relative marker *(i)o developed from the 3sg neuter PIE relative *iod. As noted
above, in many other early IE dialects that-complementizers seem to have developed
from the 3sg neuter relative pronoun (e.g. Latin quod, Sanskrit yád, Greek hóti, Hittite
kuit). In all these cases an inflected pronoun in Spec-CP has been reanalysed as an
uninflected complementizer filling the C head. In structural terms, the development of
the relative marker in Celtic can be viewed in the same way, with the relative pronoun
being reanalysed as a relative complementizer; however, in Celtic this change was
more far reaching, with the new relative complementizer replacing all the relative
pronouns.
For the PIE relative pronoun to have been reanalysed as an uninflected relative
marker in Celtic it must have lost or have been well on its way to losing its
inflections. There are two possible explanations for this. First, it is possible that the
inflectional endings of the relative pronoun were eroded by phonological change,
leaving a relative pronoun with minimal or no number, person or case distinctions.
This seems plausible, as, although nominal expressions maintain their inflections into
the Classical Old Irish period, pronouns do not. Pronouns have only nominative and
accusative forms (Thurneysen 1946: 257–260). Therefore, it could be the case that the
relative pronouns lost their inflections as part of a change affecting the pronominal
system as a whole. The second possibility is that new strategies were introduced for
marking relative clauses, causing the inflected relative to become restricted to use
with a certain type of antecedent. If, for example, the inherited relative was only used
with subject antecedents, then it would only appear in the nominative case. Such a
scenario is proposed by Schrijver (1997)
Schrijver (1997) suggests that subject antecedent and object antecedent relative
clauses were marked in different ways in pre-Old Irish. He argues that only subject
antecedent relatives were marked with the inherited *io relative. Object antecedent
relatives were marked by enclitic pronouns *em>*en ‘him’, used for masculine and
feminine and *ed>*e ‘it’ used with neuter antecedents. The main piece of evidence
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
151
that Schrijver employs to support this claim comes from the distribution of contracted
and uncontracted forms in relative clauses. In the Glosses certain compound verbs can
appear in initial position in either contracted or uncontracted form. As a result we find
forms such as tuc ‘brought’ alongside forms such as do-uc. Schrijver argues that in
relative clauses the contracted forms are used almost exclusively with neuter object
antecedents, whereas the uncontracted form is found with subject antecedents. The
reason for this, Schrijver argues, is that the neuter object pronoun *e used in relative
clauses allowed contraction, whereas the *io particle found in subject relative clauses
prevented it.
If, as Schrijver suggests, the *(i)o relative was only used with subject antecedents
it would only have surfaced in its nominative form and so would have appeared to be
uninflected for case. Of course, at this stage the relative pronoun would still have
been inflected for person and number. However, these properties are not limited to
DPs. Verbs and also complementizers can show person and number agreement (see
Fuß 2005 on inflected complementizers in Germanic). Case, on the other hand, is a
property of DPs. When the pronoun lost its case inflection it lost its distinguishing
marker as a DP; therefore, it was possible for it to be reanalysed as a C particle. After
this reanalysis, the particle underwent further phonological change, leading to the loss
of number and gender distinctions, and the change from independent word to enclitic.
The change from relative pronoun to relative complementizer can be seen as a case
of grammaticalisation, with the pronoun losing its case, number and gender features
and becoming purely a marker of relative clauses. It has often been observed that
phonological reduction occurs as a result of grammaticalization (Hopper & Traugott
1993, Roberts & Roussou 2003: 224f). As a lexical item becomes more grammatical
it can lose its independent stress and become enclitic. A similar case to that presented
here is the development of future tense marking in Romance as outlined by Roberts &
Roussou (2003: 48f). The future tense endings in the modern Romance languages
developed from the Latin verb habere. If we compare the French future tense endings
shown in (43a) with the verb avoir ‘to have’ given in (43b), we see that they are
almost identical.
43. (a) chanter-ai, chanter-as, chanter-a, chanter-ons, chanter-ez, chanter-ont
(b) ai, as, a, avons, avez, ont
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
152
In late Latin one option for expressing the future was to use a periphrastic
construction involving the verb habere and an infinitive. Over time the verb habere,
an independent and fully stressed word, was reanalysed as a future auxiliary (like will
in English). As a result of this reanalysis it became phonologically reduced, being
reanalysed first as a clitic, and then an affix, as seen in the modern Romance
languages.
The discussion in the preceding paragraphs has been of a somewhat tentative
nature, and more research is necessary before any firm conclusions can be drawn
about the origins of the Celtic uninflected relative marker. This section has developed
a new account, namely that the Insular Celtic relative marker could have developed
through the grammaticalisation of the PIE relative pronoun. This will be assumed in
what is to follow, although it is not crucial. The important point to note is that the PIE
inflected relative was lost, as a result of which the inner position of the left periphery
in Celtic would have contained an uninflected relative marker, crucially a head and
not an XP. This change led to the loss of the configurations XP-XP and X-XP;
however, as topicalisation of the verb could involve movement of just a head the
configuration X-X remained. The articulated CP could not be lost, then, until this
configuration disappeared. Before we go on to consider how this occurred, let us turn
our attention to the changes affecting the fronted verb.
4.4 From optional to obligatory verb fronting
Between PIE and pre-Old Irish optional, pragmatically motivated verb-movement was
reanalysed as obligatory, grammatically motivated verb-movement. In theoretical
terms this involves a change in the status of the feature motivating the movement.
Whereas in PIE the feature motivating movement of the verb was optional, in pre-Old
Irish this feature became obligatory. It was argued above that in order for this change
to take place the frequency of verb fronting had to increase and the pragmatic
function associated with a fronted verb had to be bleached. This section proposes that
not only can the increase in frequency and the bleaching be linked to one another, but
that both of these changes can be linked to Cowgill’s particle *es.
In section 2 above it was argued that although the particle theory is preferable on
conceptual grounds to McCone’s suffix-/infix-deletion theory, there are two major
problems with it. First no satisfactory etymology has been provided for the particle
*es. Secondly the theory provides no explanation for the increase in verb fronting. As
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
153
discussed in section 2.2 above, Schrijver (1994, 1997) attempts to solve the first
problem through his proposal that the particle *es developed from a particle of the
form *eti, a main clause connective cognate with Latin et ‘and’, Gothic iþ ‘but’ and
also Ancient Greek éti ‘further, moreover’ and Sanskrit áti ‘beyond, very’. For this
particle to have had such a significant effect on the morphology of the verb it must
have been very common. Schrijver observes that in the early IE languages there is a
tendency to use a particle to express the link between clauses overtly. Watkins (1963:
13) observes that in Hittite the connective nu is found at the beginning of almost
every clause. Watkins also gives an example from Archaic Latin that shows extensive
use of the connective -que:
44. Macel[am-que opidom] / [p]ucnando cepet. En-que Macella.ACC.SG-and town.ACC.SG fighting. ABL.SG captured.3SG In-and eodem mac[istratud bene] / [r]em nauebos same.ABL.SG magistracy.ABL.SG well situation.ACC.SG ships.ABL.PL marid consol primos c[eset copias-que] / sea.ABL.SG consul.NOM.SG first.NOM.SG carried out.3SG forces.ACC.PL-and [c]lases-que nauales primos ornauet pa[rauet-que]
fleets.ACC.PL-and naval.ACC.PL first.NOM.SG put.in.order.3SG prepared.3SG-and /cum-que eis nauebos claseis Poenicas om[nis with-and these.ABL.PL ships.ABL.PL fleet.ACC.PL Punic.ACC.PLwhole.ACC.PL item ma-] / [x]umas copias Cartaciniensis praesente[d and greatest.ACC.PL forces.ACC.PL Carthaginian.ACC.PL present.ABL.SG Hanibaled] / dicatored ol[or]om in altod marid Hanibal.ABL.SG dictator.ABL.SG them.GEN.PL in high.ABL.SG sea.ABL.SG
pucn[ad uicet] / ui-que naue[is cepe]t battle.ABL.SG conquered.3SG force.ABL.SG-andships.ACC.PLcaptured.3SG
‘He captured the town of Macella by fighting. And in the same magistracy, he
was the first consul to be successful in battle with ships on the sea. He put in
order and prepared the first naval forces and navies. And with these ships he
conquered the whole Punic fleet and also the greatest Carthaginian forces, in the
presence of Hannibal, their dictator, in battle on the high sea and he captured the
ships by force...’ 46
(Degrassi 1957: 189–90; Watkins 1963: 8–9)
46 I am grateful to Nick Zair for help with the translation of this example.
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
154
Schrijver (1997) also observes that in Middle Welsh the connective ac ‘and’ joins
almost every clause. If this was also the case in pre-Old Irish, or even Insular Celtic,
then we have a possible explanation for why this particle came to be used so
frequently that it could have affected the verbal inflections.47
It seems, however, that using a connective was not the only way that the
connection between clauses could be marked. Dressler (1969) argues that fronting the
verb in the early IE languages could have a cataphoric or anaphoric effect linking two
clauses together. Such an occurrence of verb fronting is seen in the example from
Homeric Greek in (28b) above, repeated as (45) below. The main verb of the second
clause, erêtuseie ‘curb’, is fronted to the beginning of the clause in order to mark the
connection between the two clauses.
45. êe kholon pauseien erêtuseie te thumon.
or wrath.ACC check curb and spirit.ACC
‘Or he should check his wrath and curb his spirit’ (Il 1, 192)
The example in (45) is particularly interesting because it shows that it was possible to
use both strategies for linking clauses together. Not only is the verb fronted in the
second clause, but there is also a connective particle te in second position. In order for
the connective particle *es to have become verbal morphology this must have also
been the case in pre-Old Irish. One way to explain this development in pre-Old Irish
is that, like the Hittite connective nu, the particle *es became used so frequently that it
was bleached of its connective meaning. As a result of this bleaching there was an
increase in pragmatic verb fronting to the left periphery in order to reassert the link
between clauses. As verb-intial clauses increased in frequency, this led to further
bleaching of verb fronting, causing the connective force to be lost and the fronted
verb to become susceptible to reanalysis.48
47 David Willis (p.c.) points out that this use of connectives could simply be a literary feature and not reflect the language spoken at the time. However, it is interesting to note that it seems to be prevalent in many different branches of IE. This perhaps suggests that it is an inherited linguistic feature rather than a shared literary one. Although see Watkins (2001) on the possibility of shared literary features. 48 See Garrett (1994) for similar ideas regarding the role of bleaching in the development of unmarked verb-intial order in the Anatolian language Lycian.
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
155
To sum up this section, it seems that adopting Schrijver’s etymology for the
particle *es provides an explanation not only as to why the particle was so prolific but
also why there was an increase in frequency of verb fronting. It seems likely that this
increase in verb fronting would have led to a loss in pragmatic force, and so the
conditions were met for the reanalysis of verb fronting from an optional process to an
obligatory one. Although in this section an explanation has been offered for the
change from optional to obligatory verb fronting, it has not addressed the change in
the target position of the movement, i.e. the development of V-to-C movement. This
is the topic of the next section.
4.5 From clitic to affix: changes in the inner C position
To sum up the situation so far, in section 4.2 it was argued that unlike other early IE
languages, Insular Celtic did not have an inflected relative pronoun. The inherited PIE
relative pronoun was grammaticalised and became an uninflected relative marker. As
a result, the inner peripheral position in Insular Celtic contained a head rather than a
phrase, eliminating two of the possible configurations that provided evidence for an
articulated CP. Section 4.3 argued that there was an increase in frequency of verb-
intial clauses in pre-Old Irish, due to a requirement to mark the link between clauses
overtly. This meant that the verb followed by the enclitic connective *es appeared at
the beginning of virtually every main clause, making it possible for the verb fronting
to be reanalysed as an obligatory, grammatically motivated process. However, at this
stage the reanalysis of verb fronting as V-to-C movement is not yet possible. The
fronted verb occupies the outer position of the left periphery. If the fronted verb was
in all cases a remnant XP, then we could perhaps assume at this stage that the
articulated CP had been lost. In structural terms we would have the configuration XP-
X, which is compatible with an unarticulated CP; furthermore, with the increase in
frequency outlined in section 4.4, the fronted verb will have lost its pragmatic force,
reducing the evidence for a separate Topic/Focus position in the left periphery.
However, as argued in section 3.3 above, verb fronting could simply involve the
verbal head. In this case we have the configuration X-X, and therefore evidence for an
articulated CP. It seems then that for the articulated CP to be lost and for verb fronting
to be reanalysed as V-to-C movement there must be a further change, namely the
particles that fill the inner position must be reanalysed from independent syntactic
elements to affixes. It was argued in section 4.2 that the relative marker fills the inner
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
156
position (Cwh). However, it seems likely that this was not the only element that could
do so. Before we consider how the change from clitic to affix took place, let us
examine another candidate for this position, namely the connective clitic *es.
Hale (1995) argues that in Vedic and PIE connective clitics are placed by prosodic
inversion (Halpern 1995). The connective clitics are adjoined to the left of the second
conjunct during the syntax. Then, if no appropriate phonological host is provided by
the syntax, the clitics move to the right of the initial prosodic word during the
phonology so that they have a phonological host to their left. The evidence Hale
provides for this is that in Vedic Sanskrit and Greek, as shown in examples (46) and
(47), connective clitics appear between topicalised phrases in the outer position
(Top/FocP) and the relative or wh-phrases that occupy the specifier of the inner
position (Spec-CwhP). This means that in the early IE languages and PIE under Hale’s
analysis the connective clitics cannot be in the inner head position, i.e. Cwh.
46. stútaṣ ca yµs tvā várdhanti mahé rµdhase nṛmṇµya
praise-songs and which you increase great giving heroism
‘And which praise-songs fortify you for great giving and heroism’
(RV 8.2.29ab; Hale 1995: 266)
47. ha dè tálain’ álokhos tíni moi ôleto moírai
the PTC wretched wife.NOM wh.DAT.SG my.DAT.SG perished fate.DAT
‘But by what fate did my wretched wife perish?’
(Euripides Phoenissae 1566; Garrett 1996: 88)
However, it was argued above that the left periphery is structured somewhat
differently in Celtic to the other early IE languages. After the change of relative
pronouns from phrases to heads and also changes in the formation of wh-questions
(on which see section 6.2 below), the specifier of the inner C position is no longer
filled; therefore it becomes possible for PIE connective clitics to be reanalysed as C-
related particles in Celtic. As noted above, Watkins (1963) suggests that the PIE
connective clitics *kwe and *de became relative markers in Old Irish. Assuming that
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
157
relative markers are heads appearing in the inner C position, then it seems that these
clitics must have undergone a change from sentential clitic to C-related head.49
Let us consider the evidence for a similar change with regards to the connective
*es. It was argued above that *es was bleached of connective meaning because it was
used so frequently; however, the particle continued to be used long enough to prevent
apocope of the final syllables of initial verbs. It seems unlikely that this particle would
have been completely devoid of function. One possible explanation is that when the
particle was bleached of its connective meaning it became reanalysed as a clause-
typing particle, marking declarative, non-relative clauses. Such particles are common
in Brittonic Celtic. Middle Welsh has a declarative particle of the form y and Modern
Welsh has the particles mi and fe (Evans 1964, Willis 1998). In addition, the form of
special relative verbs suggests that the relative particle *io and the connective *es
never occurred together on the same verb. The two particles seem to be in
complementary distribution (Schrijver 1994, 1997). If they are both clause-marking
particles that appeared in the same syntactic position, namely the inner C position,
marking relative and non-relative clauses, then this is to be expected.
So, for each clause the inner C position (Cwh) is filled by a clause-marking clitic. In
main, i.e. non-relative, clauses, this clitic is *es and in relative clauses it is *io. Either
the verb or the entire vP is fronted in order to mark the link between clauses. This is
shown in the trees in (48) below:50
48. (a) Main clauses: (b) Relative clauses:
Top/FocP Top/FocP
Top/Foc CwhP Top/Foc CwhP vP /V vP/V
Spec Cwh` Spec Cwh` Ø Ø
Cwh TP Cwh TP es io (Subj…Obj) (Subj…Obj)
49 For the connectives to have been reanalysed as C elements they must either have been in complementary distribution with the relative particle *io or have combined with it. The former is perhaps more likely as there seems to be no phonological evidence of a union between the two. 50 If a specifier position is empty as in the trees in (56) it is simply not projected, and so absent from the structure. I have included the specifiers in the trees in (56) to emphasise the fact that after the reanalysis of *es and *io as C heads the specifier position is empty.
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
158
However, if, like the relative particle *io, the particle *es appears in the inner
peripheral position, then this means that both positions in the left periphery will be
filled, and so the verb cannot be analysed as filling this position. For verb fronting to
be analysed as V-to-C movement, then, the clause marking clitics in the inner position
must be reanalysed as verbal affixes.
The change from clitic to affix is a common case of grammaticalisation (see
Hopper & Traugott 1993; Roberts & Roussou 2003). In spite of the fact that this type
of change is so common, little work has been done to show exactly how it proceeds.
Before we can determine whether a clitic has become an affix we need a clear idea
about what the distinction between a clitic and an affix is. Zwicky & Pullum (1983:
504–5) provide criteria for making this distinction:
I) Clitics can exhibit a low degree of selection with respect to their hosts, while
affixes can exhibit a high degree of selection with respect to their stems.
II) Arbitrary gaps in the set of combinations are more characteristic of affixed
words than of clitic groups.
III) Morphophonological idiosyncrasies are more characteristic of affixed words
than of clitic groups.
IV) Semantic idiosyncrasies are more characteristic of affixed words than of clitic
groups.
V) Syntactic rules can affect affixed words, but cannot affect clitic groups.
VI) Clitics can attach to material already containing clitics, but affixes cannot.
These criteria, as set out by Zwicky & Pullum, are designed to help the linguist
determine whether a grammatical entity is a clitic or an affix. Fuß (2005) proposes
that children might use something similar during language acquisition to determine
whether a certain element should be analysed as a clitic or an affix. Let us relate this
idea to Celtic.
In section 2.3 it was argued that the main motivation from a linguist’s perspective
for the existence of the particle *es was to explain the lack of *i-apocope in verbs in
initial position. The idea that this particle prevents apocope does not provide any
evidence, however, as to whether it is a clitic or an affix. Apocope is a phonological
change and so takes place in the phonological component where a fronted verb and a
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
159
clitic make up a single phonological word in the same way as a verb and an affix.
However, after this apocope has taken place, verbs that appear with *es have a
different stem to verbs without *es. The verbal form that appears with *es will have a
final *-i, whereas the forms that do not occur with *es will not have this *-i, as it will
have been apocopated. This means that after apocope the particle *es appears to
condition a stem alternation. According to Zwicky & Pullum’s condition (III) above,
this is a property of affixes and not clitics. In addition, due to the frequency of
remnant vP fronting, the *es particle virtually always appears with a verb. Appearing
consistently with the same type of host, according to Zwicky & Pullum’s condition (I)
is again a property of affixes rather than clitics. On the basis of this evidence, then,
children reanalyse the *es particle as an affix rather than a clitic. On the assumption
that *io underwent the same development, then once this reanalysis has taken place,
the fronted verb can (and will) be analysed as appearing in the inner position in both
relative and non-relative clauses, and so verb-movement to the inner C position is
acquired. Furthermore, once verb fronting is analysed as targeting the inner position,
this eliminates the configuration X-X and so evidence for an articulated CP no longer
remains, and so we have V-to-C movement.
What this section has argued so far is that the development of V-to-C movement is
linked to the development of an unarticulated CP. The two changes seem to have
occurred in tandem. Interestingly, however, the analysis presented in this section also
suggests that the development of V-to-C movement is related to the development of
new verbal morphology. The reanalysis of the particle *es as an affix associated with
clause-initial verbs represents the first stage of the development of absolute
morphology. So, it seems that the development of V-to-C movement and the
development of the double system of verbal morphology are linked.
In section 2 above it was argued that one of the main conceptual advantages of
McCone’s suffix-/infix-deletion theory over Cowgill’s particle theory is that it links
the development of the double system of verbal inflection to the development of
unmarked verb-intial word order. Adopting the analysis proposed in this section, this
advantage no longer holds. By supplementing Cowgill’s particle theory with ideas
from syntactic change it seems to be possible to explain the shift to verb-intial word
order and how this is linked to the development of the double system of verbal
inflection.
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
160
4.6 Summary
This section has presented a new account of how verb-intial word order may have
developed in pre-Old Irish. It has been argued that the development of verb-intial
order seems to be linked not only to changes in the C-system causing the loss of the
articulated CP, but also to a morphological change, namely the development of
absolute verbal morphology. In section 4.2 it was argued that within a cue-based
theory of language change the acquisition of both an articulated CP and optional
rather than obligatory verb-movement requires the presence of certain cues in the
linguistic data. Section 4.3 argued that changes in the relative system between PIE
and Insular Celtic ensured that an XP could not appear in the inner position of the left
periphery. As a result, two of the three possible cues for an articulated CP were lost.
In section 4.4 it was argued that the tendency to mark clauses overtly led to an
increased use of clausal connectives and verb fronting. This increase in frequency of
verb fronting led its pragmatic force to be bleached, and the initial verb became
subject to reanalysis. However, at this stage verb fronting could not be analysed as V-
to-C movement as the inner position, the Cwh head, was filled. Section 4.5 proposed
that it was the reanalysis of clause typing clitics that filled the Cwh position from
clitics to affixes that resulted not only in the development of V-to-C movement but
also in the loss of the articulated CP.
Having developed an account of how simple verbs may have come to appear in
absolute initial position, let us now turn our attention to compound verbs.
5 THE DEVELOPMENT OF PREVERBS
The main (non-phonological) differences between initial preverbs in PIE and Old
Irish are equivalent to the differences exhibited by simple verbs. As discussed in
section 3.4, in PIE fronting a preverb was optional and had a pragmatic effect. In Old
Irish, on the other hand as seen in chapter 2, when C is unfilled and the verb is
compound, fronting the preverb is obligatory and stylistically unmarked. The
reanalysis undergone by preverbs, then, is essentially the same as that undergone by
simple verbs: pragmatically motivated, optional preverb fronting to a
Topicalisation/Focus projection in an articulated left periphery is reanalysed as
grammatically motivated movement of the preverb to a generalised C position. The
change in the status of preverbs, then, seems to be dependent on the same changes as
the reanalysis of simple verbs. First, fronting of the initial preverb must become
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
161
sufficiently frequent and lose its pragmatic force so that it is susceptible to reanalysis.
Secondly, the inner position of the CP must change so that the evidence for an
articulated CP decreases, and the preverb can be analysed as occupying the single C
head position.
Before we consider the parallels between the development of preverb-movement
and verb-movement, there is an additional issue that must be addressed. It was noted
above that preverbs were originally adverbial elements. Adverbs are typically phrases;
therefore in order to appear in the C position preverbs must have undergone a change
from XP to head.51 It seems plausible that preverbs underwent grammaticalisation,
whereby they lost their independent stress and their independent meaning. It seems
likely that the change from XP to head is connected to these changes.
As discussed in section 3.4 above, preverb fronting seems to have been
functionally equivalent to fronting of a simple verb in the early IE languages. It was
argued in section 4.4 that the main motivation for verb fronting seems to have been to
mark the link between clauses. When the verb was compound, then, the initial preverb
would have been fronted in place of the verb in order to mark this link. The increase
in frequency of fronted preverbs can be explained in the same way as the increase in
frequency of fronted verbs. After the bleaching of the connective particle *es and its
change in status to a clause typing particle, the frequency of preverb fronting
increased in order to mark the link between clauses. As a result of this, the
combination of initial preverb+*es became sufficiently frequent that it was bleached
of its pragmatic force and became subject to reanalysis.
Let us turn now to the second prerequisite for the reanalysis of the preverbs,
namely the changes to the inner position of the left periphery. It was argued in section
4 that for pragmatically fronted verbs to be reanalysed as appearing in the head of an
unarticulated CP, the evidence for the articulated CP had to decrease. Specifically it
was argued in section 4.5 that the particles that could appear in the inner C position,
namely the former connective *es and the relative marker *io had to undergo a
change from clitic to affix. This change seems quite natural in the case of verbs, as
verbs tend to show morphological endings. Preverbs on the other hand are typically
indeclinable and so do not tend to appear with affixes. However, it seems that there is
both cross-linguistic and Irish evidence to support this claim that the particles that 51 This is not necessarily the case if we adopt Sportiche’s (1992) view of clitic movement. See chapter 2, section 3.4 for details.
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
162
could appear in the inner C position became affixed to preverbs as well as verbs. Let
us consider the Irish evidence first.
It seems that in Old Irish preverbs are not completely indeclinable. Certain
preverbs show different forms in different contexts, suggesting that they can undergo
affixation in the same way as verbs. In chapter 2, section 3.3.2 we saw that like
simple verbs certain preverbs had special relative forms. In relative contexts the
preverbs im(m) and ar have the forms imme/imma and ara/are (Thurneysen 1946:
314). This extra vowel could be taken to reflect the presence of the relative particle
*io (Watkins 1963: 25). However, this relative marking is no longer a clitic, as its
distribution is severely restricted. Instead, it seems to appear as an affix on the
preverb. Similar traces can also be found of the non-relative particle *es. Russell
(1988) observes that certain preverbs have sigmatic forms, so for example we find the
deuterotonic sigmatic form fris-gair ‘answers, replies’ alongside the prototonic form –
frecair which must have developed from asigmatic *frith-gair. Russell further notes
that “the original pattern…seems to have consisted of sigmatic preverbs in
deuterotonic forms and asigmatic in prototonic forms” (Russell 1988: 160). These
sigmatic forms can be explained by the presence of Cowgill’s particle *es. As this
particle occurred in second position it would only have appeared after preverbs in
absolute initial position. Therefore, we would expect to find reflexes of the particle
only in deuterotonic forms and not in prototonic forms. This is exactly the pattern
Russell describes. As with the relative forms of the preverbs given above, the particle
*es seems to have become part of the preverb itself, suggesting that it is an affix
rather than a clitic.52 53
Let us consider now some cross-linguistic evidence. In certain Germanic dialects
complementizers can show number and person agreement. The examples in (50)
below come from Lower Bavarian, and those in (51) are from West Flemish.54
52 Not all preverbs have a sigmatic form when they are used in deuterotonic verbs. In most instances we would expect the final *es to have been lost through apocope as it was in the absolute verb forms. It is unclear why this was not the case with the preverb frith. 53 See Schrijver (1994) for an alternative account of the development of the sigmatic form of the preverb fris-. 54 For further details of complementizer agreement in Lower Bavarian see Bayer (1984). On West Flemish see Haegeman (1992). For recent theoretical accounts of this phenomenon see Fuß (2005) and Ackema & Neeleman (2005).
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
163
50. (a) ob-st (du) noch Minga kumm-st
whether-2SG (you) to Munich come-2SG
‘Whether you come to Munich’ (Fuß 2005: 159)
(b) wem-ma (mia) aaf Minga fon
when-1PL (we) to Munich drive
‘When we drive to Munich’ (Fuß 2005: 165)
51. (a) da-n ik werken
that-1SG I work.1SG
‘That I work’
(b) da gie werkt
that-2SG you work.2SG
‘That you work’ (Ackema & Neeleman 2005: 236)
Complementizers are generally considered to be indeclinable; however, it seems that
in some varieties it is possible for complementizers to appear with affixes. The
Germanic evidence, then, provides cross-linguistic support for the idea that affixes
can be associated with elements other than verbs. Fuß (2005) examines how
complementizer agreement developed in these Germanic dialects. He argues that
these inflectional affixes were in origin pronominal clitics, which were reanalysed
from clitic to affix in a similar way to that proposed for Irish above. Interestingly for
our purposes, Fuß proposes that the pronominal clitics were reanalysed as affixes first
with verbs and then the affixes subsequently spread to complementizers. The same
progression could be postulated for pre-Old Irish. The reanalysis of the C-oriented
clitics *es and *io as affixes may have taken place first in the most natural
environment, i.e. with verbs, and then secondarily in the less natural environment, i.e.
with preverbs.
It seems then that the development of preverbs from pragmatically fronted
elements to grammatically placed C elements can be explained in the same way as the
development of verbs. Having provided an account of the development of preverbs in
Old Irish, let us move on to the final class of elements that can fill C, namely conjunct
particles.
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
164
6 THE DEVELOPMENT OF CONJUNCT PARTICLES
In traditional grammars of Old Irish, conjunct particles are defined as particles that
cause the verb to take conjunct inflection or prototonic form (Thurneysen 1946: 28).
In chapter 2 it was argued, following Carnie, Harley & Pyatt (2000), Doherty (2000)
and Adger (to appear), that conjunct particles are complementizers, i.e. they fill the C
position. So far in this chapter, it has been argued that before the development of V-
to-C movement the only elements that could fill the ‘C position’, i.e. the head of the
inner projection of the left periphery, were enclitic clause-typing particles, such as the
relative particle *io or the non-relative particle *es, which derived from a connective.
If this is the case then we need an explanation as to how and when the Old Irish
conjunct particles developed. This is the aim of this section. The conjunct particles in
Old Irish can be divided into three main groups: negative particles, interrogative
particles and conjunctions. We will consider each of these in turn.
6.1 Negative particles
It seems that a parallel can be drawn between the development of the negative particle
and that of the preverbs in Old Irish. Fortson (2004: 149) notes that from the evidence
of the earliest IE languages it is possible to reconstruct a negative adverb of the form
*ne. In order to mark clausal negation, the default position for this particle was before
the verb. However, it seems it was also possible to move the negative particle to the
beginning of the clause for emphasis. McCone (1979a, 1997b) observes that this
process of fronting the negative to clause-initial position can have the same effect as
fronting the verb. In example (52) below (repeated from (33) above) each of the three
clauses contains an imperative, and so we would expect the verb to be in initial
position. However, in the second clause, the negative particle ma is fronted in place of
the verb.
52. ā no yajñe bhajata, mā no yajñad antárgata, PVB us sacrifice share.IMPV.2PL NEG us sacrifice exclude. IMPV.2PL
astv evá no ‘pi yajñe bhāga iti be.IMPV.3SG thus us PTC sacrifice share PTC
‘give us a share in the sacrifice, do not exclude us from the sacrifice, let there
be a share in the sacrifice for us.’ (McCone 1997b: 372)
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
165
If negation is fronted in the same way as verbs and preverbs to mark the link between
clauses, and marking the link between clauses is obligatory, then this provides an
explanation of how initial negation became so frequent that it was possible to
reanalyse it as obligatory.55 An interesting question at this point is whether the
negative particle co-occurred with connective particles. If the negative was fronted in
the same way as verbs and preverbs to the outer peripheral position, then we might
expect a clausal connective to be present in the inner peripheral position. There is
some evidence to suggest that this was the case.
The negative particle in Old Irish has special forms when it appears in relative
contexts and with an infixed pronoun. When a negative clause is relative, the negative
particle has the form nad. Watkins (1963: 26) argues that this /d/ is equivalent to the
/d/ that characterises Class C infixed pronouns, i.e. those used in a relative context.
This /d/, Watkins argues, derives from a PIE clausal connective cognate with Ancient
Greek dè. When the negative particle appears with an infixed pronoun it has the form
nach-. Watkins (1963) argues that this reflects the presence of the IE connective clitic
*-kwe-. So it seems that the negative particle must have co-occurred with at least some
connective clitics that occupied the C position. There is perhaps also reason to believe
that the negative particle co-occurred with the connective *es. In Old Irish the basic
form of the negative alternates between ni and ní. Only the first of these would have
developed from the PIE form *ne. Thurneysen (1946: 153) argues that the alternative
with the long vowel most likely arose from confusion with the negative form of the
copula *ne-est>*nés(t)>*nís>*ní. The same long vowel could also be achieved if the
negative particle occurred with the connective *es. Further research is necessary to
determine whether this is viable.
So, in sum, it seems that the development of negation as a conjunct particle,
occurring in the C position, can plausibly be seen as part of the same development
that led to the generalisation of verb-intial and preverb-initial word orders.
55 It is not clear why fronting the negative particle should carry the same force as fronting the verb. The negative particle cannot be considered part of the verb in the same way as a preverb. Traditionally, negation is a projection in its own right, not part of the vP. One possible explanation is that fronting emphasises polarity. Whereas fronting the verb emphasises positive polarity, fronting the negative emphasises negative polarity.
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
166
6.2 Interrogative particles
As discussed in chapter 2, there are two ways to form a question in Old Irish. In the
case of yes/no-questions an interrogative particle in appears in clause-initial position,
causing the verb to have dependent form. To form a wh-question, a wh-word appears
in initial position. The etymology of the interrogative particle in is unclear (although
see Pedersen (1909–1913: 391) for one suggestion). As a result this section will focus
on the history of the wh-words.
There are two classes of interrogative pronoun in Old Irish. The first class, ce,ci,
cía, are generally unstressed or weakly stressed and invariable for number and gender.
They behave like conjunct particles, being followed by a verb in conjunct or
prototonic form, as shown in the examples in (53) below.
53. (a) cía beir búar o thig Temrach
who take.PRES.3SG.CONJ cattle from house Tara.GEN.SG
‘Who takes cattle from the house of Tara?’ (LL 1566)
(b) cía acca
who see.PRET.2SG.PT
‘Who did you see?’ (LU 7135)
The second class cía ‘who’, cid, ced ‘what’ are stressed and followed by a relative
clause, as shown in (54).
54. (a) cía rannas dúib
who divide.PRES.3SG.REL for.2PL
‘Who (is it that) divides for you?’ (LL 11312)
(b) cid as dénti
what COP.PRES.3SG.REL to-be-done
‘What (is it that) is to be done?’ (Wb 12d41)
Both sets of interrogative pronouns in Old Irish formally correspond to those found in
many other IE languages, for example Vedic kas, Latin quis, Hittite kuiš ‘who’
(Fortson 2004: 130). This suggests that they descend from the reconstructed PIE
interrogative pronoun *kwo-/*kwi-. Of the two classes, Bergin (1938: 205) observes
that the unstressed variant is likely to be older. This seems plausible. The stressed
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
167
variant, as discussed in chapter 2, is best analysed as a cleft construction. Clefting is
the main strategy employed in Old Irish for topicalising or focussing. Newton (2006)
argues that the clefting construction developed as a result of the increase in verb
fronting. When verb fronting increased in frequency, it became impossible to front
any other constituent to initial position, and so a new strategy developed in order to
fulfil the original discourse function of fronting, namely clefting.56 It seems likely that
the development of wh-clefts occurred as part of this general development.
Let us turn our attention to the unstressed interrogative pronouns. As the older
variant it seems reasonable to suggest that these pronouns developed directly from the
PIE interrogative pronoun. As discussed in section 3.2, Hale (1987, 1995) proposes
that in PIE interrogative and relative pronouns formed a single class, appearing in the
inner position of the left periphery. If this were true for Irish, we would expect the
interrogative pronouns to have developed in the same way as the relative pronouns,
i.e. becoming second position enclitics. However, this is clearly not the case, as
interrogative pronouns appear in clause-initial position. There are two possible
explanations for this. First, it is perhaps possible that verb fronting and interrogative
clauses were simply not compatible. This would mean that if an interrogative pronoun
filled the inner position of the articulated CP, no element could move to the outer
position. As a result, the interrogative pronoun could not be analysed as a second-
position clitic, even if it became phonologically reduced, as there would be no
possible host to its left. The second option is that interrogative pronouns may have
been topicalised or focussed and so appeared in the outer position of the left
periphery.
The advantage of the first option is that under this analysis the interrogative
pronoun appears in the position we would expect, namely the inner peripheral
position that becomes the C position. Furthermore, the fact that the interrogative
pronoun is uninflected in the same way as was proposed above for the relative
pronoun, suggests that they may have undergone the same type of change, i.e. been
grammaticalised from specifiers to heads. However, under this analysis, the idea that
interrogatives cannot co-occur with a topicalised or focussed constituent is pure
stipulation.
56 See Garrett (1994) who proposes that a similar development took place in Lycian.
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
168
If we consider the second option, the interrogative pronoun is not in the position
we might expect, i.e. the inner peripheral position; however, this is not necessarily a
problem. The idea that the interrogative pronoun might be focussed receives some
cross-linguistic support. First, parallels are often drawn between wh-movement and
focussing (Kiparsky 1995a, Rizzi 1997, Sabel 2000). If wh-movement is a sub-type of
focussing, then this suggests that wh-elements may be emphatic, and so the possibility
of them occupying initial position seems plausible. Furthermore, there is comparative
evidence to suggest that certain types of wh-word can be fronted to Top/FocP. In
Hittite, wh-words tend to appear in second position; however, indefinite relative
pronouns appear clause-initially (Held 1957). Hale (1987) argues that the reason for
this is that, unlike other types of wh-word, indefinite relatives in Hittite are topicalised
and so appear clause-initially. It is possible that interrogative wh-words in Old Irish
could behave like indefinite relatives in Hittite. There is also evidence from within
Irish that supports the idea that interrogative pronouns in pre-Old Irish were fronted to
Top/FocP. As discussed above, it seems likely that clefting developed in Old Irish to
take over the function of the Top/FocP. With the increase in verb fronting, this
position could no longer be used to topicalise or focus any other constituent. The cleft
construction developed to take on this function. The fact that stressed interrogative
pronouns appear in a cleft construction supports the idea that interrogative pronouns
were originally in Top/FocP. When Top/FocP lost its pragmatic force, and the
interrogative pronouns that filled it were reanalysed as C heads, the wh-cleft
construction developed to replace the old relative construction.
In sum, it seems that it is possible to explain how the Old Irish interrogative
pronouns developed from PIE in two different ways. At this stage, perhaps the second
option, whereby the interrogative pronoun was fronted to Top/FocP, and was
reanalysed as a C element in the same way as fronted verbs and preverbs, is
preferable.
6.3 Conjunctions
Thurneysen (1946: 547–8) provides a list of 57 conjunctions found in the Old Irish
glosses. Of these, only three are conjunct particles, namely aran ‘in order that’, dian
‘if, when’ and con ‘so that, until’. It is only these three particles that appear in clause-
initial position and are followed by dependent forms of the verb; therefore, it seems
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
169
that it is only these three particles that appear in the C position. This section aims to
consider how these complementizers developed.
Thurneysen (1946:298–9) argues that aran, dian and con all developed from the
combination of a preposition and the relative particle/demonstrative an. So, for
example, dian- ‘if, when’ seems to have developed from the combination of the
preposition di and an, meaning perhaps ‘of/from that’. Similarly, aran ‘in order that’
was in origin the adverb/preverb ar ‘for’ plus an, and con ‘so that, until’ came from
the preposition co ‘to’. Thurneysen (1946: 299) suggests that originally these
prepositional phrases (PPs) were part of the main clause, later becoming reanalysed as
part of the embedded clause. This proposal receives cross-linguistic support from the
development of complementizers in other languages. It has been argued that the
complementizer that in English developed diachronically from the demonstrative that
(Kiparsky 1995a, Ferraresi 1997, van Gelderen 2005). The change in status of that
can be seen as a case of rebracketing. Initially, the demonstrative that appeared as the
complement of the verb of the main clause and referred to a clause in apposition, as
shown in (55) below. Such clauses were then subject to reanalysis, whereby that was
reanalysed as being part of the subordinate clause.
55. I know thati [the earth is round]i > I know [that the earth is round]
This type of rebracketing is quite common. The complementizer for seems to have
developed in a similar way, initially being part of the main clause, and being
reanalysed as the complementizer of the infinitival clause (see Fischer et al 2000 for
more details of this change):
56. It is good [PPfor me] [CPto go] > It is good [CPfor [me to go]]
It is easy to see how this could be applied to the Old Irish case, with the PP containing
the demonstrative being part of the main clause and referring to the second clause,
and then being reanalysed as part of the second clause.
For relative PPs to be reanalysed as complementizers in the way Thurneysen
suggests, the PP must be clause final in order for there to be ambiguity as to which
clause it belongs in. This suggests that at this stage, Irish cannot have been
predominantly verb-final. There are two possible scenarios here: either the
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
170
development of conjunct particles followed the shift to verb-intial word order or at
this stage, Irish was perhaps verb-medial. The first of these options is not appealing. If
the shift to verb-intial order occurred before the development of conjunct particles,
then it becomes difficult to explain why conjunct particles and initial verbs with
absolute inflection are in complementary distribution. It seems unlikely that conjunct
particles would be analysed as occupying the C position if this position were already
filled by the verb or a preverb. This being the case, at the stage when conjunct
particles developed, before the shift to verb-intial word order, Irish must have been
verb medial. We will return to this proposal in more detail in chapter 5.
In addition to being reanalysed as belonging to the embedded clause rather than the
main clause, the change from relative PPs to complementizers involves a further
change from a phrase to a head (see Roberts & Roussou (2003) and van Gelderen
(2005) where it is argued that that underwent a similar change from specifier to head
in the history of English). On theoretical grounds it seems that the rebracketing and
the change from specifer to head could have occurred in either order. However, there
is reason to believe that the conjunct particles may have gone through a pre-
complementizer stage, where they were syntactically part of the embedded clause, but
were still phrasal categories. As noted above, Old Irish has a number of conjunctions
that do not seem to appear in the C position. These particles are followed by
independent rather than dependent verb forms and cannot act as hosts for enclitic
object pronouns. This suggests that they cannot fill the C position, and must either fill
a higher position in the clause, or be clause external (cf. the German conjunction denn
‘as’). However, it seems unlikely that these non-conjunct particles should be part of a
preceding clause. In fact, in many cases non-conjunct particles occur in clause-initial
position, as can be seen in the examples in (57).
57. (a) ma chomalnit a n-grád
if fulfil.PRES.3PL.ABS their orders
‘If they fulfil their orders’ (Wb 28c7)
(b) in tan do-rolaig día in n-úaill do-rigni…
when PVB-forgive.PERF.3SG.DT god the pride PVB-do.PERF.3SG.DT
‘When God had forgiven him the pride he had shown…’ (Ml 50d15)
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
171
In these cases the particle clearly cannot be part of a preceding clause, suggesting that
the particle occupies Spec-CP.57 The existence of clausal connectives in Old Irish that
do not occupy the C position suggests that it is possible that conjunct particles also
went through a similar stage, whereby they occupied a specifier position in the left
periphery, before being reanalysed as C heads.
The change of the conjunct particles from specifier to head can be viewed as a case
of grammaticalisation, whereby the PP undergoes both semantic and phonological
change. Initially the conjunction meaning associated with the PP will be a secondary
meaning, derivable from its literal meaning by pragmatic inference. Over time,
however, the pragmatic link between the new conjunction meaning and the literal
meaning will become opaque, and it will become possible to analyse them as distinct
lexical items, i.e. the original PP and a conjunction.58 In addition, phonological
change will obscure the internal structure of the PP, so that it is no longer clear that it
consists of two separate elements. Once the internal structure of the PP is opaque, this
reduces the evidence that it is a phrase, and reanalysis of the PP as a head becomes
possible.
Having the phonological and semantic qualities of a complementizer, however, is
not sufficient for being reanalysed as one; it is also necessary for certain syntactic
conditions to be met. In other words, for an element to be reanalysed as a
complementizer it cannot appear with any other elements that unambiguously fill the
C position. As discussed above, the fact that conjunct particles are in complementary
distribution with initial simple verbs and the initial preverb of deuterotonic
compounds suggests that they cannot have developed after the development of V-to-C
and preverb-to-C movement. However, it was argued in sections 4 and 5 above that
before the development of V-to-C movement, the verb or preverb (or the negative
particle) moved to the outer left-peripheral position in virtually every clause and C
was filled by enclitic clause typing particles, such as the main clause particle *es and
the relative particle *io. To explain the development of conjunct particles, then, we
must explain why they did not co-occur with fronted verbs or preverbs and establish
whether they co-occurred with C particles.
57 It is possible that conjunctions such as in tan ‘when’ may have originally been used as adverbial expressions. This being the case, we would not expect them to be part of the main clause, but adjoined to the embedded clause. 58 This change is perhaps comparable to the presumed development of English because from the PP by cause.
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
172
The fact that conjunct particles are in complementary distribution with initial verbs
and preverbs can be easily explained. In sections 4 and 5 above it was argued that the
reason that fronted verbs and preverbs appeared so frequently in initial position was to
mark the link between clauses. As subordinating conjunctions, the primary function of
conjunct particles is to link two clauses. Therefore, whenever a conjunct particle is
present this particle marks the link between clauses and so movement of the verb or
preverb to the left periphery is not necessary.59 It could also be the case, of course,
that these conjunctions, after the rebracketing, but before they were analysed as heads,
occupied the same position as fronted verbs and preverbs. This being the case, in
addition to the functional reason for their complementary distribution, there is also a
structural explanation.
An important question that arises here is when the development of conjunct
particles took place. It was argued above that the conjunctions cannot have become C
elements after the development of V-to-C movement, otherwise they would not be in
complementary distribution with fronted verbs. This leaves us with the following
options: either the conjunctions became C elements before the development of V-to-C
movement or both changes occurred at the same time. It was argued in sections 4 and
5 that the development of verb and preverb-movement to C was linked to the change
from an articulated to an unarticulated CP. Before this change, there was no
generalised C position. It was argued above that the inner position was essentially a
restricted focus position that could only be filled by clause typing particles, marking
clauses as relative (*io) or non-relative (*es). This being the case, we would not
expect the inner position at this stage to contain conjunctions, as clause linking was
not part of its function.60 In fact, according to the analysis proposed in sections 4 and
5, clause linking is a function associated with the outer position. Ideally then, from a
theoretical perspective we would expect the reanalysis of the conjunctions as C heads
not to take place until the development of an unarticulated CP. In this way the
development of complementizers can be linked to the development of a generalised C
position.
59 It could perhaps also be the case that the development of these new conjunct particles as a new strategy for linking clauses contributed to the reanalysis of the connective particles as clause typing particles by encroaching on their function. 60 Although this inner position contains *es which was a connective, it was argued in section 4.5 above that *es did not appear as head of the inner peripheral position until it was reanalysed as a clause typing particle.
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
173
Empirical evidence to support the idea that the conjunctions became C elements at
the same time as the development of a generalised C position is difficult to come by.
One construction that may be taken to support this claim comes from the use of
infixed pronouns after the conjunctions aran, dian and con. These conjunctions are
used with class C pronouns. Class C pronouns are used in relative contexts and are
characterised by a /d/. Watkins (1963) argues that this /d/ comes from a connective
cognate with Ancient Greek dè, but has come to play a relative function. On the
assumption that like the connectives *es and *kwe the connective *de was reanalysed
as a relative clause marker, appearing in the inner peripheral position, then for the
conjunctions aran, dian and con to become C heads, this former connective must have
changed from a clitic to an affix associated with infixed pronouns.61 This suggests
then, that the conjunctions aran, dian and con cannot have been reanalysed as C heads
until after the change in status of the clause typing particles from clitic to affix, i.e. at
the same time as the reanalysis of initial verbs and preverbs as C elements.
One final issue to be addressed in this section is why it was that only three
expressions became C heads; what prevented the reanalysis of other nominal and
adverbial expressions as complementizers? It seems unlikely that there will be a
single answer to this question. In some cases the expression in question may not have
satisfied the semantic and phonological conditions for being reanalysed as a head.
This is evidently the case for in tan ‘when’, literally ‘the time’. However, many of the
non-conjunct particles do seem to fulfil these conditions by the Old Irish period. For
example, the etymology of the particle ma ‘if’ is unclear, and phonologically it
resembles a head rather than a phrase. However, these conditions may not have been
met at the time when the changes in the C-system took place. Thurneysen (1946: 558)
notes that in the Early Irish Laws i-nneoch ma or neoch ma is often found in place of
ma (neoch is the dative singular of the indefinite pronoun ní ‘something, anything’).
The language of the Laws is typically archaic, and so this could plausibly reflect an
earlier stage of the language. If this construction was used when the shift to verb-intial
word order took place, then i-nneoch ma would have been clearly phrasal and so
could not have been reanalysed as a C head.
A further possibility is that whether or not an expression was reanalysed as a
complementizer could have been related to whether or not that expression co-occurred 61 The reanalysis of *de was somewhat different to that of the others as it became part of the infixed pronoun system rather than the verbal morphology.
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
174
with a fronted verb. It was argued above that once the meaning of aran, dian and con
changed such that their primary function was to link clauses, they would no longer
appear with fronted verbs or preverbs. It could be the case that these three expressions
were the only ones that underwent this change in meaning and function before the
changes in the C-system and the shift to verb-intial word order. Therefore, although
there are other non-conjunct particles that function primarily as conjunctions in Old
Irish, this may not have been the case when the CP was restructured.
6.4 Summary
The discussion in this section has of necessity been somewhat tentative; however, it
has shown that at first sight the development of conjunct particles seems to be
consistent with our account of the development of verb-intial and preverb-initial order
in pre-Old Irish. It is plausible that the negative and interrogative particles and the
conjunctions that appear in the C position in Old Irish could have originated in the
outer position of an articulated CP, and been reanalysed as C heads as a result of the
loss of the articulated CP and the development of a generalised C position.
7. CONCLUSION
This chapter has provided a new account of the development of the Old Irish double
system of verbal inflection. Section 2 outlined the two main existing philological
accounts of the development and argued that on conceptual grounds Cowgill’s
particle theory is preferable to McCone’s suffix-/infix-deletion theory. However, a
major problem with the particle theory is that it does not explain the shift to verb-
intial word order, and the link between the syntactic position of the verb and its
morphological form. The aim of the remainder of the chapter was to solve this
problem. Having outlined the main syntactic characteristics of the verbal system in
PIE in section 3, sections 4 and 5 went on to suggest how this PIE system may have
developed into that of pre-Old Irish. Section 4 concentrated on the development of V-
to-C movement in pre-Old Irish, arguing that it this was linked to the loss of the
articulated CP and the development of a generalised C position. Section 5 provided
the beginnings of an account of the development of compound verbs, arguing that
preverb-to-C movement developed in the same way and as a result of the same
conditions as V-to-C movement. In section 6, we turned our attention to conjunct
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
175
particles, and attempted to show that their development can be seen to be parallel to
that of initial verbs and preverbs, in that it is linked to the changes in the C-system.
In addition to linking the development of V-to-C movement with changes in the C-
system, it was argued in section 4 that V-to-C movement is also linked to the
development of absolute verbal morphology. As discussed in chapter 3, the
relationship between verb-movement and verbal morphology has received a lot of
attention within both diachronic and synchronic generative work. In particular the loss
of verb-movement is often linked to the loss of verbal inflections (Roberts 1993;
Vikner 1995). An interesting question with regard to the Irish case, then, is to what
extent the development of the new verbal morphology led to the development of V-to-
C movement.
It seems that the development of the new verbal morphology was necessary for the
development of V-to-C movement. Without the reanalysis of the former connective
*es as a verbal affix rather than a clitic, the verb could not have been analysed as
appearing in the C position. However, although this development was necessary it
was not sufficient. As discussed in section 4, a number of other changes were
necessary for the development of V-to-C movement, most notably a significant rise in
the frequency of pragmatically motivated verb fronting. So, it seems that the link
between the development of verb-movement and the development of morphology is
by no means causal.
A further interesting question is whether V-to-C movement could have arisen
without the development of new C-based verbal morphology. It could be argued that
it was the presence of these C-based inflections on the verb that linked the verb to the
C position. If the clause-typing particles had not been present then there would have
been no link between the fronted verb and the C position. As a result, when verb
fronting became reanalysed as obligatory it would perhaps have been associated with
the T position as a result of its tense and agreement inflections. Viewed in a slightly
different way, the C-based inflections could be used as a cue during language
acquisition to show children that the verb is in the C position. However, as discussed
in chapter 3, the status of morphological cues is somewhat controversial. In the case
of V-to-T movement, languages that show a morphological cue also have a syntactic
cue. If we can show that in Irish the only cue linking the fronted verb to the C position
is the morphological one then this will provide evidence for the validity of
morphological cues.
CHAPTER 4 – THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
176
With the development of conjunct particles, as discussed in section 6, there is some
syntactic evidence that the verb moves to C rather than T. Once conjunct particles are
analysed as C elements, i.e. as particles merged in the C position, then the fact that the
fronted verb is in complementary distribution with these elements provides evidence
that the fronted verb targets the C position rather than T. However, it is not entirely
clear whether this evidence can constitute a cue for acquisition. We will return to this
issue in the next chapter, when we consider the loss of V-to-C movement and the loss
of the double system of verbal morphology.
CHAPTER 5
THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM OF VERBAL INFLECTION
1 INTRODUCTION
One of the main differences between Old and Modern Irish is the reduction in the
complexity of the verbal system. One significant way in which the complexity has
been reduced is through the loss of the double system of verbal inflection. In Modern
Irish all verbs in all persons and tenses have only one set of inflectional endings, used
both when the verb is in absolute initial position and when the verb is preceded by a
conjunct particle. The table below shows the forms of the verb mol ‘praise’.1
Table 1: Conjugation of the regular verb mol ‘praise’ in Modern Irish
PRESENT FUTURE PAST CONDITIONAL IMPERFECT
1sg molaim molfaidh mé mhol mé mholfainn mholainn
2sg molann tú molfaidh tú mhol tú mholfá mholtá
3sg molann sé/sí molfaidh sé/sí mhol sé/sí mholfadh sé/sí mholadh sé/sí
1pl molaimid molfaimid mholamar mholfaimis mholaimis
2pl molann sibh molfaidh sibh mhol sibh mholfadh sibh mholadh sibh
3pl molann siad molfaidh siad mhol sibh mholfaidís mholaidís
Pass moltar molfar moladh mholfaí mholtaí
(McGonagle 1988)
The loss of the double system is also apparent in the Old Irish compound verbs.
Between Old and Modern Irish all formerly compound verbs have been simplified,
and follow the same inflectional patterns as other simple verbs, as shown by the
present tense paradigms for the simple verb mol ‘praise’ and the formerly compound
verbs tabhair ‘give’ (OIr do-beir), déan ‘do, make’ (OIr do-gní) and feic ‘see’ (OIr
ad-cí).
1 These endings differ slightly between dialects, with Munster retaining more synthetic forms. See Ó Siadhail (1991) for detail. Crucially, though, none of the Modern Irish dialects retain a distinction between absolute and conjunct morphology. Scots Gaelic, on the other hand, does retain such a distinction but only in the future tense, where we find the -(a)idh ending in independent verbs and the -ø ending in dependent forms.
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
178
Table 2: The present tense of mol ‘praise’, tabhair ‘give’, déan ‘do’ and feic ‘see’
1sg molaim tugaim déanaim feicim
2sg molann tú tugann tú déanann tú feiceann tú
3sg molann sé/sí tugann sé/sí déanann sé/sí feiceann sé/sí
1pl molaimid tugaimid déanaimid feicimid
2pl molann sibh tugann sibh déanann sibh feiceann sibh
3pl molann siad tugann siad déanann siad feiceann siad
Pass moltar tugtar déantar feictear
Only one trace of the Old Irish double system remains in Modern Irish. There is a
class of around ten irregular verbs that have different independent and dependent
forms. For example, the verb feic ‘see’ has the past tense form chonaic in initial
position (1c), but fhaca/bhfaca in dependent position, as shown in (1a) and (1b).2
1. (a) Ní fhaca tú mo nighean
Neg see.PAST.DEP you my daughter
‘You didn’t see my daughter’
(b) An bhfaca tú mo nighean?
Int see.PAST.DEP you my daughter
‘Did you see my daughter?’
(c) Chonaic tú í
see.PAST.IND you her
‘You saw her’ (McCloskey 2001b: 79)
There is little doubt that these different forms are suppletive in Modern Irish, with the
presence of particular C elements conditioning their insertion (McCloskey 2001b: 78).
Duffield (1995: 181) explains the appearance of the two forms in terms of f-selection.
If the T position is f-selected by a complementizer or negation, then the dependent
form is inserted. If the T position is unselected by any such C head, then the
independent form will appear. In current minimalist terms the appearance of the
different forms could be explained in terms of C-T feature spreading, whereby certain
specifications of C (e.g. negative, interrogative and certain complementizers) transfer 2 The distinction between the forms in (1a) and (1b) is a result of the different particles. The negative particle lenites, giving fhaca< faca, whereas the interrogative particle nasalizes, giving bhfaca<faca.
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
179
a feature to T that conditions the insertion of the dependent form. Crucially, however,
the use of independent and dependent verbal forms in Modern Irish is an irregularity,
an idiosyncratic feature of a handful of verbs. It is by no means a productive system,
and so is of little interest from a syntactic perspective.
The aim of this chapter is to explore how the double system of inflection of the Old
Irish period developed into the system we find in Modern Irish, in other words, how
the double system of verbal inflection was lost. In chapter 4 it was argued that in pre-
Old Irish the double system was syntactically productive, i.e. it depended on the
syntactic position of the verb. In chapter 2 it was argued that in Classical Old Irish the
verb only moves as far as T, and so the system cannot be syntactically productive.
Section 2 examines the change between pre- and Classical Old Irish, namely how the
double system was lost as a syntactically productive system, and how this can be
linked to what Watkins (1963) terms ‘univerbation’. In the Middle Irish period the
deuterotonic/prototonic distinction broke down as a result of the simplification of
compound verbs. This is the topic of section 3. The final stage in the loss was the loss
of the absolute/conjunct distinction during the Middle and Early Modern periods. This
is examined in section 4. Section 5 concludes the chapter.
2 UNIVERBATION: THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM IN THE SYNTAX
2.1 Introduction: what is univerbation?
The process of univerbation is the coming together of two (or more) parts of a word to
form a single unit. It seems to be a common process amongst all the early IE
languages. For example, in Archaic Latin we find examples such as sub vos placo
corresponding to Latin vos supplico ‘I beseech you’ (see Vincent 1999: 1119).
Similarly in Homeric Greek we find non-univerbated examples such as those in (2a)
alongside univerbated forms as in (2b). By Classical Greek only the latter survives.
2. (a) hôs ephat' Atreïdês, epi d' êineon alloi Akhaioi So spoke Atreus PVB PTC approved all Acheans
‘So spoke Atreus and all the Acheans shouted assent
(Il 3. 461/McCone 1979a: 253)
(b) Hektori men gar epêinêsan
Hector.DAT on the other hand for praised.3PL
‘to Hector on the other hand they gave praise’ (Il 18.312)
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
180
The process that Watkins (1963) describes as univerbation in Irish is somewhat
different. Between pre- and Classical Old Irish there is a change in the position of the
verb, such that the verb always appears in initial or near-initial position regardless of
whether there is a conjunct particle or an initial preverb in initial position. The
development of #CV…# orders in place of #C…V# orders is not strictly univerbation
as the conjunct particle and the verb do not form a single unit (except perhaps in the
phonology as the conjunct particle is proclitic). The development of #PV…# orders in
place of #P…V# orders is perhaps closer to the strict definition as the preverb and the
verb form a single semantic unit. However, in Classical Old Irish the preverb and the
verb are still syntactically and phonologically distinct. Infixation is still possible
between the verb and the preverb and compound verbs do not show initial stress,
which we would expect of a single phonological unit. True univerbation of this kind
does not occur until the Middle Irish period when compound verbs are simplified. We
will return to this in section 3.
It seems, then, that what Watkins refers to as univerbation is not in fact
univerbation in the strictest sense; it is better characterised as a syntactic change,
resulting in the generalisation of verb-initial or near-verb-initial word order. Let us
consider this change in theoretical terms.3 It was argued in chapter 4 that pre-Old Irish
resembles the system proposed by Carnie, Harley & Pyatt (2000), having a filled C
condition that forces movement of either simple verbs or the initial preverb of
compound verbs to C in the syntax when C is otherwise unfilled. In chapter 2 it was
argued that this is no longer the case in Classical Old Irish, where simple verbs only
move as far as T and preverbs do not move in the syntax. Furthermore, whereas in
pre-Old Irish the verb remains within the vP when C is filled, in Classical Old Irish
this is not the case. The verb moves to T across the board, irrespective of whether C is
filled. The differences between the two periods can be seen in the trees in (3–5)
below, where the pre-Old Irish situation is shown on the left and Classical Old Irish
on the right. Example (3) shows the difference in the structure for simple verbs,
example (4) for compound verbs, and example (5) shows the structure for a clause
containing a conjunct particle.
3 For a summary of Watkins’ (1963) account of univerbation and the problems with it see the discussion of McCone’s suffix/infix-deletion theory in chapter 4, section 2.3.
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
181
3. CP CP
C TP C TP
verb T vP T vP
verb v VP v VP
V DP V DP
4. CP CP
C TP C TP
pvb pvb T vP T vP
verb v VP v VP
V DP V DP
verb 5. CP CP
C TP C TP
Conj Conj T vP T vP
(pvb)verb v VP v VP
(pvb) V DP V DP
verb Two significant changes have occurred between pre- and Classical Old Irish. First, V-
to-C movement has been lost and replaced by V-to-T movement, leading to the
‘univerbation’ of simple verbs and conjunct particles in clause-initial position.
Secondly, verb-movement to light v has been generalised. In pre-Old Irish it seems
that V-to-v movement only takes place when light v is empty, i.e. when the verb is
simple. In Classical Old Irish the verb begins to move to light v across the board,
regardless of whether there is a preverb in light v. Between pre- and Classical Old
Irish there seems to have been a change in the status of the preverbs. Whereas in pre-
Old Irish they are syntactically independent and so can block verb-movement to light
v, in Classical Old Irish this is no longer the case.
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
182
In terms of the approach to syntactic change outlined here, the phenomenon that
Watkins calls univerbation in Irish seems to be the result of two independent changes,
namely a parametric change, whereby V-to-C movement was reanalysed as V-to-T
movement, and a change in the syntactic status of preverbs. Sections 2.2 and 2.3
consider each of these changes in turn. Although these changes account for the
syntactic differences between pre- and Classical Old Irish, there is also a crucial
morphological difference, specifically in the way that the double system of verbal
inflection is derived. Whereas in pre-Old Irish the different forms are syntactically
derived and depend on the verb and preverb occupying different syntactic positions,
in Classical Old Irish this is no longer the case and the different forms result from
post-syntactic operations. Section 2.4 considers how and why these post-syntactic
operations may have arisen.
2.2 ‘Univerbation’ within the clause: generalised V-to-T movement
It was argued in chapter 2 that there is good evidence to suggest that in Classical Old
Irish the verb only moves as far as T. This means that if, as proposed in chapter 4,
pre-Old Irish had V-to-C movement, V-to-C movement must have been lost and
replaced by V-to-T movement at some point before the attested Old Irish period.
From a theoretical perspective the reanalysis of V-to-C movement as V-to-T
movement is fairly straightforward. Under current minimalist assumptions (Chomsky
2005, 2006), T does not have any of its own features. All of T’s tense and subject
agreement (φ) features are given to T by the C head. Under this view, C and T could
be seen as a complex category (Biberauer 2005). Instead of an Agree relation between
T and V, then, we have an Agree relation between the C-T complex and the v-V
complex. As a result, for V-to-C movement to be reanalysed as V-to-T movement, we
do not need to postulate a new Agree relation. The C-T complex still Agrees with v-V
as before; the only difference is the position of the feature triggering movement.
Whereas in pre-Old Irish the Affix-feature is associated with C, in Classical Old Irish
it becomes associated with T.
The replacement of V-to-C movement by generalised V-to-T movement is also
reasonably common cross-linguistically. Old English, Old French and Middle Welsh
are all argued to have V-to-C movement, which is lost and replaced by V-to-T
movement during the course of their history (see Fischer, van Kemenade, Koopman
& van der Wurff (2000) and the references therein for English; Roberts (1993) for
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
183
French; Willis (1998) for Welsh). So it seems, then, that the idea that V-to-C
movement was reanalysed as V-to-T movement in Irish receives both theoretical and
cross-linguistic support. The next task is to explain why this change might have taken
place.
As discussed in chapter 3, the abstract syntactic features that drive movement are
acquired during language acquisition on the basis of evidence in the linguistic data. In
order for V-to-C movement to be reanalysed as V-to-T movement, cues for V-to-C
movement must become obscured and cues for V-to-T movement must develop. In
the documented cases of the loss of V-to-C movement in English, French and Welsh
the loss of V-to-C movement is part of the loss of V2. As discussed in chapter 3,
Lightfoot (1999) argues that the cue for the V2 parameter is clauses of the type XVS,
where some element other than the subject precedes the verb, and the subject appears
post-verbally. A decrease in the frequency of XVS clauses will lead to the loss of the
cue for V2, and so V2 will be lost. This seems to have been the case in both English
and French where there was an increase in subject-initial clauses at the expense of the
other types before V2 was finally lost (see Roberts 1993: 142–186 for French, and
326–332 for English).4
The loss of V-to-C movement in Irish clearly differs from the other attested cases
as it is not related to the loss of V2. V-to-C movement in pre-Old Irish cannot have
been cued by XVS orders, and so we need a different cue and a different explanation
for the loss. In chapter 4 it was proposed that there are two possible cues for the
acquisition of V-to-C movement in Irish. First, there is the morphological cue, the C-
based verbal morphology linking the verb to the C position. Secondly, there is the
syntactic cue, the fact that a fronted verb does not co-occur with elements that are
merged in the C position, i.e. conjunct particles. Let us examine each of these in turn.
2.2.1 The loss of final syllables and the loss of V-to-C movement
As we saw in chapter 3, it is often argued that the loss of verbal morphology can lead
to the loss of verb-movement. The most widely cited case is that of the loss of verbal
inflection and the loss of V-to-T movement in English (Roberts 1985, 1993). Under a
4 The situation in Welsh is somewhat different. Willis (1998: 184–189) argues that although the loss of V2 was in part triggered by a decrease in object topicalisation, the most significant factor was the loss of preverbal particles. These preverbal particles appeared in the C position, and so any constituent that appeared to their left had to be analysed as appearing in Spec-CP. When these particles were lost through phonological change this evidence disappeared.
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
184
cue-based theory of acquisition this correlation can be seen as the loss of a
morphological cue leading to a failure to acquire the associated movement process.
When the verbal endings are lost, the morphological cue linking the verb to the T
position is lost and so evidence for V-to-T movement disappears.5
In chapter 4 it was argued that V-to-C movement developed in pre-Old Irish in
conjunction with the development of new C-based morphology. This clause-marking
suffix, Cowgill’s *es particle, linked the initial verb to the C position, and so acted as
a cue during acquisition, showing that the raised verb was in the C position rather
than the T position. Particle theorists (Cowgill 1975) argue that this particle *es was
lost in the fifth century as part of the process of apocope that affected the language as
a whole at this time (see McCone 1996 for details of this change), and this is why it is
not found in Old Irish. According to a cue-based theory of language acquisition, if
this morphological ending that links the verb to the C position is lost, then one
possible cue for V-to-C movement is obscured and so we might expect V-to-C
movement to be lost.
One problem that arises from the attempt to link the loss of V-to-C movement to
the loss of verbal morphology is that although the particle *es was apocopated, it left
behind the absolute endings.6 Even after the loss of the *es particle, the absolute
endings were clearly distinct from the conjunct. Why was this not sufficient to link
the verb to the C position? One possible answer is that for inflectional morphology to
act as a cue for acquisition of movement to a particular functional head, there must be
a clear link between the form of the ending and the function associated with the
functional head. If, as argued in chapter 4, the particle *es marked declarative main
clauses there would have been a clear correspondence between the form *es and the
function of clause typing. Clause typing is typically associated with the C head, and
so the particle *es would have clearly been the realisation of a feature associated with
5 Although, as discussed in chapter 3, the loss of verbal morphology can at best be seen as a contributing factor to the loss of V-to-T movement, as verb-movement was not lost in English until the loss of syntactic evidence for V-to-T movement. 6 David Adger (p.c.) suggests that relative endings may also have provided sufficient morphological evidence for V-to-C movement. These endings have survived in the Modern Goidelic languages and so it seems likely that they were fairly robust at this earlier stage. However, as we saw in chapter 2, the special relative endings are restricted in terms of distribution, only occurring with 3rd person and 1pl forms of simple verbs. It is perhaps possible at this stage of the language, when there were large numbers of compound verbs, that the special relative endings would not have been sufficiently frequent to maintain V-to-C movement.
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
185
C.7 However, once the *es particle was lost as a result of apocope, this link between
form and function was lost. The absolute endings remained but the main function of
these endings was to mark subject-verb agreement, a property of the T head rather
than the C head. The functional link between the verbal endings and the C position
disappeared; therefore the morphological cue was lost.
If we assume, then, that the morphological cue is the only evidence that the initial
verb is in the C position rather than the T position, then when this cue is lost, there is
no longer any evidence that the verb is in C. However, the verb in initial position will
satisfy the cue for V-to-T movement, i.e. it appears to the left of the subject and VP-
adverbs. The loss of the morphological cue, then, leads to a loss of evidence for V-to-
C and an increase in evidence for V-to-T resulting in a shift in parameter settings.8
A further issue to address is whether the loss of the morphological cue was the
only factor that played a role in the loss of V-to-C movement. If the acquisition of V-
to-C movement relied solely on the morphological endings of the verb, then we would
expect the loss of these endings to result in the reanalysis of verb-initial orders from
V-to-C to V-to-T movement. However, as we observed in chapter 4 there is also a
syntactic distinction between movement to C and movement to T. Verb-movement to
C only takes place when C is not otherwise filled by a conjunct particle. As a result, it
is possible that examples of the type in (6), where the verb clearly remains in situ in
the vP when C is filled, alongside examples as in (7) where the verb has moved, could
provide unambiguous evidence that the verb moves to C and not to T.
6. #C (S)(Adv)(O)V#
7. #V(S)(Adv)(O) #
The next section examines whether this is the case.
7 This is perhaps not so clear within the current theory whereby features are shared by C and T. However, even in this scenario there remains a sense in which features are inherently associated with only one position. This is especially true for traditionally C-based features such as force and finiteness, which do not tend to appear on T alone. 8 Another possible way to view this reanalysis is as a structural simplification in the sense of Roberts & Roussou (2003). If we assume that a language learner postulates the least amount of structure consistent with the evidence, then, V-to-C movement will only be postulated when there is robust, specific evidence for it. If this evidence is not present then the learner will postulate less structure, namely V-to-T movement.
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
186
2.2.2 Syntactic evidence and the loss of V-to-C movement
Although root/embedded asymmetries such as that shown in (6) and (7) provide clear
evidence for the linguist that a fronted verb has moved to C, this does not necessarily
mean that this evidence is also used by children. This evidence is quite unlike all the
other syntactic cues that have been proposed so far. The cues for V-to-T movement
and V2 seem to involve the identification of linear strings, e.g. verb-adverb or verb-
subject orders for V-to-T and XVS orders for V2. Once children can identify
categories and constituents, identifying these strings will be reasonably
straightforward. It seems likely that identifying that a fronted verb does not co-occur
with a complementizer would be a more complex procedure. To do so, children would
have to compare multiple clauses to see that complementizers and fronted verbs are in
complementary distribution. Perhaps more problematically, to identify that two
elements are in complementary distribution a child must utilise negative evidence,
namely that two elements cannot co-occur. Lightfoot (1991, 1999) argues that
negative evidence cannot make up part of the trigger experience. Children have no
access to information about what is ungrammatical. They must set their parameters on
the basis of structures they hear, not structures they do not, as they cannot conclude
that a construction is ungrammatical simply because they do not hear it.
From a Lightfootian perspective the fact that complementizers and fronted verbs
are in complementary distribution is also problematic as a cue for parameter setting,
as it involves information from embedded domains. Lightfoot (1991) argues that
children are degree-0 learners. This means that they make use only of evidence from
main clauses (plus ‘a bit’ at the edge of the embedded clause) during language
acquisition. As complementizers only tend to occur in embedded clauses, children
would have to utilise evidence from embedded clauses to establish that
complementizers and fronted verbs cannot co-occur.9
It seems, then, that there are good reasons for rejecting root/embedded
asymmetries as a cue for the acquisition of V-to-C movement. However, it is
interesting to note that in all the languages where V-to-C movement has been lost,
there seems to have been evidence that would undermine such a cue. In other words,
in Old English (8), Old French (9) and Middle Welsh (10) the verb (bold) did not
appear strictly in final position as it does, for example, in Modern German (11). 9 This is perhaps not such an issue for Old Irish, as Old Irish has a number of conjunct particles that appear in the C position in main clauses too.
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
187
8. Þæt he mot ehtan godra manna
that he might persecute good men
‘That he might persecute good men’
(Wulfstan’s Homilies 130.37–8; Biberauer & Roberts 2005: 18)
9. celui jor qui vint Nostre Sires en la cité de Jerusalem
that day that came our Lord into the city of Jerusalem
‘That day that Our Lord came into the city of Jerusalem’
(Vance 1988: 94; Roberts 1993: 98)
10. a chyt archo ed yti rodi yr eil, na dyro
and though implore.SUBJ he to.you give.VN the second NEG give.IMPV
‘And though he implore you to give him the second, do not give (it)…’
(PKM 3 19–20; Willis 1998: 53)
11. Ich weiß, daß Johann gestern ein Buch gekauft hat
I know that John yesterday a book bought has
‘I know that John bought a book yesterday’
These examples demonstrate that in Old English, Old French and Middle Welsh there
was possible evidence for verb-movement in embedded clauses, i.e. when C was
filled, thus undermining the root/embedded asymmetry. Willis (1998) argues that this
was the case in Middle Welsh, with the verb consistently moving to T in embedded
clauses. In Old English and Old French, on the other hand, the position of the verb is
variable, and so the postulation of V-to-T movement is not so clear.
Roberts (1993) suggests that many clauses that seem to show embedded V2 in Old
French are in fact examples of free inversion. Free inversion is a feature of null
subject languages, such as Italian, where the subject can appear post-verbally:
12. (a) É arrivato Gianni
is arrived Gianni
‘Gianni has arrived’
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
188
(b) Hanno telefonato molti studenti
have.3PL telephoned many students
‘Many students have phoned’
Old French was also a null subject language, and so it seems plausible that a number
of examples, such as that given in (9) above (repeated as (13) below), where the
subject follows the verb, could be analysed in this way.
13. celui jor qui vint Nostre Sires en la cité de Jerusalem
that day that came our Lord into the city of Jerusalem
‘That day that Our Lord came into the city of Jerusalem’
(Vance 1988: 94; Roberts 1993: 98)
Biberauer & Roberts (2005) argue that many of the English examples where the verb
is not in final position in the embedded clause can be analysed as biclausal, as in the
example in (14).
14. [Þæt hi mihton] [swa bealdlice Godes geleafan bodian]
that they could so boldly God’s faith preach
‘That they could preach God’s faith so boldly’
(The Homilies of the Anglo-Saxon Church I 232; Biberauer & Roberts 2005: 17)
A third possibility for the variation seen in embedded clauses could be right-
dislocation. It was argued in chapter 4, following McCone (1979a, 1997b) that right-
dislocation may have been a feature of many of the early IE languages, in order to
provide an extra topicalisation or focus position at the right edge of the clause, or a
site for heavy subjects or objects. Right-dislocation could also result in object- or
subject-final clauses.
So far in this section, then, it has been argued on conceptual grounds that it is
unlikely that root/embedded asymmetries provide a cue for the acquisition of V-to-C
movement. However, empirically it seems that languages that have lost V-to-C in V2
contexts tend not to show strict root/embedded asymmetries. Crucially, unlike
Modern German, Old English, Old French and Middle Welsh were not strictly verb-
final in embedded clauses. On this basis it seems likely then that for V-to-C
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
189
movement to be reanalysed as V-to-T movement in Old Irish, pre-Old Irish cannot
have been strictly verb-final. There is some evidence to suggest that this was the case.
As we saw in chapter 4, Bergin (1938) provides a number of examples from
archaic Irish texts where the verb is not in initial position in the clause, such as those
given in (15) below.
15. (a) ceso femmuin m-bolgaig m-bung
although seaweed blistered reap.PRES.1SG.CONJ
‘Although I reap blistered seaweed’
(Corm 1059; Bergin 1938: 197)
(b) fri aingel n-acallastar
to angel speak.PRET.3SG.PT
‘He spoke to an angel’
(LU 1148; Bergin 1938: 201)
Watkins (1963) argues that such examples provide evidence to suggest that at an
earlier stage Irish was predominantly verb-final. Although the majority of Bergin’s
original examples seem to show a clause-final verb, Bergin himself makes no
reference to the verb appearing specifically in final position. In fact there are a
significant number of examples where the verb occurs in non-final position:
16. (a) Lugaid Luath loisc trebthu trén tuath
Lugaid swift burn.PRET.3SG.CONJ dwellings strong people
‘Lugaid the Swift burned the dwellings of the strong people’
(Corp Gen 5; Carney 1979: 432)
(b) bángluinn gní glenn gaeth
bloodless.deed do.PRES.3SG.CONJ valleys wind
‘The wind of the valleys does a bloodless deed’ (Corp Gen 6; Carney 1979: 433)
From this evidence Koch (1991) proposes that pre-Old Irish was a V2 language. This
idea was further developed within a generative framework by Doherty (1999, 2000),
as we saw in chapter 2. Although many examples of Bergin’s Construction seem to
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
190
follow the V2 pattern, with only one constituent preceding the verb, there are also a
number of cases where more than one constituent precedes the verb, as shown in (17).
17. (a) Mortlithi márlóchet di doínib dingbatar
Great.plagues great.lightnings from the people keep.PRET.PASS.PL.CONJ
‘Great plagues and great lightnings are kept from the people’
(AM §12)
(b) ar mind n-axal n-acallad
our hero apostle speak.IMPF.3SG.PT
‘Our hero used to converse with the apostle’
(ACC §82)
Doherty (2000) argues that such examples are not inconsistent with a V2 analysis, as
many other V2 languages also show V3 orders; however, this argument is not
convincing. Although V2 languages such as Old English, Old High German and
Kashmiri do show V3 orders, these deviations can in most cases be explained in a
principled way. For example, one of the fronted elements may be a clitic, as in (18) or
a left-dislocated element, neither of which ‘count’ for the purpose of V2 (Pintzuk
1999).
18. [hiora untrymnesse] [cl he] sceal rowian on his heortan
their weakness he shall atone in his heart
‘He shall atone in his heart for their weakness’
(Cura Pastoralis 60.17; Pintzuk 1999: 136)
Similarly in Kashmiri, V3 is only found in a single construction, namely wh-questions
which also contain a topic (Bhatt 1999).10
19. rajan kemis he:v nev kita:b
Raj whom showed new book
‘As for Raj, to whom did he show his new book?’
10 Kashmiri seems to differ from the Germanic V2 languages in that it has an articulated CP (Manetta 2006). This accounts for the fact that it allows more than one projection to precede the verb.
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
191
The cases of V3 found in Irish do not seem to be as principled as those found in true
V2 languages and so are less easy to explain as exceptions to V2.11
Eska (2002b) observes that in most cases of Bergin’s Construction the position of
the verb can be explained by reference to poetic or stylistic factors. In example (20)
below, moving the verb out of initial position achieves the effect of alliteration.
However the verb cannot be in final position as this would be incompatible with the
end rhyme.
20. Bángluinn gní glenn gáeth
bloodless.deed do.PRES.3SG.CJ valleys wind
Góeth di muir muiredach maéth
Wind from sea Muiredach gentle
‘The wind of the valleys does a bloodless deed;
Gentle Muiredach (is) a wind from the sea’ (Corp Gen 6.47–48)
In example (21) a final verb allows for the repetition of the initial syllable in two
adjacent words.
21. i cunn chomlán comeillgiter
in sense perfect put.together.PRES.PASS.PL.CJ
‘Which are put together in perfect good sense’ (DIAChor §23)
Eska concludes that, as the position of the verb in examples of Bergin’s Construction
seems to be determined by poetic devices, there is little we can tell about the clause
structure of pre-Old Irish. It is true that due to the poetic and highly stylised nature of
the evidence it is difficult to draw any firm conclusions from Bergin’s Construction.
However, if pre-Old Irish was strictly verb-final in the same way as Modern German
we would perhaps not expect to find these deviations, at least not to such an extent.
11 There is some evidence for V2 orders in other Celtic languages, namely Breton and Middle Welsh (Willis 1998). However, although these languages do display V2 word order patterns this type of V2 does not seem to be the same as that found in Germanic. For example, both Middle Welsh and Breton show VSO order in embedded clauses and have a number of sentence particles in main clauses that seem to appear in the C position. This suggests that the verb may not be in C in Celtic V2 languages as it is in Germanic. Although pre-Old Irish may have shown some V2 sentence patterns it is difficult to give this any theoretical significance as V2 does not seem to be a uniform phenomenon cross-linguistically.
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
192
This suggests that pre-Old Irish was not strictly verb-final and that there was some
variation in terms of which orders were allowed. Let us turn now to some comparative
IE evidence.
Watkins (1963) argues on the basis of evidence from other early IE languages that
pre-Old Irish was a verb-final language. We saw in chapter 4 that there is evidence
from the Hittite, Vedic, Ancient Greek and Latin to suggest that verb-final order
should be reconstructed as the unmarked word order for PIE. However, this does not
entail that strict verb-final order was maintained in Irish up until the development of
verb-initial order. In fact, as we saw in chapter 4, even within the earliest IE
languages deviations from verb-final order were possible, as shown in (22) for Vedic
and (23) for Homeric Greek.
22. tam eva tābhir āhutibhiḥ śamayitvorjaṃ lokānāṃ
him.ACC thus libations power having.appeased.ACC worlds.GEN
jayati yamaṃ devaṃ
wins Yama.ACC God.ACC
‘Having appeased him, the God Yama, with these libations, he wins the
power of the worlds’
(JB 7, 3–4; McCone 1997b: 370)
23. Trôas d' eklinan Danaoi
Trojans.ACC PTC turned Danaans.NOM
‘And the Danaans turned the Trojans’
(Il 5, 37)
It was argued in chapter 4 that these deviations from verb-final order seem to have
been stylistically marked, and so were most likely derived either through verb-
movement to the left periphery or movement of another constituent to the right edge
for emphasis. As there is evidence for heavy-NP-shift and other right-dislocation
processes in Modern Irish (McCloskey 1999), it does not seem unreasonable to
suggest that these existed earlier in the language. Furthermore, it is possible that with
the increase in frequency of verb fronting and the resulting changes in the C-system in
Irish, as outlined in chapter 4, a new strategy was necessary to take over from the
pragmatic fronting process that had been lost. The increase in verb fronting meant that
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
193
other elements could no longer be fronted for emphasis. As a result new strategies
were needed. It is possible, then, that the loss of pragmatic fronting could have also
led to an increase in the frequency of right-dislocation. If this was the case, then we
might expect an increase in frequency of object, subject or even adverb-final clauses
in pre-Old Irish.
So, it seems that we should expect at least some deviation from verb-final order in
pre-Old Irish and perhaps even more than in the other early IE languages as a result of
the loss of the option for pragmatic fronting.12 Furthermore, as a null subject
language, we might expect pre-Old Irish to have allowed free inversion, as seen in
Old French above. This would also have led to an increase in non-verb-final orders,
and more specifically to an increase in verb-subject orders. As we saw in chapter 3,
verb-subject orders could provide a syntactic cue for V-to-T movement. Therefore, an
increase in verb-subject (and also plausibly verb-adverb) orders would have increased
the evidence for V-to-T movement and contributed to its development.
In sum it seems that the change we are suggesting for Old Irish, namely the
reanalysis of V-to-C movement as V-to-T movement is well supported both
theoretically and cross-linguistically. It has been argued that the main motivation for
the loss of V-to-C movement was the loss of the clause typing particle *es, which was
lost during the process of apocope in the fifth century. After this particle was lost, the
fronted verb was no longer linked to the C position. A cue for the acquisition of V-to-
C movement was lost, and furthermore, a cue for V-to-T movement developed as
these fronted verbs now provided positive syntactic evidence for V-to-T movement,
as the verb appeared to the left of the subject and VP-adverbs. In this section we have
also examined the possibility of a syntactic cue for V-to-C movement. It has been
argued that the fact that a fronted verb is in complementary distribution with conjunct
particles (C elements) is unlikely to be a cue during language acquisition as it makes
reference to negative evidence and also information found in embedded clauses.
However, there does seem to be a correlation between the loss of V-to-C movement
and word order variation in embedded clauses. Unlike Modern German, Old English,
Old French and Middle Welsh do not show strictly verb-final orders when C is filled.
These three languages all allow some degree of variation in word order, which could
12 These pragmatic processes may have also led to a change from underlying OV to VO. We saw in chapter 2 that Old Irish is a VO language, whereas PIE is OV. See McCone (1979c) for details of such a change in Luwian, and Taylor (1990) for a similar change in Ancient Greek.
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
194
be analysed as verb-movement. It is possible that this is prerequisite for the loss of V-
to-C movement. There is evidence to suggest that pre-Old Irish also showed variation
in non-verb-initial clauses, thereby fulfilling this requirement.
An interesting question at this point is why this correlation between the loss of V-
to-C movement and variation in embedded orders should exist (if it is not purely
coincidental). One possible answer is that variation in embedded contexts, especially
cases of right-dislocation or free inversion where the subject appears to the right of
the verb, will provide positive evidence for the acquisition of V-to-T movement. In
Irish it seems that this evidence, in combination with that from the main clause after
the loss of the morphological cue for V-to-C movement, increases the evidence for V-
to-T movement, leading to a shift in the position of the Affix-feature.
2.3 ‘Univerbation’ within the vP: generalised V-to-v movement
The reanalysis of V-to-C movement as V-to-T movement, as outlined above, accounts
for part of the change between Pre- and Classical Old Irish. The development of V-to-
T movement in place of V-to-C movement ensures that the verb moves to initial
position regardless of whether the C position is filled. This means that whenever the
verb is simple, whether or not the C position is filled, the verb will move out of the vP
to T, resulting in the following orders:
24. (a) #V…#
(b) #CV…#
Although the development of V-to-T movement provides us with the attested orders
for simple verbs, the situation for compound verbs is less straightforward. The shift of
an Affix-feature from the C position to the T position will simply mean that whatever
is in v is attracted to T rather than C. This means that we would still expect tmesis
orders, and furthermore, we would also expect tmesis orders when C is filled, as the
initial preverb should be attracted to T:
25. (a) #P…V#
(b) *#CP…V#
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
195
However, the clause type shown in (25b) is unattested at any stage of Irish. This
suggests, therefore, that there must have been another change that occurred either
before or simultaneously with the development of V-to-T movement that prevented
this order from occurring. Crucially in Classical Old Irish both the verb and the
preverb appear in clause-initial or near-clause-initial position. This suggests that the
verb always moves through light v. Whereas previously the presence of a preverb
blocked V-to-v movement it seems that this is no longer the case, and so verb-
movement occurs regardless of whether a preverb is present or not.
The development of generalised V-to-v movement does not seem to be a
parametric change. For the verb to move to light v, light v must have an Affix-feature.
However, it was argued in chapter 4 that this was already the case in pre-Old Irish.
For simple verbs to move to the C position they must move via light v to escape the
phase, in accordance with the Phase Impenetrability Condition (PIC – Chomsky 2000,
2001). In pre-Old Irish, however, this movement only took place when light v was not
filled with a preverb. The crucial difference between pre- and Classical Old Irish,
then, is that in pre-Old Irish the preverb can fulfil light v’s Affix-feature and block V-
to-v movement, whereas in Classical Old Irish it cannot.
The change in the preverb’s ability to satisfy an Affix-feature reflects a change in
its syntactic status. One way to understand this change is as an example of
grammaticalisation. As we saw in chapter 4 preverbs started off as independent
adverbial phrases that had independent meaning and could be merged in a number of
different positions in the clause, modifying a noun or a verb or the clause as a whole.
With the changes in the C-system, preverbs were reanalysed from phrases to heads.
Instead of being merged as specifiers to vP, they became merged as v heads. This is
the first stage of the grammaticalisation. By the Classical Old Irish period preverbs
have no lexical meaning independent of the verb with which they are associated.
Instead, it was argued in chapter 2, they are verb-class markers, purely functional
elements. In Classical Old Irish preverbs are simply the realisation of a verb-class
feature, they are no longer an independent bundle of features merged in the v position.
So, it seems that preverbs have undergone a change from lexical to functional item,
and from XP to head to (valued verb-class) feature. As a head the preverb could
satisfy the Affix-feature, as simply a realisation of the light v feature it cannot. What
needs to be explained then is how and why this change took place.
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
196
The grammaticalisation of the preverb can be seen as a loss of features. As a head,
a preverb constitutes of a bundle of features. Grammaticalisation involves the loss of
these features, until only v’s basic functional features remain.13 The loss of lexical
features reflects the semantic bleaching that is typically involved in
grammaticalisation processes. The preverb is originally an independent lexical item
that can combine with a verb to produce different meanings. To start with these
meanings are pragmatically determined; however, over time they become codified,
the formerly pragmatic meaning becomes the literal meaning and the earlier literal
meaning is lost. From the non-compositional nature of compound verbs in Old Irish
(see chapter 2) it is clear that this process has taken place, and the preverb has lost its
semantic features.
It seems, then, that there is reason to believe that the semantic changes necessary
for grammaticalisation have occurred. However, the fact that these semantic changes
have taken place does not necessarily mean that a syntactic change will occur. We
saw above that particle verbs in German are semantically univerbated, but they still
consist of two syntactically independent components. Although preverbs have lost
their lexical features they will still be analysed as heads in the syntax if there is
positive evidence available to the acquirer to suggest that this is the case.
The clearest evidence that preverbs are independent syntactic heads is that they
move independently in the syntax. In pre-Old Irish preverbs move from v to C in the
syntax. Moreover, preverbs are never incorporated with a moved verb in pre-Old
Irish, as a verb can only move when v is empty, i.e. when there is no preverb.
Between pre- and Classical Old Irish there is reason to believe that both of these
pieces of evidence disappear. First, it was argued in section 2.2 that between pre- and
Classical Old Irish V-to-C movement was reanalysed as V-to-T movement. As the
Affix-feature associated with C was lost, this means that no movement to C could
take place. Therefore, although initial preverbs clearly occupy the C position, they
cannot move there in the syntax. As a result, this piece of evidence for the syntactic
independence of preverbs is lost.14
13 The last stage in the grammaticalisation process is from valued feature to zero. This is what happens in the simplification of compound verbs in Middle Irish, as we shall see in section 3. 14 Of course, we would expect with the shift in the Affix-feature that preverbs would simply start raising to T instead of C. However, this does not seem to be the case. When children are acquiring Irish there is good evidence that the initial preverb is in C, as we shall see below.
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
197
In section 2.2.2 above it was argued that one of the possible causes of the
development of V-to-T movement was an increase in the level of variability in the
position of the verb when C was filled. We saw in the previous section that it is
possible that there may have been an increase in processes such as free inversion or
right-dislocation in pre-Old Irish, which contributed to the development of V-to-T
movement. When the verb is compound and free inversion or right-dislocation takes
place, the subject (or other moved element) will appear to the right of both the verb
and the preverb, as shown in (26) below. This will provide evidence, therefore, that
both the verb and the preverb have moved to T.
26. (a) Ní-m [in fer] tabair ⇒ Ní-m tabair [in fer]
(b) Do-m [in fer] beir ⇒ Do-m beir [in fer]
From this discussion, then, it seems that univerbation in the vP is heavily dependent
on univerbation at the clause level. Univerbation in the vP is essentially caused by the
reanalysis of V-to-C movement as V-to-T movement, as this change takes away the
evidence that preverbs are syntactically independent. However, if this is the case, then
univerbation within the vP must follow univerbation in the clause, and so we would
expect orders such as (25b) above, repeated as (27) below, which are simply not
found.
27. *#CP…V#
This problem can be solved, however, if we assume that both types of univerbation
occurred simultaneously. When the new generation change their parameter settings
such that V-to-C movement is lost and V-to-T movement develops, this means that
they have to reanalyse the syntactic status of preverbs so that they are consistent with
the new grammar. For this to be the case the evidence from preverbs can play no role
in parameter setting. If preverbs were taken into account, they would have provided
clear evidence for movement to C; however, they seem to be discounted. Under a cue-
based theory of language acquisition and language change, this is easily explained.
For a change in parameter settings to take place not all evidence for the earlier
parameter setting needs to be lost; the evidence simply needs to drop below a
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
198
particular threshold. Furthermore, parameters are set on the basis of specific cues. It
seems likely that the cue for an Affix-feature on C, i.e. for V-to-C movement, will be
based around the position of the verb, not preverbs. Therefore, we might expect the
evidence from preverbs to be ignored. So, within one generation, on the basis of the
evidence from the position of the verb there is a change in parameter settings, from V-
to-C movement to V-to-T movement, which causes preverbs to lose their syntactic
independence. However, children are still faced with evidence that the initial preverb
is in C. They must find a new way to analyse this data. This is the topic of the next
section.
2.4 The development of post-syntactic rules
In the two preceding sections it has been argued that between pre-Old Irish and the
attested Classical Old Irish period there were two major changes affecting the syntax
of the language. First, V-to-C movement was reanalysed as V-to-T movement, i.e. the
Affix-feature associated with C was lost, and an Affix-feature was instead assigned to
T. Secondly, the initial preverbs of compound verbs underwent a change in status
from heads to (valued v) features, losing their syntactic independence such that they
could no longer satisfy v’s Affix-feature. This led to the development of generalised
V-to-v movement. As a result of these changes neither the deuterotonic/prototonic
alternation nor the absolute/conjunct distinction could be syntactically derived.
Children must then find a new way to derive these morphological forms post-
syntactically. This section will examine each construction in turn.
2.4.1 Deuterotonic compound verbs
After the syntactic changes outlined above, deuterotonic compound verbs could no
longer be produced in the syntax. After the development of generalised V-to-T
movement and V-to-v movement, the verb moves to T in all clauses, incorporating the
light v head on the way. This new grammar, then, can only produce prototonic forms,
where the verb and the preverb appear together in T. It is no longer possible for the
preverb to move independently to C. Although it is no longer possible to produce
deuterotonic compounds syntactically, speakers who have acquired the new grammar
still need to produce deuterotonic compounds to ensure that the output of their new
grammar is sufficiently similar to the output of the old grammar. The way they do
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
199
this, I propose, is by developing a system of post-syntactic realisation rules, as
described in chapter 2.
In chapter 2 it was argued that deuterotonic compound verbs are a result of post-
syntactic processes. The C head in Old Irish has an unvalued verbal feature. This
verbal feature is valued during the syntax through an Agree relation between C and
light v. When there are no other C-based features present in C, this verbal feature is
phonologically realised in the C position. When this occurs, C is identical with the
lower light v heads in both TP and vP, and so the lower v heads receive no
phonological realisation. As a result, the initial preverb and the remainder of the verb
are spelled-out in separate positions, the preverb in C and the verb in T, resulting in
the deuterotonic stem. If Old Irish speakers really did use such a system to produce
deuterotonic stems, then this system must be acquirable. The remainder of this section
will consider whether this is the case.
The crucial point regarding the development of this new way of forming
deuterotonic compounds is that it does not involve any new operations in the syntax.
The basic syntactic operation involved is Agree between C and v. As we saw above,
for the verb to move to T, the C-T complex must be in an Agree relation with v-V.
The valuation of C’s verbal feature can be seen as a result of this Agree operation.
The difference between pre-Old Irish and Classical Old Irish involves the realisation
of this verbal feature. Classical Old Irish speakers with the new grammar reanalyse
the initial preverbs that appear in the C position as the phonological realisation of C’s
verbal feature. In DM terms what this means is that a new set of vocabulary items are
created that are in competition for insertion into the C position. Children acquiring the
new grammar acquire a set of vocabulary items such as those below:
28. [v1] ⇔ do
[v2] ⇔fo
[v3] ⇔at
etc.
As discussed in chapter 2, preverbs in Old Irish are a closed class. There are around
ten different preverbs, and so a child must acquire ten new vocabulary items. This is
not an unreasonable suggestion. Once the child has acquired these new vocabulary
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
200
items, the conditions under which they are inserted are determined by the process of
Vocabulary Insertion. Therefore, the child does not need to acquire these conditions,
the element of competition involved in Vocabulary Insertion will ensure that they are
inserted only when there is no other suitable vocabulary item that matches more
features contained in the terminal node.
The conditions under which the lower copy of light v is deleted are also
determined by independent postsyntactic principles. Old Irish speakers will not need
to acquire the fact that the lower copy of the preverb is deleted; this will take place
automatically as a result of the Chain Reduction operation, which deletes subsequent
copies of an item that has been marked to receive a phonological realisation. So far,
then, it seems that the only part of the post-syntactic approach to deuterotonic
compounds that must be acquired is the new vocabulary items for initial preverbs, the
new candidates for insertion into the C position. The rest of the process simply falls
out from principles of the post-syntactic component.
In sum, it seems that in terms of the post-syntactic processes involved in the
formation of deuterotonic compound verbs, the only part that has to be acquired is the
value of the verbal feature associated with the verb in question and how this verbal
feature is realised in C. The Agree relation, the environments in which this realisation
appears and the deletion of the subsequent copy all result from basic, conceptually
necessary post-syntactic operations, and so do not need to be acquired. It seems then
that acquisition of the deuterotonic verbs in Classical Old Irish is relatively
straightforward. Let us turn now to the other post-syntactic operation described in
chapter 2, namely that necessary for producing absolute inflection.
2.4.2 Absolute verbal inflection
In chapter 2 it was argued that, like deuterotonic compound verbs, absolute inflection
in Old Irish was the result of a post-syntactic process. After the loss of V-to-C
movement absolute inflection can no longer be the result of the syntactic position of
the verb. However, after the loss of V-to-C movement, children acquiring the new
grammar will still encounter absolute inflections and will need to find a new strategy
for producing them. Crucially, as was the case for deuterotonic compounds, this
strategy must be acquirable.
In chapter 2 it was argued that the distribution of absolute inflection resembles
Affix-Hopping in English. Absolute inflections are a realisation of the combination of
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
201
a verb’s φ-features with an affixal force feature. When C contains a host, this force
feature is realised on C rather than T, and so does not combine with the verb’s φ-
features, which are then realised as conjunct endings. When, however, C does not
contain a host the force feature is realised on T, combining with the φ-features to give
absolute inflection. Let us consider, then, what parts of this system must be acquired.
The existence of a Force feature does not need to be acquired; this comes for free
as part of UG. However, as we saw above, this feature is usually associated with C.
During language acquisition children must determine which features are associated
with which functional head. In the case of C and T the main decision to be made is
whether the feature in question is shared by both categories or present on only one.
Children acquiring this Old Irish system, then, will need to learn that Force is shared
by both T and C, and that it is affixal. Once these facts have been acquired the
question of whether this feature is realised on C or T should come down to basic PF
principles. When C is empty the Force feature cannot be realised there, according to
the Stranded Affix Filter and so is realised in the lower position. Similarly, when it is
realised on C, it cannot be realised on T, as a result of Chain Reduction. So far, then,
children need to acquire that there is a Force feature that can appear on both C and T,
and that this feature is affixal. The only other information that needs to be acquired is
the different realisations. Children must learn how the different combinations of
Force+φ-features are realised phonologically, i.e. they must learn the phonological
forms of the absolute endings.
Although it seems that the acquisition of absolute and conjunct endings is more
complex than the acquisition of deuterotonic compounds, this is not really the case. In
the case of compound verbs, children must learn for each individual verb which class
it belongs to, i.e. how a light v feature in C is realised and how this affects the
realisation of the remainder of the verb. The acquisition of the absolute-conjunct
system involves only functional features and so although there is perhaps more to
acquire, it only needs to be acquired once, and from there it will apply productively to
all verbs.
2.5 Summary
This section has provided an account of how the verbal system changed from that of
pre-Old Irish, as described in chapter 4, to that of Classical Old Irish, as seen in
chapter 2. It has been argued that the ‘univerbation’ that occurred between these two
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
202
periods was in fact the combination of two separate changes, the reanalysis of V-to-C
movement as V-to-T movement, and the change in status of preverbs resulting in the
development of generalised v-to-V movement. These changes seem to be closely
linked to one another, occurring within the same generation. The changes in
parameter settings are summarised in the table below.
Table 3: A summary of the changes between pre- and Classical Old Irish
Pre-Old Irish Classical Old Irish C + Affix - Affix T - Affix + Affix v + Affix + Affix Preverb X0 (valued v) Feature
As a result of these two syntactic changes neither deuterotonic verbal forms nor
absolute inflections could result from movement of the preverb or the verb to C.
Therefore, new post-syntactic operations developed that enabled speakers who
possessed the new grammar to match the output of their grammars to that of the older
generations who had the old grammar. At this point, we have reached the Classical
Old Irish period. As a result of certain syntactic changes neither the deuterotonic
forms nor absolute inflection are syntactically productive. The double system has
been lost as a syntactically productive system. In the following sections we consider
the next stage, namely how the double system was lost completely from the language
as a whole. Section 3 examines the simplification of compound verbs in the Middle
Irish period and section 4 explores the loss of the absolute/conjunct distinction in
Early Modern Irish.
3 THE SIMPLIFICATION OF COMPOUND VERBS
In the previous section it was argued that after univerbation the
deuterotonic/prototonic alternation was no longer syntactically productive. In
Classical Old Irish deuterotonic compounds were derived post-syntactically, through
the realisation of a verbal feature in C. This section looks at how this system broke
down and how compound verbs were simplified.
As the simplification of compound verbs took place for the most part during
Middle Irish there is considerable evidence to be found in texts from this period.
Section 3.1 provides a brief account of the texts from which the evidence used in this
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
203
section is drawn. Section 3.2 explores how compound verbs were simplified in
descriptive terms. Section 3.3 examines how these descriptive facts can be accounted
for theoretically. In section 3.4 we consider how the simplification progressed through
the language, and what the reasons for this might have been. Section 3.5 provides a
summary.
3.1 Texts
To investigate the simplification of compound verbs it is necessary to have a variety
of texts whose dates of composition span the entire Middle Irish period, i.e. from the
tenth to the twelfth centuries. I do not intend to provide a detailed absolute
chronology for the loss of the double system, so an understanding of how the texts
relate to one another is of more importance than their exact date. The texts in the
corpus can be broken down into three groups: early Middle Irish, middle Middle Irish
texts and late Middle Irish.
The early Middle Irish text is a long religious text Saltair na Rann (SR), believed
to date from 988 (Mac Eoin 1961a). Turning now to middle Middle Irish, the corpus
contains four predominantly prose texts, the second recension of Táin Bo Cúailnge
(TBC II) from the Book of Leinster, Togáil Troí (TT), Cath Catharda (CC) and
Aislinge meic Conglinne (AMC). TT seems to be the oldest, with Mac Eoin (1961b)
suggesting a date of composition in the eleventh century. Jackson (1990: xx) suggests
that maybe the second half of that century is more accurate. Through careful analysis
and comparison of the language of the two texts, Jackson (1990) argues that AMC is
later than TT, suggesting that it was composed in the last quarter of the eleventh
century. CC and TBC II are both later. Dating TBC II is difficult, due to the fact it has
an earlier source, found in the tenth-century Lebor na hUidre (TBC I), and the
tendency of the scribe to archaise (Jackson 1990: xxi). Dillon (1927) dates it at around
1100. Jackson suggests the more tentative ‘early twelfth century’, around the same
date as the manuscript in which it is found. CC is dated later than this. Sommerfelt
(1915) suggests 1150. O’Daly (1943), in her comparison of CC with TBC II, dates it
earlier, in the second quarter of the twelfth century. Importantly, she still considers it
later than TBC II. The late Middle Irish text15 is Acallam na Senórach (AS), a long
15 Jackson (1990) classes TBC II and CC as late Middle Irish. He does not include the texts I have classed as late Middle Irish.
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
204
text of around 8000 lines. Nuner (1958–9) argues, based on both linguistic and non-
linguistic evidence, that AS was composed between 1200 and 1225.
For all the texts discussed above lists of the verbal forms have been published. The
majority of the data in this section is drawn from these lists. For SR – Strachan
(1895–7), TT – Mac Eoin (1961b), CC – Sommerfelt (1915–8), TBC II – O’Daly
(1943), AS – Nuner (1958–9).
Having established the source of the data that is to follow, let us now turn to the
change in question, the simplification of compound verbs.
3.2 How the deuterotonic/prototonic alternation was lost
As we saw in section 1 above, in Modern Irish there are no compound verbs. With the
exception of the irregular verbs, all verbs in Modern Irish have only one stem used in
both independent and dependent position. During the Middle Irish period all
compound verbs were simplified and the deuterotonic/prototonic alternation was lost.
There were two main ways that a verb could become simplified in the Middle Irish
period. First, the compound verb in question could simply be replaced by a
synonymous simple verb. For example, we find that do-cuirethar and fo-ceird ‘puts’
are both replaced by the simple verb cuirid. Similarly Old Irish ad-fét ‘tells, relates’ is
replaced by the synonymous simple verb indisid.16 This is clearly a matter of use,
whereby speakers are choosing a simple verb instead of a compound, leading to the
loss of the compound form. However, this strategy only affects the small class of
compound verbs that have synonymous simple verbs and so is not widespread. For
the majority of compound verbs the simplification involves the innovation of a new
verbal stem, modelled on either the prototonic or the verbal noun. Some examples are
given in tables (5) and (6) below.17
16 McCone (1997a: 193) gives indisid as an example of a simple verb that has developed from the verbal noun of in-fét, which has the form indisiu. 17 There are also many examples where it is not entirely clear whether it is the prototonic or the verbal noun that has provided the new stem. See McCone (1997a: 194).
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
205
Table 5: New simple verbs that developed from the prototonic stem
OIr DT OIr PT OIr VN New simple verb English
do-fócaib -tócaib tócbail tócbaid ‘lifts’
do-róscai -derscaigi derscugud derscaigid ‘excels’
imm-soí -impai impód impoid ‘turns’
as-luí -élai élúd élaid ‘escapes’
con-tuili -cotlai cotlud cotlaid ‘sleeps’
(McCone 1997a: 192)
Table 6: New simple verbs that developed from the verbal noun
OIr DT OIr PT OIr VN New simple verb English
con-oí -cumai coimét coimétaid ‘protects’
do-ruimnethar -dermainethar dermat dermataid ‘forgets’
con-utaing -cumtaing cumtach cumtaigid ‘builds’
do-fich -dích dígal díglaid ‘requites’
(McCone 1997a: 193)
After simplification, then, compound verbs, like simple verbs, have a single stem.
However, this is not the only change that they undergo. The formerly compound verbs
also exhibit a change in their morphosyntactic behaviour.
After simplification formerly compound verbs begin to show absolute verbal
endings. As discussed in chapter 2, only simple verbs show absolute endings;
therefore, for a compound verb to have absolute endings it must have been simplified.
This is shown in (29a) and (29b) below. Special relative endings are also only found
with simple verbs. After a compound verb has been simplified it can show special
relative endings, as shown in (29c) and (29d) below.
29. (a) fácbaid (AMC 662) for OIr fo-ácaib ‘leaves’
(b) frecraidh (AMC 1455) for OIr fris-gair ‘answers
(c) dirges (SR 1008) for OIr do-rig ‘strips, lays bare’
(d) roiches (AS 7090) for OIr ro-saig ‘reaches’
The second morphosyntactic change associated with simplification is the use of the
dummy preverb no. As we saw in chapter 2, in Classical Old Irish no is used with
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
206
simple verbs when the verb is relative or in a secondary tense or in order to infix an
object pronoun. Crucially, compound verbs never appear with the preverb no.
Therefore, once a compound verb begins to appear with the dummy preverb no this
suggests that it has become simplified. In Middle Irish, relative clauses begin to be
marked simply by lenition of the initial consonant of the verb, so we do not find
examples of no being used in this environment. Similarly during the Middle Irish
period enclitic pronouns become replaced by independent pronouns. As a result, there
are very few examples of no being used here. However, the use of no with secondary
tenses is retained throughout the Middle Irish period.18 Some examples are given in
(30) below.
30. (a) no theilgidís ‘they used to throw’ (imperfect) (TT 1865) (OIr do-léctis)
(b) no derrscaiged ‘he might excel’ (past subj) (TT 381) (OIr durosced (Ml
129b13))
A third characteristic of a simplified compound verb is that it begins to appear with
prefixed ro in the past tense. In Old Irish the perfective particle ro appears in initial
position only when the verb is simple. When the verb is compound, in most cases the
particle ro is infixed between the initial preverb and the remainder of the compound
verb (Thurneysen 1946: 339–341).19 After simplification, a formerly compound verb
will appear with prefixed ro. This is shown in the examples in (31) below.
31. (a) ro fastad pass sg (TT 1143) vs. adrosoid 3sg (Ml 97d16)
ad-suidi ‘stops, detains, hinders’
(b) ro thocaib (TT 368) vs. dorogbad (Ml 17a13)
do-gaib ‘removes’
(c) do thomaill (AMC 1285) vs. dorumalt (SR 2909)
do-meil ‘consumes’
It is not entirely clear whether the change in the position of ro is a cause or an effect
of simplification. During the Middle Irish period the ro particle changed in function
18 This continues into Early Modern Irish, although the dummy preverb no is replaced by do. 19 There are exceptions to this. See McCone (1997a: chapters 9–11) for a full account of the use of ro and alternatives in Old Irish.
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
207
from a perfective particle to a past tense marker (McCone 1997a: 185–186). This
change from aspect to tense marker seems to coincide with the shift in its syntactic
position, from within the vP to the C position. Viewed in this way, it seems we have a
case of grammaticalisation, to at least some degree independent of the simplification.
The details of this change will be left for further research.
Having outlined the main features of the simplification of compound verbs, let us
consider how these facts can be reconciled with our theoretical account.
3.3 The simplification of compound verbs: a theoretical perspective
In chapter 2, and section 2 above, it was argued that in Classical Old Irish the
deuterotonic/prototonic alternation is not syntactically productive. The prototonic
form of the verb is derived regularly in the syntax through movement of the verb
through light v to T. To derive the deuterotonic form, however, further post-syntactic
operations are necessary, whereby the light v feature of the verb in question is
phonologically realised in the C position, and deleted lower in the structure. The
crucial difference between compound and simple verbs, then, is that compound verbs
have a positively valued verb-class feature that can be realised in the C position.
Simple verbs, on the other hand, have a verb-class feature with the default value, i.e.
0, which has no phonological realisation. Under this view, the simplification of
compound verbs can be seen as the failure to acquire a positively valued verb-class
feature, in other words, a verb is assigned to the wrong verb class.20
This theoretical view of the simplification can account for all the features of
simplification described in section 3.2. Let us consider each in turn.
It was observed above that when a compound verb is simplified it is always the
deuterotonic form that is lost, with a new stem developing from either the prototonic
or the verbal noun. When the verb-class feature loses its positive value it can no
longer be realised in C. Therefore the conditioning environment for the deuterotonic
form will be lost and so only the prototonic form can appear.21
Turning now to the morphosyntactic changes, it seems that these can also be easily
accounted for. Once a verb is analysed as having a default value for its verb-class
20 We might also expect a similar change to take place where a compound verb is assigned to another compound verb class. This seems to be the case for the Old Irish verb ro-cluinethar ‘hears’, which becomes associated with the preverb at- in Middle Irish by association with the verb ad-cí ‘sees’. 21 Of course, more needs to be said regarding how exactly the different phonological forms arise, but this will be left for further research.
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
208
feature, it will behave syntactically like a simple verb. The C head will still Agree
with light v as it did before, but when the verb-class feature has the default value, it is
not realised in C. This means that in the secondary tenses and with infixed pronouns
the dummy preverb no will be needed to realise the C position in relative clauses,
secondary tenses and when there is an infixed pronoun. Moreover, a default verb-
class value has no morphosyntactic realisation and so cannot combine with force
features in C (see chapter 2 above). This means that when there are no other C-based
features in C to combine with force, force will be realised on T, resulting in absolute
inflection.
So far we have seen that the theoretical account of compound verbs developed in
chapter 2 provides a pleasing account of the way in which compound verbs were
simplified. Up to this point our discussion has been predominantly descriptive,
accounting for how compound verbs were simplified. The next question is why this
was the case. This is the topic of the next section.
3.4 The causes of simplification
McCone (1997a: 191) argues that compound verbs were simplified because they were
“a collection of irregularities…difficult to preserve on the scale obtaining in Old
Irish”. This idea, that compound verbs were lost because they were irregular fits in
well with our theoretical account. In our view, compound verbs are irregular, as they
have an extra feature, a valued v feature, that is not present on simple verbs. This
extra feature makes the acquisition of compound verbs more difficult than that of
simple verbs, and so makes compound verbs more susceptible to loss.
Viewed in this way the simplification of compound verbs is essentially a process
of analogy, whereby the irregular compound verbs are subsumed under the productive
pattern of simple verbs. Kiparsky (1982, 1995b, 2000) views analogy as ‘grammar
optimization’. One way in which this can take place is through the removal of
idiosyncratic feature specifications from lexical entries (Kiparsky 1995b: 644). This is
exactly what we are proposing for Irish. The idiosyncratic feature specification, the
verb-class value, is lost and replaced by the default, namely 0.
Although irregular forms are more likely to be lost, this does not entail that they
will be. The languages of the world manage to retain many irregularities. If children
hear sufficient evidence for an irregular form then the irregular form will be acquired.
Crucially for an irregular form to be lost there must be a decrease in evidence for that
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
209
form. To explain the loss of the deuterotonic/prototonic alternation we must establish
what the relevant evidence is for the acquisition of the system and how this
disappeared in the Middle Irish period.
We saw above that to acquire the deuterotonic form of a compound verb it is
necessary to learn that the verb in question has a positively valued verb-class feature
that can be realised in the C position. There are three main pieces of evidence the
child could utilise to acquire this fact. From a syntactic perspective, children could
deduce from the fact that part of the verb precedes infixed object pronouns that the
initial preverb is in the C position. From a morphophonological perspective, if as
argued in chapter 2, stress and initial mutations both fall on the initial element of the
TP, then the fact that the initial preverb is unstressed and unmutated will provide
evidence that it is in the C position. There is evidence to suggest that all of these cues
that the verb is in C decrease in frequency in the Middle Irish period. Let us examine
each in turn.
It is well known that enclitic object pronouns are replaced by independent object
pronouns in the Middle Irish period (see McCone 1997a: 169–178; Jackson 1990: 93–
96 for details of this change). This development can be seen in the texts from my
corpus in the table below.
Table 6: Proportion of infixed to independent object pronouns in Middle Irish
SR TT22 AMC23 CC TBC24 AS25
Infix 396 100% 56 90% 91 97% 90 68% 311 89% 21 6%
Indep 026 0% 6 10% 3 3% 43 32% 40 11% 320 94%
Total 396 62 94 133 351 341
Jackson (1990: 96) argues on the basis of evidence from the Annals that the loss of
enclitic object pronouns was virtually complete by 1200. However, if we consider our
latest text, namely AS, which dates from around this time, there are very few
22 Data from Jackson (1990: 96) 23 Data from Jackson (1990: 96) 24 Data from Mac Gearailt (1997–1998). 25 Data from Nuner (1958–1959: 340). 26 There are one or two pronouns that could be interpreted as independent object pronouns in SR. However, as the number of infixed pronouns in SR is so high the inclusion of these cases makes little difference to the proportions given above.
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
210
examples of infixed pronouns, and in those that we do find the pronoun can only
appear in a limited set of environments, notably after the particle ro (examples (32a)
and (32b)) and the preverb do (32c).27
32. (a) tuc urchar don mhuic co ros- marbh
give.PRET.3SG shot to.the pig so PVB-INF.3SG kill.PRET.3SG
‘He cast a spear at the pig so that he killed it’
(AS 1557)
(b) Cid ro-t- imluaid & ro-t- aistrig ille?
what PVB-INF.2SG stir.PRET.3SG & PVB-INF.2SG bring.PRET.3SG hither
‘What has impelled you and & brought you hither?’
(AS 3898–3899)
(c) is ann do-m- riacht in da mnai
COP then PVB-INF.1SG reach.PRET.3SG.DT the two women
‘It is then that the two women reached me’
(AS 4090)
If AS contains only these remnants of the system of infixed pronouns then it seems
likely that it fell out of the spoken language earlier than 1200. CC and TBC also show
a highly simplified system of infixed pronouns, with a limited number of forms
(1sg -m, 2sg -t, 3sg/pl -s, 1pl -r) occurring in limited environments, again mainly with
ro and do. Mac Gearailt (1997–1998: 495) observes that this system is strikingly
similar to that found in the Bardic poetry of the Early Modern Period, suggesting that
even by the eleventh century infixed pronouns were probably a purely literary
phenomenon.
Let us turn now to the morphophonological evidence. In chapter 2 we saw that in
Old Irish stress seems to be associated with the first element of TP. Therefore, any
element that appears before the first stressed syllable must be part of the CP (or an
earlier clause). As long as a deuterotonic verb is stressed on the second syllable, this
will provide evidence that the first preverb is in C. There is evidence to suggest,
however, that this stress pattern is not retained throughout the Middle Irish period.
One of the first groups that undergo simplification, according to Jackson (1990), are
27 I am grateful to Geraldine Parsons for help with the translation of these examples.
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
211
verbs where the first preverb ends in a vowel and the next syllable starts with a vowel,
such as do-icc ‘comes’, do-adbat ‘shows’ and fo-acaib ‘gets’. Even in the Old Irish
glosses these verbs undergo a process of vowel elision so that the deuterotonic shows
the same stress pattern (and the same form) as the prototonic, as shown for the
preterite of do-icc (do-ánic/tánic) in (33a) and the present tense of do-adbat/tadbat in
(33b).
33. (a) tánic aimser mo idbartese
come.PRET.3SG time my offering.VN
‘the time of offering me has come’
(Wb 30d11)
(b) tadbat- som tra da rect…
show.PRES.3SG- emph.part.3SG.M then two laws
‘He shows forth, then, two laws…’
(Wb 4d10)
As a result, there is a loss of evidence that these verbs have a valued light v feature
realised in the C position, so they are subject to reanalysis as simple verbs. Jackson
(1990) argues that after these verbs have become simplified, other compound verbs
follow suit, showing first a change in stress, resulting in the falling together of the
deuterotonic and prototonic forms and then full simplification. Jackson (1990: 116)
provides the following examples from AMC: imrásium ‘we rowed’, imthét ‘goes
around’, which show prototonic stem in the deuterotonic position, but retain conjunct
endings. Although it is easy to see in the case of verbs that have undergone vowel
elision, this is not the case for the other verb type. As stress is not marked in the
manuscripts it is difficult to tell for sure whether such a stress shift did in fact take
place. However, it seems plausible that there would have been pressure to
amalgamate the irregular compound verbs to the strict regular initial stress pattern.
In chapter 2 it was argued that TP is also the domain of grammatical mutations.
When the clause is relative it is the initial consonant of the TP that is lenited. While
lenition falls on the second syllable of a compound verb this provides clear evidence
that the first preverb is in C. In Middle Irish all preverbs begin to lenite in non-relative
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
212
as well as relative clauses.28 As a result of this lenition becomes part of the phonology
of the compound verb rather than a grammatical process dependent on a particular
syntactic structure, and so it seems less likely that it would act as a cue for the
position of the preverb. A further point to bear in mind is that main clause lenition
would in many cases have made the deuterotonic form more like the prototonic. For
example, one of the main differences between do-beir and tabair is that the /b/ is
lenited to /v/ in the prototonic but not in the deuterotonic. After main clause lenition
this phonological difference would have disappeared. In certain other cases, notably
where the verbal stem began with an /f/, main clause lenition could have led to further
cases of vowel elision. For example, the lenition of /f/ in do-fócaib ‘lifts up’ could
have contributed to its reanalysis as the simple verb tócbaid (AMC 278).29 It seems
then that main clause lenition decreased the evidence for deuterotonic compound
forms in a number of different ways.
So far then, we have seen that there seems to have been a decrease in evidence that
the initial preverb of a compound verb is in the C position. These changes could then
have led to the loss of the compound verb. However, compound verbs were not all
lost at once. The process was gradual, spread out over several centuries. In the next
section we will examine the path that this change followed and explore some possible
reasons for this.
3.5 The spread of the simplification
If we are to trace the spread of the simplification throughout the verbal system we
must establish some criteria to determine whether or not a particular verb has been
simplified. In section 3.2 we saw that there are four main ways to determine whether
or not a compound verb has been simplified. First, it will only have a single stem, and
no longer show an alternation between deuterotonic/prototonic forms. Secondly, if a
verb is simple it will show absolute inflections. Thirdly, a simplified verb will appear
with the dummy preverb no in the secondary tenses. Finally, once a verb is simplified
28 The motivation behind this change is argued to be the loss of the neuter gender and the associated neuter infixed pronouns that were followed by lenition. After the loss of the neuter gender, the reason for this lenition was no longer clear. As a result it became reanalysed as general, main clause lenition caused by a preverb or conjunct particle. See McCone (1997a: 173) and Jackson (1990: 77) for more details. 29 One piece of evidence that supports the idea that verbs of this kind underwent vowel elision is hypercorrect forms. Forms such as do-farraid ‘arrived’ (SR 5715) or do-fuc ‘took’ (SR 1285) for Old Irish do-arraid and do-uc appear in early Middle Irish. The inclusion of an intervocalic /f/ in these environments suggests that it has been elided elsewhere.
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
213
it will appear with prefixed ro in the past tense. From these four diagnostics it should
be clear at what point a verb has become simplified. However, this is not always the
case. Within the same text a single verb may both fulfil and flout the same criterion.
For example in AMC we find the 3sg perfect form of do-meil ‘consumes’ with infixed
ro, do-romel (53) and also a 3pl perfect form with prefixed ro, ro thomailset (343).
Even more frequently we find that a verb fulfils one of the criteria and flouts another.
For example again in AMC we find the verb at-reig ‘rises’ in simplified form with a
3sg present special relative ending: érgius (299) alongside 3sg perfect forms
containing an infixed pronoun and infixed ro: atom-raracht (848).30
There are three possible explanations for the co-occurrence of simplified and
unsimplified forms. First, it could be that both forms co-existed in the spoken
language of the Middle Irish period. Alternatively, both forms could have existed in
the written form of the language, and been used to convey different stylistic effects.31
A third possibility is that the co-occurrence of the different forms reflects conflict
between the spoken language and the more archaic literary standard. Non-simplified
verbal forms are likely to reflect the literary standard, whereas simplified forms
reflect the spoken language. A careless or badly trained scribe may allow forms from
the vernacular to creep in from time to time. Bearing in mind that scribes are more
likely to archaise than to innovate, it seems plausible that if a verb shows one
simplified form it can be considered simplified.32
Let us turn our attention now to the order in which verbs are simplified. The most
influential factor that determines at which point a verb simplifies seems to be its
frequency. It seems unlikely to be a coincidence that the verbs that retain two stems
into the Modern Irish period are the most frequent. It can be seen from table 7 below
that the verbs that correspond to the Modern Irish irregular verbs, such as tabhair (do-
beir), déan (do-gní), feic (ad-cí), abair (as-beir), faigh (fo-gaib) clois/cluin (ro-
cluinethar), téidh (téit), beir (berid) are consistently the most frequent.
30 Interestingly, infixed ro seems to be preserved quite frequently when there is also an infixed object pronoun. It is not entirely clear why this is. 31 This is clearly the case later in the language. The Bardic Grammatical Tracts (Bergin 1916–55) give lists of all the possible alternative verb forms that are allowed in verse. It is perhaps possible that something similar is at play here. 32 Although see the discussion of do-icc below.
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
214
Table 7: The most frequent verbs, excluding the copula and the substantive
SR TT AMC CC TBC AS 1 do-beir (218) do-icc (123) do-beir (55) do-icc (313) do-icc (317+) do-beir (104)
2 téit (144) do-beir (113) do-gní (47) do-beir (249) téit (234) do-gní (83)
3 do-gní (134) téit (107) as-beir (37) gaibid (233) gaibid (204) gaibid (49)
4 ráidid (87) do-gní (88) gaibid (29) do-gní (231) berid (160) do-icc (44)
5 do-icc (60) do-roich (57) do-icc (28) ad-cí (145) do-gní (153) ad-cí (42)
6 do-tét (57) as-beir (55) berid (24) téit (91) do-beir (143) fo-gaib (42)
7 gaibid (57) gaibid (52) benaid (21) as-reig (90) as-beir (102) as-beir (39)
8 ro-cluinethar
(46)
ad-cí (46) at-aig (20) as-beir (79) ad-cí (96) téit (38)
9 berid (45) ro-cluinethar
(38)
ad-cí (17) ro-icc (72) do-tuit (72) cuirid (29)
10 fo-gaib (35) marbaid (35) as-reig (17) fo-gaib (67) as-reig (64) berid (26)
This is easy to explain under the account of the loss of compound verbs presented
here. It was argued above that, in order for a verb to be acquired as compound, a child
needs to encounter sufficient positive evidence that the verb in question has a
positively valued verb-class feature realised in C. If the required threshold is not
reached, then the verb-class feature will receive its default value and the verb will be
simplified. We saw in the previous section that during the Middle Irish period the
evidence that the initial preverb was in C decreased, making it more difficult for a
child to encounter sufficient evidence to acquire the valued verb-class feature.
However, the more frequent a verb is, the greater the chance that the child will
encounter sufficient evidence. As the evidence as a whole decreases only the most
frequent verbs will provide enough evidence to acquire the verb-class feature.
Although frequency is conceivably the most important factor, it is perhaps not the
only one. Certain classes of verbs are more likely to be simplified than others. For
example we saw above that according to Jackson (1990) the first class of verbs to be
simplified were those where the initial preverb ends in a vowel and the syllable
following the preverb begins with a vowel, such as fo-acaib ‘leaves’. This is also to
be expected, as these verbs will be the first to lose the stress-based cue for their
acquisition as compounds. In our earliest Middle Irish texts it is predominantly these
so-called class 1 verbs that show signs of simplification. In the middle Middle Irish
texts we find that virtually all class 1 verbs are simplified and some class 2 verbs, i.e.
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
215
those verbs where either the preverb ends, or the remainder of the verb begins, with a
consonant, are beginning to be simplified. By late Middle Irish only the irregular
verbs (i.e. ad-cí, as-beir, do-beir, do-gní, fo-gaib, ro-cluinethar and also do-roich)
remain unsimplified.33
Although for the most part the evidence seems to support Jackson’s chronology for
simplification, it is clear that the phonological shape of the verb is not the only factor
relevant in determining at what stage a verb is simplified. For example, the verb do-
icc ‘comes’ appears in its contracted form tic in the Glosses, and although there are
sporadic examples of simplification, such as no-s-ticc (AMC 1007) where no is used
to infix a pronoun and do ticedh (AS 2377) where do appears as a dummy preverb in
the imperfect, these uses are by no means consistent and do-icc shows no sign of
absolute endings even in AS. In this case, the crucial factor seems to be frequency. As
can be seen in table 5 the verb do-icc is one of the ten most frequent verbs in all six
texts. As it is so frequent, sufficient evidence will remain to acquire it as an irregular
form, whereas other class 1 verbs appear much less frequently and are subject to
simplification.
Sommerfelt (1915) observes that verbs that contain infixes are also likely to
survive longer. These infixes need not be productive. Sommerfelt argues that verbs
with petrified infixes also seem to retain their deuterotonic forms longer. Clearly if a
verb is used frequently with an infixed pronoun, then this will provide clear structural
evidence that the initial preverb is in C. However, this is not so clear in the case of
petrified infixes as they have become part of the verbal stem, and can no longer mark
the position of the preverb. However, petrified pronouns provide morphophonological
evidence. Typically stress falls after an infix. Therefore, if there is a petrified infix
this could allow the verb to maintain stress in second position and prevent the stress
from shifting to the initial syllable.34
A further pattern that is observed by Sommerfelt is that whether a verb is
simplified or not seems to depend on the form of its initial preverb. Preverbs seem to
33 Even the irregular verbs that survive into Modern Irish are beginning to show absolute endings, for example ní tabraid (AS 7685) for Old Irish ní tabair ‘he does not give’ and atcluinmíd (AS 3289) for Old Irish ro-chluinemmar (Ml 112b13) ‘we hear’. It seems likely that this reflects the breakdown of the absolute/conjunct distinction rather than the simplification of compound verbs. 34 Apart from one instance of at-bélat ‘they will die’ (889), the examples Sommerfelt gives under this category are in the most part from irregular verbs that avoid simplification as a result of their frequency, e.g. at-cím ‘I see’ (ad-cí), at-bérim-si ‘I say’ (as-beir), at-rághat ‘they rise’ (as-reig) and at-clúinim ‘I hear’ (ro-cluinethar). Therefore, the role of this factor is perhaps doubtful.
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
216
be lost in a sequence. This can be seen in the table below, which shows which
preverbs appear in each text.
Table 8: Preverbs in Middle Irish texts
FR SR TT AMC TBC CC AS
at/ad/as at/ad/as at/ad at at at at
do do do do do do do
fo fo fo fo fo fo fo
ro ro ro ro ro ro
im im im im im im
con con con con con
for for for for
fris fris fris
ar ar
in
This pattern is particularly interesting in view of the account of compound verbs
given above. The loss of a preverb reflects the loss of a particular verb class. Verb
classes, i.e. particular values for v, seem to be lost one by one. It seems likely that this
again is related to frequency. The preverbs that survive until the end of the Middle
Irish period are those associated with irregular verbs, i.e. ad-cí, do-beir, do-gní, fo-
gaib. Of these preverbs, it is only really do that survives as a verb class, as the other
preverbs only occur with one or two verbs. This is unsurprising as do is by far the
most frequent initial preverb in the Old Irish period (Ganesalingam 2003).35
3.6 Summary
This section has examined how the distinction between deuterotonic and prototonic
forms was lost in the Middle Irish period. Following McCone it was argued that
compound verbs became simplified because they were irregular. In order to acquire a
verb as compound a child must learn that the verb in question has an extra feature,
35 This process continues into Early Modern Irish, with do replacing ad in ad-cí and ad-chluin (OIr ro-cluinethar) (McManus 1994: 394).
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
217
namely a positively valued verb-class feature that can be realised in the C position. To
acquire this, children need to hear specific evidence. During the Middle Irish period
this evidence is gradually lost, and as a result children cease to assign positively
valued verb-class features and compound verbs are lost. This change does not affect
all compound verbs at the same time; simplification seems to spread throughout the
lexicon, affecting one verb at a time, with one verb at a time losing its valued verb-
class feature. The main factor determining this is frequency; however, certain other
factors also seem to play a role, for example, the phonological shape of the verb,
whether it occurs with a petrified infix and the verb class to which it belongs.
4 THE LOSS OF ABSOLUTE AND CONJUNCT INFLECTION
In section 2 above it was argued that as a result of the loss of V-to-C movement
between pre- and Classical Old Irish absolute and conjunct inflection was lost as a
syntactically productive system and came to be derived post-syntactically.
Throughout the Middle and Early Modern periods the distinction between absolute
and conjunct inflection was gradually eroded so that by Modern Irish each verb in
each tense only has one set of personal endings. In this section we will examine the
way in which the double system of inflection was lost, particularly the order in which
this change affected different tenses and moods, and consider what this can tell us
about how and why the system was lost. Like the simplification of compound verbs,
the loss of absolute and conjunct morphology took place at a time for which we have
a great deal of written evidence. To consider this change in full detail would involve a
close inspection of this textual evidence, from all the different dialects of Irish, and
also Scots Gaelic and Manx. Unfortunately such a sizeable task is beyond the scope of
this dissertation. This section, then, will provide an overview of the changes involved
in the loss of the absolute/conjunct distinction, with the more detailed study being left
for further research. Section 4.1 examines how the loss of the absolute/conjunct
distinction progressed throughout the language and section 4.2 considers how these
data support the theoretical approach outlined in this dissertation.
4.1 How the absolute/conjunct distinction was lost
In Old Irish the absolute/conjunct distinction was found only in the primary tenses,
namely the present indicative, present subjunctive, future and preterite. By Early
Modern Irish this distinction remained only in the present and the future. As we saw
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
218
in section 1, by Modern Irish this alternation has been lost completely. This section
examines the order in which the absolute/conjunct distinction was lost, beginning
with the loss in the preterite indicative and the present subjunctive during Middle
Irish, and then the loss in the present and future in the Early Modern period.
We saw in section 3 that the past tense underwent some significant changes during
the Middle Irish period. In Old Irish a distinction could be drawn in terms of both
form and function between the simple preterite and the perfect, formed with the
particle ro. In Middle Irish this distinction broke down. The particle ro changed in
function from a perfective to a generic past tense marker. As a result, the augmented
ro-forms were in competition with the older simple preterite formations, and began to
encroach on their territory. By late Middle Irish this change is well on its way, and in
AS we find only 74 past tense forms without ro compared to 470 with ro. This
increased use of ro meant that the absolute endings hardly surfaced. As a result, the
evidence for them decreased and they ceased to be acquired, with the only past tense
absolute ending that survives into Early Modern Irish being the 3sg s-preterite ending
-(a)is, as can be seen in the table below.36 The use of this form continues to decline
throughout the period (McManus 1994: 408).
Table 9: The past tense in Old and Early Modern Irish
OLD IRISH PRETERITE OLD IRISH PERFECT EARLY MIDDLE IRISH PAST
marbsu -marbus ro marbus do mholas
marbsai -marbais ro marbais do mholais
marbais -marb ro marb molais, do mhol
marbsaimmi(?) -marbsam ro marbsam do mhol(s)ama(i)r
do mholsam
___________ -marbsaid ro marbsaid do mhol(s)abha(i)r
do mholsaidh
marbsait -marbsat ro marbsat do mhol(s)ada(i)r
do mholsad
36 This table shows two different verbs, marbaid ‘kills’ and molaid ‘praises’. The reason for this is that although regular by the Early Modern period, in Old Irish molaid patterns as a deponent verb. The use of marbaid provides a clearer comparison.
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
219
The loss of the absolute/conjunct distinction in the present subjunctive was also well
underway in the Middle Irish period. In part this can be explained through
phonological and morphological changes. For example, a new 1sg ending -(e)ar
developed that replaced both the absolute and conjunct form.37 Similarly, the 2sg
endings had already fallen together in the Old Irish period, both having the form -ae.
This is not the case for the other persons and numbers. It is interesting to note that as
with the past tense, in the present subjunctive, with the exception of the 2pl form,
which we will return to below, it is the conjunct ending that survives into the Early
Modern period.
Table 10: The present subjunctive in Old and Early Modern Irish
OLD IRISH EARLY MODERN IRISH
marba -marb molar
marbae -marbae mola
marbaid -marba mola
marbmai -marbam molam
marbthae -marbaid molta(oi)
marbait -marbat
mola(i)d
One possible reason for this could be that the present subjunctive is most frequently
used after a conjunct particle. It can be seen from the table below, that in the Middle
Irish texts from our corpus (except SR) there are very few examples of verbs in the
present subjunctive without a conjunct particle.
37 On the origin of this ending see McCone (1997a: 217); McManus (1994: 407).
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
220
Table 11: The proportion of verbs in the present subjunctive used with or without a
conjunct particle
SR38 TT AMC CC TBC AS
Ind 57 41% 339 14% 3 9% 4 7% 16 11% 2 4%
Dep 82 59% 18 86% 32 91% 51 93% 126 89% 51 96%
Total 139 21 35 55 145 53
If the present subjunctive is used consistently with a conjunct particle, then the
absolute forms will not surface sufficiently frequently to be acquired and so are likely
to be lost.
Let us turn now to the tenses where the absolute and conjunct distinction survived
the longest, namely the present and the future tenses. Although these tenses maintain
an absolute/conjunct distinction at the end of the Middle Irish period, this distinction
is not found in all tenses. In the present tense a double set of endings is found in the
3sg, 1pl and 3pl; the future tense also shows a distinction in the 1sg in addition to
those found in the present. This can be seen in the paradigm below.
Table 12: The present and future tense in Early Modern Irish
PRESENT TENSE FUTURE TENSE
molaim -molaim molfad -molabh
mola(e) -mola(e) molfa -molfa
molaid -mol(ann) molfaidh -molfa
molma(o)id -molma(o)id
-molam
molfama(o)id -molfam
moltaoi
molaid
-moltaoi
-molaid
molfaidhe
molfaithe
-molfaidhe
-molfaithe
molaid -mola(i)d molfaid -molfad
The 1sg and 2sg present and 2sg future endings do not distinguish absolute and
conjunct even in the Old Irish period (Thurneysen 1946: 456–457). The 2pl, on the 38 Many of the examples of subjunctive forms without a conjunct particle are jussive subjunctives. It is possible that this was more frequent in the written than the spoken language. It is interesting to note that it is found most frequently in the religious, poetic text SR. 39 Two of these verbs are compound verbs, and so show conjunct rather than absolute endings.
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
221
other hand, survives in Old Irish, and is lost during the course of the Middle Irish
period. During Middle Irish there is confusion between the 2pl absolute and the 2pl
conjunct in the present, future and the a-subjunctive, with the absolute ending -(a)ithe
gradually replacing the conjunct -(a)id. In SR the absolute and conjunct endings
seemed to be used correctly. However, by TT and AMC only examples of the
absolute ending are found. This continues in CC and AS. It is interesting that this
change took place across all three tenses. This suggests that, at least to a certain
extent, the personal endings were not linked to a specific tense. Children learnt two
sets of endings, one for the primary tenses and one for the secondary tenses, and then
used these across the board.
The question of how and why this change took place are not entirely clear. The fact
that the absolute/conjunct distinction should be lost in 2pl forms before any others
could perhaps again be related to frequency. In our Middle Irish texts we find that the
2pl is the least frequent personal ending.
Table 13: The frequency of each personal ending in Middle Irish texts SR TT AMC CC TBC AS
1sg 101 4% 40 3% 110 15% 74 2% 290 9% 125 9%
2sg 179 6% 25 2% 70 10% 76 2% 294 9% 141 10%
3sg 1767 62% 890 55% 310 43% 2013 48% 1807 53% 543 37%
1pl 61 2% 7 0.4% 18 3% 58 1% 142 4% 136 9%
2pl 5740 2% 6 0.4% 2 0.3% 8841 2% 28 0.01% 5342 4%
3pl 389 14% 432 27% 54 8% 1111 26% 588 17% 234 16%
Pass 292 10% 213 13% 153 21% 786 19% 247 7% 220 15%
Total 2845 1613 717 4206 3396 1452
This suggests that there may have been less evidence available to acquire the
distinction between the two forms and so this distinction was more likely to be lost.
This does not, however, account for the fact that it was the absolute form that replaced
the conjunct. O’Daly (1943: 38) suggests that the reason for this was because the 2pl
conjunct ending -(a)id was identical in form to the 3sg absolute ending. The
40 49 of the 57 2pl forms in SR are imperatives. 41 53 of the 88 2pl forms in CC are imperatives. 42 18 of the 53 2pl forms in AS are imperatives.
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
222
generalisation of the 2pl absolute ending meant that the 2pl and 3sg could be clearly
distinguished from one another. Crucially, the generalisation of the absolute ending in
the 2pl seems to have occurred in the middle of the Middle Irish period, before the
loss of the absolute endings in the present subjunctive, thus explaining why the 2pl is
the only ending to maintain the absolute rather than the conjunct form.
Let us turn now to the other endings that survive into Early Modern Irish. The first
of these endings to be lost seems to be the 3pl. McManus (1994: 397) observes that in
the present tense the former absolute and conjunct endings are used interchangeably
in the Early Modern period, with the absolute form becoming more frequent. In the
Early Modern version of the Old Irish tale Scéla Mucce Meic Dathó (C. Breatnach
1996), for example, we find only the -aid ending.43 Similarly, the 1pl endings become
confused in Early Modern Irish. The direction of this change is not entirely clear.
McManus (1994: 401) observes that it is more common for the conjunct to replace the
absolute in prose texts, at least in the future. However, if we look further down the
line at how this ending developed into the Modern Irish dialects it seems that it is the
absolute ending that is most prevalent. In Munster, although there are traces of the
conjunct ending -am in the future, the absolute ending is more frequent, surviving in
the present as well as the future, e.g. molaimíd, cuirimíd ‘we praise, we put’ and
molfaimid ‘we will praise’. In Ulster, only the absolute forms survive, and only in the
present as molamaid and cuireamaid (O’Rahilly 1972: 170–1). It seems likely, then,
that for a time both the absolute and conjunct endings survived side by side, being
used interchangeably (see O’Rahilly 1972: 170, fn 2), with the absolute eventually
winning out. Again, it seems that it is the most phonologically marked ending that
tends to be favoured, with -muid being used in preference to -am.44
Let us turn finally to the 3sg forms. In Middle Irish a new 3sg conjunct ending
-(e)ann develops in the present tense.45 Throughout the Middle and Early Modern
periods this ending is interchangeable with the original ending, -ø, so we find forms
such as -mol alongside -molann (McManus 1994: 396). In the fifteenth century we
43 It was argued above that the 2pl conjunct ending -aid was lost because it was identical with the 3sg absolute. This was not the case here. Although the 3pl ending is spelled -aid there would have been a difference in the pronunciation, with the 3sg ending with lenited /ð/ and the 3pl with unlenited /d/ (</t/). 44 In the Modern Irish dialects this -muid ending has been reanalysed as a pronoun. For this process of degrammaticalization to have taken place, the ending must have been used to a certain degree of frequency. 45 The origin of this ending is disputed. See Breatnach (1994: 293); McCone (1997a: 205–7) for further details.
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
223
start to find examples of -(e)ann being used in place of absolute endings in prose
texts, reaching equal numbers in the seventeenth century. O’Rahilly (1972: 132)
observes that the original absolute -(a)id ending disappeared from literary usage in the
present tense in the mid-eighteenth century, but survived until the early twentieth
century in the spoken language in Ulster.46 Again, then, it seems that a period of
confusion, with the two endings being used in free variation, is followed by the
eventual loss of the less marked form. The -(e)ann ending spread further throughout
the verbal system, becoming the generic present tense ending. In the future, on the
other hand, it seems to be the absolute form that has been generalised, with -(a)idh
being most common not only in the 3sg future forms, but also across the paradigm.
Again, it seems likely that there would have been a period of fluctuation, with the -
(a)idh form winning out because it is more marked than the conjunct -a ending.
Having provided a brief survey of how the absolute and conjunct endings were lost
in Middle and Early Modern Irish, let us now consider how these facts fit with our
theoretical account of the double system of inflection.
4.2 The loss of the absolute/conjunct distinction: a theoretical account
In section 2 above it was argued that in order to acquire the absolute and conjunct
distinction children have to learn that there is an affixal Force feature that is present
on both C and T. When C contains positively valued features, the Force feature
combines with them and so is realised on C and deleted on T. In this case, the φ-
features cannot combine with Force and so are phonologically realised as conjunct.
When C is empty, on the other hand, the Force feature cannot be realised there, as
there are no features with which it can combine and so it is realised on T. It combines
with φ-features, and is realised phonologically as absolute endings. It was argued in
section 2 above that in order to acquire this system there are two main pieces of
information that must be learned. First, a child must learn that the Force feature is
affixal and shared by both C and T. Secondly, a child must acquire the different
phonological realisations that correspond to the different feature configurations, i.e.
that φ-features are spelled-out as conjunct endings and φ-features+Force are spelled-
out as absolute endings. This being the case, it seems then that the loss of absolute
and conjunct inflection could occur in one of two ways. Either there could be a 46 Interestingly this -(e)ann ending which is so prevalent in Modern Irish is not found in Scots Gaelic or Manx. O’Rahilly (1972: 132) suggests that this ending was lost in these dialects, as there is evidence for it in early written Scots Gaelic.
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
224
change in narrow syntax, namely a change in the position of the Force feature, or a
change in the vocabulary items (VIs – the endings), either in the morphosyntactic
features they encode or in the way they are realised phonologically. It seems that it is
the second option that is at play here.
We saw above that the first stage in the loss of the absolute/conjunct distinction
was its loss in the past indicative and present subjunctive. It was argued above that in
this case, the conjunct endings were generalised, as a result of a significant decrease
in the frequency of the absolute endings. Let us consider this in theoretical terms. In
Old Irish, for each person children would have had two separate VIs, one for absolute
and one for conjunct endings. This is shown below for the 3sg of the s-preterite:
34. (a) [Tpast] [φ3sg] ⇔ /ø/
(b) [Tpast] [φ3sg] [Force] ⇔ /(a)is/
In order to acquire each of these endings a child needs to hear them sufficiently
frequently. If the frequency of one of these endings decreases, say for example
through an increased use of conjunct particles, then there will be insufficient evidence
for it to be acquired, and this ending will be lost. As a result, the new grammar will
contain only one VI, corresponding to the conjunct ending, and this will be inserted
both when the verb is in absolute initial position and when it follows a conjunct
particle.
35. [Tpast] [φ3sg] ⇔ /ø/
At this stage there is no change in the syntax. The force feature may still appear on
either C or T, however, the VI no longer makes any reference to this feature, and can
appear both when it is present and when it is absent.47
We saw above that by the beginning of the Early Modern period the
absolute/conjunct distinction survives only in the present and future tenses, and in
47 This change could also be seen as a merger of the two VIs. In this view the two VIs remain but they both have the same realisation, in this case /ø/. Although it is possible for more than one VI to have the same realisation (for example, the genitive, plural and 3sg present endings are all realised as /s/ in English), it seems unlikely in this case, where the two VIs would be so similar, and the observed distribution is possible from simply one set of morphosyntactic features, that a child would postulate more than one VI.
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
225
these tenses only in the first and third persons. As a result of phonological and
morphological changes the distinction had simply been lost in the other tenses and
persons. As the distinction between absolute and conjunct survived in only a few
environments, it seems likely that it would have been more difficult to acquire as a
productive system. In other words, it would have become increasingly difficult to link
absolute endings to the presence of a Force feature on T. There are two possibilities as
to what may have occurred at this stage. First there may have been a change in the
syntax, whereby the Force feature ceased to be transferred from C to T. The
alternative is that there was a change in the VIs for the endings in the present and
future tenses such that they no longer made reference to the presence of a force
feature. Let us consider each of these options in turn
The idea that the last stage in the loss was the loss of the conditioning environment
for the absolute/conjunct alternation is appealing from an acquisitional perspective.
As discussed above, force is primarily associated with the C head; it is a C-based
feature. Under this view, for the Force feature to appear on T is the non-default case.
In order to acquire that the force feature is transferred to T, then, a child will need
sufficient evidence that this is the case. Once the absolute/conjunct system starts to
break down, the relationship between absolute endings and declarative force will
become obscured, leading to a reduction in evidence for the presence of a force
feature on T. However, absolute endings are not the only evidence that force is
present on T. In chapter 2 it was argued that one of the main arguments for
postulating a force feature on T is the presence of special relative marking on simple
verbs. In relative contexts certain forms of the verb show special relative endings,
most notably the 3sg ending -es, -as. This continues into Early Modern and Modern
Irish (except in the Munster dialect). As long as these relative verbal endings continue
there will be evidence for a Force feature on T. Therefore, it seems unlikely that the
loss of the absolute/conjunct distinction was a result of a change in the syntax.
Let us turn now to the second option. The loss of the link between absolute
morphology and declarative main clause marking could also be captured through a
change in the vocabulary items. Owing to the loss of the absolute/conjunct distinction
in other tenses and persons, it seems likely that the acquisition of the link between
absolute morphology and declarative main clauses will become more difficult. When
this link becomes obscured it will no longer be possible for children to acquire a VI
such as that below, that associates a particular phonological form with a force feature:
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
226
36. [Tpresent] [φ3sg] [Force] ⇔ /(a)id/
However, unlike in the past indicative and present subjunctive, when acquiring the
present and future tenses children will be faced with two different endings for the first
and third persons. Once the force feature is taken out of the equation, these two
endings will surface in exactly the same morphosyntactic contexts. They will both
have the features shown below:
37. (a) [Tpresent] [φ3sg] ⇔ /(a)id/
(b) [Tpresent] [φ3sg] ⇔ /(e)ann/
Once the link with force is lost, then, we would expect the absolute and conjunct
endings to be used interchangeably, resulting in free variation. As we saw above, this
seems to be the case in the Early Modern and Modern periods.48 Although there are
many examples of morphological doublets of this kind cross-linguistically, their
existence is generally considered to be unstable, with one variant replacing the other
(Kroch 1994). Again, this seems to be what happened in Irish, although again, further
research is necessary to determine exactly how long the doublets survived.
4.3 Summary
In this section we have explored, in general terms, how the distinction between
absolute and conjunct inflections was lost between Old and Modern Irish. The loss
seems to have involved a number of different changes, e.g. phonological changes that
caused two endings to fall together, the development of new morphological endings
that replaced both the absolute and the conjunct and syntactic changes that led to a
decrease in frequency of the absolute forms. As a result of these changes, by the Early
Modern period the distinction remained only in a few limited environments. This 48 Although it is possible that the two endings were in complete free variation, it is perhaps more likely that the choice of one over the other was determined by some other factor. In contact situations, for example, where doublets similar to this occur there is often a sociolinguistic distinction between the two variants (see Kroch 1994 and the references therein). We saw in the previous section that the ending that seems to win out is the most phonologically marked. This suggests that the choice between them is a matter of language use, rather than a principle of the grammar. Further research into the distribution of the different forms in the Early Modern and Modern periods could shed some light on this issue. For our purposes, however, the crucial point is that there is no distinction in terms of morphosyntactic features.
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
227
being the case, it became more difficult to acquire it as a productive system. The link
between absolute endings and the presence of a force feature was lost, and so the two
endings could appear in the same morphosyntactic environments. This led to free
variation, an unstable state of affairs, resulting in the eventual replacement of one
form by the other.
5 CONCLUSION
This chapter has provided an account of how the double system of verbal inflection
was lost between Old and Modern Irish. In section 2 it was argued that the first stage
in the loss of the double system was the syntactic change involved in univerbation.
The reanalysis of V-to-C movement as V-to-T movement, and the development of
generalised V-to-v movement resulting from a change in status of initial preverbs
from heads to simply valued v features, meant that neither the deuterotonic/prototonic
alternation nor the distinction between absolute and conjunct inflection could be
derived syntactically. At this stage, the double system was lost as a syntactically
productive system and so it began to be derived post-syntactically, as described in
chapter 2.
After univerbation and the loss of V-to-C movement, extra rules were needed to
derive the deuterotonic forms. Children had to learn for each compound verb that it
had a positively valued verb-class feature, and that this feature could be realised in C.
In order to do this they needed sufficient evidence. During the course of the Middle
Irish period this evidence was lost through the replacement of infixed object pronouns
by independent pronouns and phonological processes such as vowel elision, a
possible stress shift and the development of main clause lenition. As a result, children
could not acquire the correct verb-class value and compound verbs became
simplified. This evidence did not disappear for all verbs all at once. The change
spread through the lexicon affecting one verb at a time. The main factor determining
this spread was frequency.
The loss of the absolute/conjunct distinction also in part resulted from the loss of
V-to-C movement. After this children had to learn that certain feature configurations
could be realised in different ways, specifically that φ-features alone were realised as
conjunct endings, and φ-features combined with a declarative force feature were
realised as absolute endings. During the Middle and Early Modern periods the
evidence for these different endings decreased. The distinction was lost first in the
CHAPTER 5 – THE LOSS OF THE DOUBLE SYSTEM
228
past and present subjunctive where the verb appeared frequently with a conjunct
particle. The loss in the present and future tenses was more gradual. The
absolute/conjunct distinction remained in the 3sg, 1pl and 3pl forms. However, as the
absolute/conjunct distinction had become restricted to these contexts, it became more
difficult to acquire it as a fully working system. The evidence for the link between
absolute morphology and declarative force was significantly reduced. Therefore, the
different endings were acquired simply as free variants, identical in terms of
morphosyntactic features. Over time one of the variants became preferred, usually the
variant with the most phonologically marked form, and the other disappeared. This
was essentially a matter of language use.
From the discussion in this chapter it is clear that the loss of the double system was
a gradual process, beginning with univerbation in around the sixth century, and not
reaching completion until the early twentieth century. Although the change that
initiated the loss, i.e. the parametric change involving the reanalysis of V-to-C
movement as V-to-T movement, was abrupt, the consequences of this change were
gradually implemented, first through the loss of deuterotonic forms and then through
the loss of the absolute/conjunct distinction. In this case, the gradual implementation
of the change can be seen as a case of lexical diffusion, affecting lexical items in the
case of compound verbs, and functional items in the case of the absolute/conjunct
distinction. This provides an example of how, although parametric change is abrupt,
its complete implementation can be gradual.
CHAPTER 6
CONCLUSION
The main aim of this dissertation has been to provide a new account of the double
system of verbal inflection in Old Irish, specifically how it developed from PIE and
how it was lost between Old and Modern Irish.
Chapter 1 sets out the relevant background, familiarising the reader with Old Irish
and its position within the Celtic language family and also the main features of
Chomsky’s minimalist programme. In this chapter we also introduce an important
theoretical issue, namely the status of head-movement within the minimalist
programme, outlining the main assumptions relevant for the remainder of the
dissertation.
Chapter 2 develops a new synchronic analysis of the double system of verbal
inflection in the Classical Old Irish period (eighth and ninth centuries). Having
introduced the main features of the Old Irish verbal system, the existing generative
literature on the subject is reviewed. Through close consideration of the Old Irish data
it emerges that the existing syntactic accounts of the double system are fundamentally
flawed. With regards to simple verbs it is argued that evidence from infixed pronouns
and relative clauses suggests that, although prior to the Old Irish period the verb
moved to the C position, in Classical Old Irish the verb moves only as far as T in the
syntax. It is observed that adopting this view also provides a satisfying account of
stress placement and grammatical mutation within the verbal complex in Old Irish,
with both operations applying within the TP domain.
Turning to compound verbs, it is argued that the initial preverbs of deuterotonic
compound verbs are best analysed as C elements due to their phonological and
syntactic parallels with conjunct particles. However, from a theoretical perspective it
is seemingly impossible for them to move to the C position in the syntax. Various
possible analyses are investigated, including head-movement, XP-movement and
remnant-fronting, all of which face significant theoretical and empirical difficulties.
As simple verbs always appear in the T position, absolute and conjunct
morphology cannot be a reflection of the verb’s syntactic position. Furthermore, as
the initial preverb of compound verbs cannot move to C in the syntax, the distinction
between deuterotonic and prototonic forms similarly cannot be syntactically derived.
CHAPTER 6 – CONCLUSION
230
Therefore, it is concluded that in order to account for the double system of verbal
inflection synchronically it is necessary to invoke post-syntactic operations.
A new post-syntactic account of the double system is developed, which, unlike that
proposed by Adger (to appear), does not invoke conceptually undesirable post-
syntactic movement. A parallel is drawn between the distribution of absolute
inflection in Old Irish and Affix-Hopping in English. Absolute inflection is argued to
result from the presence of an affixal force feature combining with the verb’s φ-
features on T. This force feature is shared by both C and T. When C contains valued
features, affixal force combines with them and is deleted on T, resulting in conjunct
inflection. When C contains no valued features other than force, affixal force has no
host and so cannot be realised there, in accordance with the Stranded Affix Filter. In
this case, force is realised on T in combination with the φ-features, giving rise to
absolute inflection. The distribution of the dummy preverb no was also examined, and
argued to parallel do-insertion in English.
With regard to compound verbs it is argued that the initial preverb of the
deuterotonic form is best analysed as the phonological realisation of a valued verb-
class feature in the C position. This verb-class feature on C is valued by an Agree
relation with light v, but is only realised when no other inherent C features are present
in the C position. When the verb-class feature is realised in C the lower v head is
deleted under identity, giving rise to the deuterotonic form. In all other cases v is
spelled-out alongside the verb resulting in the prototonic form.
Chapter 3 marks the beginning of the diachronic part of the dissertation,
introducing the theoretical framework to be adopted in chapters 4 and 5. Following an
outline of the main principles of parametric change within a minimalist framework, a
cue-based theory of syntactic change is developed, building on work by Dresher &
Kaye (1990), Dresher (1998) and Lightfoot (1999). In particular, a question is raised
as to the role played by morphology in acquisition and syntactic change.
Chapter 4 presents a novel account of the development of the double system of
verbal inflection from PIE. The main philological accounts of the development are
reviewed. Cowgill’s (1975) particle theory is adopted in favour of McCone’s (1979b)
suffix-/infix-deletion theory on conceptual grounds. However, the Particle Theory as
it stands cannot account for the link between the development of the double system
and the development of verb-initial word order. The remainder of the chapter attempts
CHAPTER 6 – CONCLUSION
231
to fill this void, supplementing Cowgill’s particle theory with an account of the
development of verb-initial word order.
An overview of the main syntactic features of PIE is presented in order to provide
a starting point for the diachronic account. Crucially, evidence is presented to suggest
that PIE had an articulated CP, to which it was possible to move the verb for stylistic
or pragmatic effects. The development of unmarked verb-initial word order in Old
Irish is argued to result from the reanalysis of this optional, pragmatically motivated
verb-movement as obligatory, grammatically motivated verb-movement to the C
position. This development seems to be linked to both the loss of the articulated CP
and also the development of new C-based verbal morphology marking clause type.
The development of V-to-C movement was not the only consequence of the
changes in the CP. The initial preverb of compound verbs also began to appear in the
C position. Furthermore, it seems that a new class of conjunct particles developed,
specifically negative and interrogative particles and certain conjunctions.
Chapter 5 considers the loss of the double system. It is argued that the first stage
involves the loss of the double system as a syntactically productive process. This
occurs as a result of what Watkins (1963) terms ‘univerbation’. Between pre- and
Classical Old Irish V-to-C movement is reanalysed as V-to-T movement and preverbs
undergo a change in status from heads to valued v features, resulting in generalised V-
to-v movement. As a consequence of these syntactic changes, neither the
absolute/conjunct distinction nor the deuterotonic/prototonic alternation can be
derived syntactically. However, children acquiring the language are still faced with
these different forms, and so have to find a new way to derive them. It is at this point
that the post-syntactic operations outlined in chapter 2 develop.
After the Old Irish period the double system is lost from the language as a whole.
The first stage of this is the simplification of compound verbs. This change is argued
to be essentially analogical, with the irregular compound forms adopting the regular
pattern of simple verbs. Acquiring a verb as compound involves acquiring the fact
that the verb in question has a positively valued v feature. During the Middle Irish
period a reduction in the evidence for these v features leads to a failure to acquire
them, and so the valued v feature is lost, and compound verbs are reanalysed as
simple. This change is gradual, affecting one verb at a time. The point at which a verb
is simplified is determined primarily by frequency.
CHAPTER 6 – CONCLUSION
232
The final stage in the loss of the double system is the loss of the distinction
between absolute and conjunct endings. This change is argued to have occurred in
two stages. The distinction disappeared first in the past indicative and present
subjunctive, seemingly as a result of an increase in the use of conjunct particles in
these tenses. This led to the decrease in frequency and subsequent loss of the absolute
forms. After the loss of the double system in these tenses, distinct endings remained
only in the first and third persons of the present and future tenses. Due to the limited
number of environments in which the absolute/conjunct distinction survived it
became more difficult to acquire the link between absolute morphology and the force
feature. Therefore, the system was lost. The two endings survived for a while as free
variants, before one ending, usually the most phonologically marked, became
ubiquitous.
In spite of the seemingly narrow empirical focus of the dissertation, the preceding
chapters have touched on a number of broader theoretical issues. The synchronic
analysis of Old Irish in chapter 2 led to an investigation of the interface between
syntax and phonology and the operations that can take place there. From a diachronic
perspective, we have considered the development and loss of head-movement and the
thorny issue of the link between head-movement and verbal morphology. By
considering the development of head-movement alongside the loss, within the C-
domain rather than the T domain, evidence has been provided to support the existence
of a link between morphology and head-movement. Finally, the investigation of the
loss of the double system has provided an example of how, despite the necessarily
abrupt nature of parametric change, its effects can be gradual, spanning many
centuries, through the process of lexical diffusion.
REFERENCES
233
REFERENCES
Ackema, P. & A. Neeleman (2005). Beyond morphology: interface conditions on
word formation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Adger, D. (2003). Core syntax: a minimalist approach. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Adger, D. (to appear). Postsyntactic movement and the Old Irish verb. To appear in
Natural Language and Linguistic Theory.
Adger, D. & G. Ramchand (2005). Merge and Move: Wh-dependencies revisted.
Linguistic Inquiry 36, 161–193.
Ahlqvist, A. (1983). Two notes on relative marking in Old Irish. Celtica 15, 10–12.
Alexiadou, A. & E. Anagnostopoulou (1998). Parametrizing AGR: word order, V-
movement and EPP-checking. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 16,
491–539.
Alexiadou, A. & G. Fanselow (2002). On the correlation between morphology and
syntax. J-W. Zwart & W. Abraham (eds.) Studies in Comparative Germanic
Syntax. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 219–242.
Andersen, H. (1973). Abductive and deductive change. Language 49, 765–93.
Anderson, S. (1992). A-morphous morphology. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Anderson, S. (1993). Wackernagel’s revenge: clitics, morphology, and the syntax of
second position. Language 69, 68–98.
Anderson, S. (1996). How to put your clitics in their place. The Linguistic Review 13,
165–191.
Arad, M. & A. Roussou (1997). Particles and C-positions in Classical Greek.
Unpublished ms: University College London and University of Wales, Bangor.
Baker, M. (1988). Incorporation: a theory of grammatical function changing.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Baker, M. (2001). The atoms of language: the mind’s hidden rules of grammar. New
York: Basic Books.
Bayer, J. (1984). COMP in Bavarian syntax. The Linguistic Review 3. 209–274.
Bhatt, R. (1999). Verb movement and the syntax of Kashmiri. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Beerman, D., D. LeBlanc & H. van Riemsdijk (1997). Rightward movement.
Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
REFERENCES
234
Belletti, A. (1991). Generalized verb movement: aspects of verb syntax. Torino:
Rosenberg & Sellier.
Belletti, A. (1999). Italian/Romance clitics: Structure and derivation. H. van
Riemsdijk (ed), Clitics in the Languages of Europe. Berlin: De Gruyter, 543-
579.
Bergin, O. (1916–1955). Irish grammatical tracts I–V. Supplements to Ériu 8–10, 14,
17.
Bergin, O. (1938). On the syntax of the verb in Old Irish. Ériu 12, 197–214.
Best, R. & O. Bergin (1929). Lebor na hUidre (Book of the Dun Cow). Dublin:
Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies.
Best, R., M. O’Brien & A. O’Sullivan (1954–1983). The Book of Leinster, formerly
Lebar na Núachongbála. Dublin: Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies.
den Besten H. (1977/1983). On the interaction of root transformations and lexical
deletive rules. W. Abraham (ed.), On the Formal Syntax of the Westgermania.
Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 47–131.
den Besten, H. & G. Webelhuth (1987). ‘Remnant topicalisation and the constituent
structure of the VP in the Germanic SOV languages’ GLOW Newsletter 18, 15–
16.
den Besten, H. & G. Webelhuth (1990). Stranding. G. Grewendorf, & W. Sternefeld
(eds.) Scrambling and Barriers. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 77–92.
Biberauer, T. (2003). Verb Second (V2) in Afrikaans: A Minimalist Investigation of
Word Order Variation. PhD dissertation, University of Cambridge.
Biberauer, T. (2005). Splitting not spreading: a new perspective on the C/T
connection. Paper presented at GLOW V in Asia (Delhi), October 2005.
Biberauer, T. & I. Roberts (2005). Changing EPP-parameters in the history of
English: accounting for variation and change. English language and linguistics
9, 5–46.
Biberauer, T. & I. Roberts (to appear) Subjects, tense and verb-movement in
Germanic and Romance. To appear in Proceedings of GLOW V in Asia.
Bobaljik, J. (1995). Morphosyntax: the syntax of verbal inflection. PhD dissertation,
MIT.
Bobaljik, J. (2002). A-chains at the PF interface: Copies and ‘covert’ movement.
Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 20, 197–267.
REFERENCES
235
Bobalkik, J. & A. Carnie (1996) A minimalist approach to some problems of Irish
word order. R. Borsley & I. Roberts (eds.) The Syntax of the Celtic Languages
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 223–240.
Boeckx, C. & S. Stjepanovic (2001). Head-ing for PF. Linguistic Inquiry 32, 345–
355.
Boley, J. (1985). Hittite and Indo-European place word syntax. Die Sprache 31, 229–
241.
Boling, B. (1972). Some problems of the phonology and morphology of the Old Irish
verb. Ériu 23, 73–101.
Borsley, R. & A. Kathol. (2000). Breton as a V2 language. Linguistics 38,
665–710.
Borsley, R., M. Rivero, & J. Stephens (1996). Long head movement in Breton. R.
Borsley & I. Roberts (eds.) The Syntax of the Celtic Languages. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 53–74.
Borsley, R. & I. Roberts (1996). The Syntax of the Celtic Languages. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Bošković, Ž. (2000). Second position clitics: syntax and/or phonology? F. Beukema
& M. den Dikken (eds.) Clitic phenomena in European Languages. Amsterdam:
John Benjamins, 71-119.
Breatnach, C. (1996). Patronage, Politics and Prose: Ceasacht Inghine Guile, Sgéala
Muice Meic Dha Thó, Oidheadh Chuinn Chéadchathaigh. Maynooth: An
Sagart.
Breatnach, L. (1977). The suffixed pronoun in Early Irish. Celtica 12, 75–107.
Breatnach, L. (1980). Some remarks on the relative in Old Irish. Ériu 3, 1–9.
Breatnach, L. (1994). An Mheán-Ghaeilge. K. McCone, D. McManus, C. Ó Háinle &
L. Breatnach (eds.), Stair na Gaeilge in ómós do Phádraig Ó Fiannachta.
Maynooth: Department of Old Irish, St Patrick’s College, 221-333.
Brody, M. (1995). Lexico-logical form: a radically minimalist theory. Cambridge,
MA: MIT Press.
Cardinaletti, A. & I. Roberts (2002). The Extended Projection Principle as a condition
on the tense dependency. P. Svenonius (ed.) Subjects, expletives, and the EPP.
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 125–156.
Carney, J. (1979). Aspects of Archaic Irish. Éigse 17, 417–435.
REFERENCES
236
Carnie, A. (1995). Non-verbal predication and head movement. PhD dissertation,
MIT
Carnie, A., H. Harley & E. Pyatt (1994). The resurrection: Raising to Comp, evidence
from Old Irish. Studies in the Linguistic Sciences 24, 85–100.
Carnie, A., H. Harley & E. Pyatt (2000). VSO order as raising out of IP? Some
evidence from Old Irish. A. Carnie & E. Guilfoyle (eds.), The syntax of verb-
initial languages. Oxford University Press, New York, 39–59.
Chametzky, R. (2000). Phrase structure: from GB to Minimalism. Oxford: Blackwell.
Chomsky, N. (1955/1975). The logical structure of linguistic theory. New York:
Plenum.
Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic structures. The Hague: Mouton.
Chomsky, N. (1977). On wh-movement. P. Culicover, T. Wasow & A. Akmajian
(eds.), Formal Syntax, Academic Press, New York, 71–132.
Chomsky, N. (1981). Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht: Foris.
Chomsky, N. (1993). A minimalist program for linguistic theory. K. Hale & S. J.
Keyser (eds.) The view from building 20. Essays in linguistics in honor of
Sylvain Bromberger. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
Chomsky, N. (1995a). The minimalist program. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
Chomsky, N. (1995b). Bare phrase structure. G. Webelhuth (ed.) Government and
binding theory and the minimalist program. London: Blackwell, 383–439.
Chomsky, N. (2000). Minimalist inquiries: the framework. R. Martin, D. Michaels &
J. Uriagereka (eds.), Step by step: essays in minimalist syntax in honor of
Howard Lasnik. Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 89–156.
Chomsky, N. (2001). Derivation by phase. M. Kenstowicz (ed.), Ken Hale: a life in
language. MIT Press: Cambridge MA, 1–52.
Chomsky, N. (2002). On nature and language. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Chomsky, N. (2004). Beyond explanatory adequacy. A. Belletti (ed.) Structures and
beyond: the cartography of syntactic structures, volume 3. Oxford: Oxford
University Press. 104–131.
Chomsky, N. (2005). On phases. Ms MIT.
Chomsky, N. (2006). Approaching UG from below. Ms MIT.
Chomsky, N. & M. Halle (1968). The sound pattern of English. New York: Harper &
Row.
REFERENCES
237
Chung, S. & J. McCloskey (1987) Government, barriers and small clauses in Modern
Irish. Linguistic Inquiry 18, 173–237
Cinque, G. (1999). Adverbs and functional projections. New York: Oxford University
Press.
Clark, R. & I. Roberts (1993). A computational approach to language learnability and
language change. Linguistic Inquiry 24, 299–345.
Cowgill, W. (1975). The origins of the Insular Celtic conjunct and absolute verbal
endings. H. Rix (ed.), Flexion und Wortbildung: Akten der V. Fachtagung der
Indogermanischen Gesellschaft, Regensburg, 9.–14. September 1973. Reichert,
Wiesbaden, 40–70.
Cowgill, W. (1985). On the origin of the absolute and conjunct verbal inflections of
Old Irish. B. Schlerath (ed.), Grammatische Kategorien: Funktion und
Geschichte. Reichert, Wiesbaden, 109–18.
Cowgill, W. (1987). The distribution of infixed and suffixed pronouns in Old Irish.
Cambridge Medieval Celtic Studies 14, 1–5.
Déchaine, R. & M. Wiltschko (2003). Negation at the left periphery. Evidence from
Algonquian and Salish. L. Carmichael, C-H. Huang & V. Samiian (eds.),
Proceedings of WECOL 2001. Fresno, Ca: CSU Fresno, 104-117.
Degrassi, A. (1957). Inscriptiones Latinae Liberae Rei Publicae. Fasculus prior.
Firenze: La nuova italia.
Delbrück, B. (1893). Vergleichende Syntax der indogermanischen Sprachen.
Strassburg: K. J. Trübner.
den Dikken, M. (1995). Particles: On the syntax of verb-particle, triadic, and
causative constructions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dillon, M. (1927). Nominal predicates in Irish I. Zeitschrift für Celtische Philologie
16, 313–356.
Dillon, M. (1947). Celtic and the other Indo-European languages. Transactions of the
Philological Society, 15–25.
Dillon, M. (1962). History of the preverb to. Éigse 10, 120–126.
Dik, H. (1995). Ancient Greek word order. Amsterdam: Gieben.
Doherty, C. (1999). Verb second and tmesis in Early Irish. S. Chang (ed.)
Proceedings of Twenty-Fifth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics
Society. Berkeley CA: Berkeley Linguistics Society, 98–108.
REFERENCES
238
Doherty, C. (2000). Residual verb second in Early Irish: On the nature of Bergin’s
Construction. Diachronica 17 5–38.
Dover, K. (1960). Greek word order. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dresher, E. (1999). Charting the learning path: cues to parameter setting. Linguistic
Inquiry 30, 27–68.
Dresher, E. & J. Kaye (1990). A computational learning model for metrical
phonology. Cognition 34, 137–195.
Dressler, W. (1969). Eine textsyntaktische Regel der idg. Wortstellung. Zeitschrift für
vergleichende Sprachforschung auf dem Gebiet der Indogermanischen
Sprachen 83, 1–25.
Duffield, N. (1995). Particles and projections in Irish syntax. Dordrecht: Kluwer
Academic Publishers.
Embick, D. (1997). Voice and the interfaces of syntax. PhD dissertation, University
of Pennsylvania.
Embick, D. & M. Halle (2005). On the status of stems in morphological theory. T.
Geerts & H. Jacobs (eds.) Romance languages and linguistic theory.
Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 37–62.
Embick, D. & R. Noyer (2001). Movement operations after syntax. Linguistic Inquiry
32, 555–596.
Emonds, J. (1978). The verbal complex V-V in French. Linguistic Inquiry 9, 151–
175.
Eska, J. (1989). Interpreting the Gaulish inscription of Voltino. Bulletin of the Board
of Celtic Studies 36, 106–7.
Eska, J. (1994). Rethinking the evolution of Celtic constituent configuration.
Münchener Studien zur Sprachwissenschaft 55: 7–39.
Eska, J. (1996). On syntax and phonology within the early Irish verbal complex.
Diachronica 13: 223–257.
Eska, J. (2002a). Absolute and conjunct and Cowgill. Paper presented at the East
Coast Indo-European Conference, University of Pennsylvania, June 2002.
Eska, J. (2002b). Re-assessing Bergin’s Rule. Paper presented at Harvard Celtic
Colloquium, October 2002.
Eska, J. & D. Ellis Evans (1993). Continental Celtic. M. Ball & J. Fife (eds.) The
Celtic Languages. London: Routledge, 26–63.
REFERENCES
239
Eythórsson, T. (2003). The interaction of clitics and stress assignment in Old Irish.
Paper presented at the Fourth Celtic Linguistics Conference, Cambridge,
September 2003.
Evans, D. S. (1964). A grammar of Middle Welsh. Dublin: Dublin Institute for
Advanced Studies.
Ferraresi, G. (1997). Word Order and Phrase Structure in Gothic. PhD Dissertation,
University of Stuttgart.
Fischer, O., A. van Kemenade, W. Koopman & W. van der Wurff (eds.) (2000). The
syntax of early English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fortson, B. (2004). Indo-European language and culture. Blackwell, Oxford.
Fox, D. & D. Pesetsky (2004). Cyclic linearization of syntactic structures. Theoretical
Linguistics 31, 1–46.
Franks, S. (1999). Optimality Theory and clitics at PF. K. Dziwirek, H. Coats & C.
M. Vakareliyska (eds.) Proceedings of Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics
7. Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publications, 101–116.
Fuß, E. (2005). The rise of agreement. A formal approach to the syntax and
grammaticalization of verbal inflection. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Ganesalingam, M. (2003). Multiple preverbs in Old Irish. MPhil dissertation,
University of Cambridge.
Garrett, A. (1990). The syntax of Anatolian pronominal clitics. PhD dissertation,
Havard University.
Garrett, A. (1992). Topics in Lycian syntax. Historische Sprachforschung 105,
200–212.
Garrett, A. (1994). Relative clause syntax in Lycian and Hittite. Die Sprache 36, 29–
69.
Garrett, A. (1996). Wackernagel's Law and unaccusativity in Hittite. A. Halpern & A.
Zwicky (eds.), Approaching second: Second position clitics and related
phenomena. Stanford, CA.: CSLI Publications, 85–133.
Gelderen, E. van (2005). Grammaticalization as Economy. Amsterdam, John
Benjamins.
Görlach, M. (1991). Introduction to Early Modern English. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Gray, D. (1985). The Oxford book of late medieval prose and verse. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
REFERENCES
240
Groat E. & J. O’Neill (1996). Spell-out at the interface: achieving a unified syntactic
computational system in the minimalist framework. W. Abraham, S. Epstein, H.
Thráinsson & J-W Zwart (eds.). Minimal ideas: syntactic studies in the
minimalist framework. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 113–139.
Grohmann, K. (2000). Towards a syntactic understanding of prosodically reduced
pronouns. Theoretical Linguistics 26, 175–210
Haegeman, L. (1992). Theory and description in generative syntax: a case study in
West Flemish. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Haegeman, L. (2000). Inversion, non-adjacent inversion and adjuncts in CP.
Transactions of the Philological Society 98, 121-160.
Hale, K. & S. Keyser (1993). On Argument Structure and the Lexical Expression of
Syntactic Relations. K. Hale & S. Keyser (eds.) The View from Building 20.
Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 53–110.
Hale, M. (1987). Notes on Wackernagel’s Law in the language of the Rigveda.
Calvert Watkins (ed.) Studies in memory of Warren Cowgill (1929–1985).
Berlin/New York: De Gruyter, 38–50.
Hale, M. (1995). Wackernagel’s Law in the language of the Rigveda. Unpublished
Ms, University of Concordia.
Hale, M. (1996a). Deriving Wackernagel’s Law: prosodic and syntactic factors
determining clitic placement in the language of the Rigveda. A. Halpern & A.
Zwicky (eds.), Approaching second: second position clitics and related
phenomena. Stanford CA: CSLI Publications 165–198.
Hale, M. (1996b). Theory and method in historical linguistics. Unpublished MS,
University of Concordia.
Halle, M. & A. Marantz (1993). Distributed morphology and the pieces of inflection.
K. Hale & S. J. Keyser (eds.) The view from building 20. MIT Press, Cambridge
MA, 111–176.
Halle, M. & A. Marantz (1994). Some key features of Distributed Morphology. A.
Carnie & H, Harley (eds.) Papers on phonology and morphology, MIT Working
Papers in Linguistics 21, 257–288.
Halpern, A. (1995). On the placement and morphology of clitics. Stanford CA: CSLI
Publications.
REFERENCES
241
Harley, H. (1994). Deriving the Morphosyntactic Feature Hierarchy. A. Carnie & H.
Harley (eds.) MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 21, Papers on Phonology and
Morphology, 289–320.
Harley, H. (1995). Subjects, events and licensing. PhD dissertation, MIT.
Harley, H. (2004). Merge conflation and head movement: the first sister principle
revisited. K. Moulton & M. Wolf (eds.) NELS 34. Amherst: University of
Massachusetts,
Harley, H. & R. Noyer (1999). Distributed Morphology. GLOT International 4:
3–9.
Harley, H. & E. Ritter (2002). Person and number in pronouns: A feature-geometric
analysis. Language 78, 482–526.
Haspelmath, M., M. Dryer, D. Gil & B. Comrie (2005). The world atlas of language
structures. New York: Oxford University Press.
Held, W. (1957). The Hittite relative sentence. Language Dissertation 55. Baltimore:
Waverly.
Hock, H. (1996). Who’s on first? Towards a prosodic account of P2 clitics. A.
Halpern & A. Zwicky (eds.), Approaching second: second position clitics and
related phenomena. Stanford CA: CSLI Publications 199–270.
Hoekstra, T. (1988). Small clause results. Lingua 74, 101–139.
Holmberg, A. & C. Platzack (1995). The role of inflection in Scandinavian syntax.
New York: Oxford University Press.
Hopper, & E. Traugott (1993). Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Hróarsdóttir, T., G. Hrafnbjargarson, A. Wiklund & K. Bentzen (to appear). The
Tromsø guide to Scandinavian verb movement. To appear in Working Papers in
Scandinavian Syntax.
Huang, J. (1982). Logical relations in Chinese and the theory of grammar. PhD
dissertation, MIT.
Hyams, N. (1986). Language acquisition and the theory of parameters. Dordrecht: D.
Reidel.
Inkelas S. & D. Zec (1995). Syntax-phonology interface. J. Goldsmith (ed.) The
handbook of phonological theory. Oxford: Blackwell, 535–549.
Isaac, G. (2000). The most recent model of the development of absolute and conjunct
inflection. Ériu 51, 63–68.
REFERENCES
242
Isaac, G. (2001). The function and typology of absolute and conjunct flexion in early
Celtic: Some hints from Ancient Egyptian. Transactions of the Philological
Society, 145–168.
Jackson, K. (1951). Common Gaelic: The Evolution of the Gaelic Languages. Sir
John Rhys Memorial Lecture, British Academy, London.
Jackson, K. (ed.) (1990). Aislinge meic con glinne. Dublin: Dublin Institute for
Advanced Studies.
Kayne, R. (1975). French syntax: the transformational cycle. Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press.
Kayne, R. (1985). Principles of particle constructions. J. Guéron, H.-G. Obenauer &
J.-Y. Pollock (eds.) Grammatical Representations. Dordrecht: Foris,
101–140.
Kayne, R. (1989). Null subjects and clitic climbing. O. Jaeggli & K. Safir (eds.) The
null subject parameter. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 239–261.
Kayne, R. (1991). Romance clitics, verb movement and PRO. Linguistic Inquiry 33:
409–442.
Kayne, R. (1994). The antisymmetry of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Kemenade, A. van (1987). Syntactic case and morphological case in the history of
English. Dordrecht: Foris.
Kiparsky, P. (1982). Explanation in Phonology. Dordrecht: Foris.
Kiparsky, P. (1995a). Indo-European Origins of Germanic Syntax. A. Battye & I.
Roberts (eds.) Clause structure and language change. New York: Oxford
University Press, 140–170.
Kiparsky, P. (1995b). The Phonological Basis of Sound Change. J. Goldsmith (ed.)
Handbook of Phonological Theory. Oxford: Blackwell, 640–670.
Kiparsky, P. (2000). Analogy as Optimization. A. Lahiri (ed.) Analogy, Levelling,
Markedness. Principles of Change in Phonology and Morphology. Berlin:
Mouton de Gruyter, 15–46.
Koch, J. (1985). Movement and emphasis in the Gaulish sentence. Bulletin of the
Board of Celtic Studies 32, 1–37.
Koch, J. (1987). Prosody and the Old Celtic verbal complex. Ériu 38, 143–176.
Koch, J. (1991). On the prehistory of Brittonic syntax. J. Fife & E. Poppe (eds.)
Studies in Brythonic word order. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1–43.
REFERENCES
243
Kortland, F. (1979). The Old Irish absolute and conjunct endings and questions of
relative chronology. Ériu 30, 35–53.
Kortland, F. (1994). Absolute and conjunct again. Münchener Studien zur
Sprachwissenschaft 55, 61–68.
Kroch, A. (1989). Reflexes of grammar in patterns of language change. Language
variation and change 1, 199–244.
Kroch, A. (1994). Morphosyntactic variation. Papers from the 30th meeting of the
Chicago Linguistic Society 2, 180–201.
Laka, I. (1990). Negation in syntax. On the nature of functional categories and
projections. PhD dissertation, MIT.
Landau, I. (2006). Chain resolution in Hebrew V(P) fronting. Syntax 9, 32–66.
Langacker, R. (1977). Syntactic reanalysis. C. Li (ed.) Mechanisms of syntactic
change. Austin: University of Texas Press, 57–139.
Lasnik, H. (1981). Restricting the theory of transformations: A case study. N.
Hornstein & D. Lightfoot (eds.) Explanations in linguistics. London: Longman.
Lasnik, Howard (1995) Verbal morphology: syntactic structures meets the minimalist
program. H. Campos & P. Kempchinsky (eds.) Evolution and revolution in
linguistic theory: Essays in honor of Carlos Otero. Washington DC:
Georgetown University Press, 251–275. [Reprinted in Lasnik, H. (1999).
Minimalist analysis. Oxford: Blackwell.]
Lechner, W. (2004). Ellipsis in comparatives. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Lechner, W. (2005). Interpretive effects of head movement. Ms., University of
Tübingen.
Lee, F. (2000). VP remnant movement and VSO in Quiavini Zapotec. A. Carnie & E.
Guilfoyle (eds.), The syntax of verb-initial languages. New York: Oxford
University Press, 143–162.
Lee, F. (2005). Force first: clause-fronting and clause typing in San Lucas Quiaviní
Zapotec. A. Carnie, H, Harley & S. Dooley (eds.) Verb first: on the syntax of
verb-initial languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 91–106.
Lejeune, M. (1988). Recuil des inscriptions gauloises ii/1, textes gallo-étrusques,
textes gallo-latins sur pierre. Paris: Centre National de la Recherche
Scientifique.
Lightfoot, D. (1989). The child’s trigger experience: degree-0 learnability.
Behavioural and Brain Sciences 12, 321–334.
REFERENCES
244
Lightfoot, D. (1991). How to set parameters: Arguments from language change.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Lightfoot, D. (1999). The development of language: Acquisition, change and
evolution. Oxford: Blackwell.
Lightfoot, D. (2006). How new languages emerge. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Lightfoot, D. & N. Hornstein (1994). Verb Movement. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Luraghi, S. (1990). Old Hittite sentence structure. London: Routledge.
McCloskey, J. (1978). Stress and syntax in Old Irish compound verbs. S. Schmerling
& C. Smith (eds.) Texas Linguistic Forum 10. Austin, Texas: Department of
Linguistics, University of Texas at Austin, 58–71.
McCloskey, J. (1991). Clause Structure, Ellipsis and Proper Government in Irish.
Lingua 85, 259–302.
McCloskey, J. (1996a). On the Scope of Verb Movement in Irish. Natural Language
and Linguistic Theory 14, 47–104.
McCloskey, J. (1996b). Subjects and subject positions in Irish. R. Borsley & I.
Roberts (eds.) The Syntax of the Celtic Languages. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 241–283.
McCloskey, J. (1999). On the right edge in Irish. Syntax 2, 189–209.
McCloskey, J. (2001a). On the distribution of subject properties in Irish. W. D.
Davies & S. Dubinsky (eds.) Objects and other subjects. Dordrecht/Boston:
Kluwer Academic Press, 157–192.
McCloskey, J. (2001b). The morphosyntax of wh-extraction in Irish. Journal of
Linguistics 37: 67–100.
McCloskey, J. (2002). Resumption, successive cyclicity, and the locality of
operations. S. Epstein & D. Seely (eds.) Derivation and explanation in the
minimalist program. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 184–226.
McCloskey, J. (2005). A note on predicates and heads in Irish clausal syntax. A.
Carnie, H, Harley & S. Dooley (eds.) Verb first: on the syntax of verb-initial
languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 155–174.
McCone, K. (1978). The dative singular of Old Irish consonant stems. Ériu 29, 26–38. McCone, K. (1979a). Aspects of Indo-European sentence patterns and their role in the
constitution of the Old Irish verbal system. DPhil dissertation, University of
REFERENCES
245
Oxford. McCone, K. (1979b). Pretonic preverbs and the absolute verbal endings in Old Irish.
Ériu, 30, 1–34.
McCone, K. (1979c). The diachronic possibilities of the Indo-European ‘amplified’
sentence: A case history from Anatolian. Brogyani, B. (ed.), Studies in
Diachronic, Synchronic, and Typological Linguistics: Festschrift for Oswald
Szemérenyi on the Occasion of his 65th Birthday. Amsterdam: John Benjamins,
467–488.
McCone, K. (1980). The nasalizing relative clause with object antecedent in the
glosses. Ériu 31, 10–27.
McCone, K. (1982). Further to absolute and conjunct. Ériu 33, 1–29.
McCone, K. (1985). The absolute and conjunct verbal inflection in Old Irish. B.
Schlerath (ed.), Grammatische Kategorien: Funktion und Geschichte.
Wiesbaden: Reichert, 261–270.
McCone, K. (1996). Towards a chronology of ancient and medieval Celtic sound
changes. Maynooth Studies in Celtic Linguistics I.
McCone, K. (1997a). The Early Irish Verb. Maynooth: An Sagart.
McCone, K. (1997b). Delbrück’s model of PIE word order and the Celtic evidence. E.
Crespo & J. Ramon (eds.) Berthold Delbrück y la sintaxis indoeuropea hoy:
actas del coloquio de la Indogermanische Gesellschaft, Madrid 21–24 de
septimbre de 1994. Madrid: Wiesbaden, 363–396.
McDaniel, D. (1989). Partial and multiple wh-movement. Natural Language and
Linguistic Theory 7, 565–604.
MacDonell, A. (1916). Vedic grammar for students. Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Mac Eoin, G. (1961a). On the date and authorship of Saltair na Rann. Zeitschrift für
Celtische Philologie 28, 51–67.
Mac Eoin, G. (1961b). Das Verbalsystem von Togail Troi. Zeitschrift für celtische
Philologie 28, 73–136, 149–233.
Mac Gearailt, U. (1997–1998). Infixed and independent pronouns in the LL text of
Táin Bo Cuailnge. Zeitschrift für Celtische Philologie 49–50, 494–515.
McGonagle, N. (1988) Irish grammar: a basic handbook. Conamara: Cló Iar-
Chonnachta.
McManus, D. (1991). A guide to Ogam. Maynooth: An Sagart.
REFERENCES
246
McManus, D. (1994). An Nua-Ghaeilge Chlasaiceach. K. McCone, D. McManus, C.
Ó Háinle & L. Breatnach (eds.), Stair na Gaeilge in ómós do Phádraig Ó
Fiannachta. Maynooth: Department of Old Irish, St Patrick’s College, 335–446.
Mahajan, A. (2000). Eliminating head movement. GLOW Newsletter 44: 44–5.
Mahajan, A. (2003). Word order and (remnant) VP movement. S. Karimi (ed.) Word
order and scrambling. Oxford: Blackwell, 217–237.
Manetta, E. (2006). Peripheries in Kashmiri and Hindi-Urdu. PhD dissertation,
University of California, Santa Cruz.
Marantz, A. (1988). Clitics, morphological merger and the mapping to phonological
structure. M. Hammond & M. Noonan (eds.) Theoretical Morphology. San
Diego: Academic Press, 253–270.
Marantz, A. (1997). No escape from syntax. Don’t try a morphological analysis in the
privacy of your own lexicon. Proceedings of the 21st annual Penn Linguistics
Colloquium. Penn Working Papers in Linguistics 4, 201–225.
Massam, D. (2000). VSO and VOS: aspects of Niuean word order. A. Carnie & E.
Guilfoyle (eds.), The syntax of verb-initial languages. New York: Oxford
University Press, 97–116.
Massam, D. (2005). Lexical categories, lack of inflection and predicate fronting in
Niuean. A. Carnie, H, Harley & S. Dooley (eds.) Verb first: on the syntax of
verb-initial languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 227–242.
Matić, D. (2003). Topic, focus and discourse structure: Ancient Greek word order.
Studies in Language 27, 573–633.
Matushansky, O. (2002). Moving a-head. K. Hiraiwa & J. Sabbagh (eds.), Minimalist
Approaches to Clause Structure, MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 50.
Matushansky, O. (2006). Head movement in linguistic theory. Linguistic Inquiry 37:
69–109.
Müller, G. (2004). Phase impenetrability and wh-intervention. A. Stepanov, G.
Fanselow, & R. Vogel (eds.) Minimality Effects in Syntax. Berlin: Mouton de
Gruyter, 289–325.
Neeleman, A. (1994). Complex predicates. PhD dissertation, University of Utrecht.
Newton, G. (2005). The Old Irish double system of verbal inflection: towards a
synchronic analysis. F. Chalcraft & E. Sipetzis (eds.), Cambridge Occasional
Papers in Linguistics 2, 149–172.
REFERENCES
247
Newton, G. (2006). The contribution of the Old Irish verbal system to the
reconstruction of Proto-Indo-European syntax. N. Yanez-Bouzita (ed.) Papers
in Linguistics of the University of Manchester (PLUM) 2005, 95–112.
Noyer, R. (1997). Features, Positions and Affixes in Autonomous Morphological
Structure. New York: Garland Publishing.
Nuner, R. (1958–9). The verbal system of the Agallamh na Senórach. Zeitschrift für
celtische Philologie 27, 230–309.
Nunes, J. (1999). Linearization of chains and phonetic realization of chain links. S.
Epstein & N. Hornstein (eds.) Working minimalism. Cambridge MA: MIT
Press.
Nunes, J. (2004) Linearization of chains and sideward movement. Cambridge MA:
MIT Press.
Oda, K. (2005). V1 and wh-questions: a typology. A. Carnie, H, Harley & S. Dooley
(eds.) Verb first: on the syntax of verb-initial languages. Amsterdam: John
Benjamins, 107–134.
O’Daly, M. (1943). The verbal system of the LL Táin. Ériu 14, 31–139.
O’Rahilly, T. (1932). Irish dialects past and present. Dublin: Dublin Institute for
Advanced Studies.
Ó Siadhail, M. (1991). Modern Irish: grammatical structure and dialectal variation.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ó hUiginn, R. (1986). The Old Irish nasalizing relative clause. Ériu 37, 33–87.
Ó hUiginn, R. (1997). Aspects of clause subordination in Celtic. F. Josephson (ed.)
Celts and Vikings: proceedings of the Fourth Symposium of Societas
Celtologica Nordica. Göteborg : Meijerbergs institut för svensk etymologisk
forskning, 69–87.
Pedersen, H. (1909–1913). Vergleichende Grammatik der keltischen Sprachen.
Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht.
Pesetsky, D. (1997). Optimality theory and syntax: movement and pronunciation. D.
Archangeli & T. Langendoen (eds.) Optimality theory: an overview. Malden,
MA: Blackwell, 134–170.
Pesetsky, D. & E. Torrego (2001). T-to-C movement: causes and consequences. M.
Kenstowicz (ed.), Ken Hale: a life in language. Cambridge MA: MIT Press,
355–426.
Pintzuk, S. (1999). Phrase Structures in Competition: Variation and Change in Old
REFERENCES
248
English Word Order. New York: Garland.
Pollock, J-Y (1989). Verb movement, universal grammar and the structure of IP.
Linguistic Inquiry 20, 365–424.
Quin, E. (1975). Old Irish workbook. Dublin: Royal Irish Academy.
Rackowski, A. & L. Travis (2000). V-initial languages: X or XP movement and
adverbial placement. A. Carnie & E. Guilfoyle (eds.), The syntax of verb-initial
languages. New York: Oxford University Press, 117–141.
Renou, L. (1933). La separation du préverbe et du verbe en védique. BSL 34, 49–96.
Richards, M. (2004). Object shift and scrambling in North and West Germanic: a
case study in symmetrical syntax. PhD dissertation, University of Cambridge.
Rizzi, L. (1990) Relativized Minimality Cambridge MA: MIT Press
Rizzi, L. (1997). The fine structure of the left periphery. L. Haegeman (ed.), Elements
of grammar: handbook of generative grammar. Dordrecht: Kluwer 281–338.
Roberts, I. (1985). Agreement parameters and the development of English modal
auxiliaries. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 3, 21–58.
Roberts, I. (1991). Excorporation and minimality. Linguistic Inquiry 22, 209–18.
Roberts, I. (1993). Verbs and diachronic syntax: a comparative history of English and
French. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
Roberts, I. (1999). Verb movement and markedness. M. deGraff (ed.) Language
creation and language change. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 287–328.
Roberts, I. (2005). Principles and parameters in a VSO language: A case study in
Welsh. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Roberts, I. & A. Roussou (2003). Syntactic change: a minimalist approach to
grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rodway, S. (1998). Absolute forms in the poetry of the Gogynfeirdd: functionally
obsolete archaisms or working system? Journal of Celtic Linguistics 7, 63–84.
Rohrbacher, B. (1999). Morphology-driven syntax: a theory of V-to-I raising and pro-
drop. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Russell, P. (1988). Preverbs, Prepositions and Adverbs: Sigmatic and Asigmatic.
Transactions of the Philological Society, 144–172.
Russell, P. (1995). An introduction to the Celtic languages. London: Longman.
Sabel, J. (2000). Partial wh-movement and the typology of wh-questions. U. Lutz, G.
Müller & A. von Stechow (eds.), Wh-scope marking. Amsterdam: John
Benjamins, 409–446.
REFERENCES
249
Saito, M. & N. Fukui (1998). Order in phrase structure and movement. Linguistic
Inquiry 29, 439–474.
Schrijver, P. (1994). The Celtic adverbs for ‘against’ and ‘with’ and the early apocope
of *-i. Ériu 45, 151–189.
Schrijver, P. (1997). Studies in the history of Celtic particles and pronouns.
Maynooth Studies in Celtic Linguistics II.
Selkirk, E. (1986). On derived domains in sentence phonology. Phonology 3, 371–
405.
Selkirk, E. (1995). The prosodic structure of function words. J. Beckman, L. Dickey
& S. Urbanczyk (eds.) Papers in optimality theory. Amherst: GLSA, 439–69.
Senn, A. (1966). Handbuch der litauischen Sprache. Heidelberg: Carl Winters
Universitätsverlag.
Sims-Williams, P. (1984). The double system of verbal inflection in Old Irish.
Transactions of the Philological Society, 138–201.
Sommerfelt, A. (1915–21). Le système verbal dans In Cath Catharda. Revue Celtique
36, 24–62, 295–334 & 37, 230–246 & 38, 25–47.
Sportiche, D. (1992). Clitic Constructions. L. Zaring & J. Rooryck (eds.) Phrase
Structure and the Lexicon. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Stephens, J. (1982). Word order in Breton. PhD dissertation, University of London.
Stokes, W. & J. Strachan (1901–1903). Thesaurus palaeohibernicus: a collection of
old-Irish glosses, scholia, prose, and verse. Dublin: Dublin Institute for
Advanced Studies.
Strachan, J. (1895–7). The verbal system of Saltair na Rann. Transactions of the
Philological Society, 1–75.
Strachan, J. (1904). The infixed pronoun in Middle Irish. Ériu 1, 153–179.
Taylor, A. (1990). Clitics and configurationality in Ancient Greek. PhD dissertation,
University of Pennsylvania.
Thiersch, C. (1985). VP Scrambling and the German Mittelfeld. Unpublished ms:
University of Tilburg
Thráinsson, H. (2003). Syntactic Variation, Historical Development, and Minimalism.
Hendrick, R. (ed.). Minimalist Syntax. Oxford: Blackwell, 152-191.
Thurneysen, R. (1907). On certain initial changes in the Irish verb after preverbal
particles. Ériu 3, 18–19.
REFERENCES
250
Thurneysen, R. (1946). A Grammar of Old Irish: An Enlarged Edition with
Supplement translated by Daniel A Binchy & Osborn Bergin. Dublin: Dublin
Institute for Advanced Studies
Timberlake, A. (1977). Reanalysis and actualization in syntactic change. C. Li (ed.)
Mechanisms of syntactic change. Austin: University of Texas Press, 141–77.
Travis, L. (1984) Parameters and Effects of Word Order Variation. PhD Dissertation,
MIT.
Truckenbrodt, H. (1995). Phonological phrases: Their relation to syntax, focus and
prominence. PhD Dissertation, MIT.
Uriagereka, Juan (1995) Aspects of the syntax of clitic placement in Western
Romance. Linguistic Inquiry 26, 79–123.
Vance, B. (1988). Null subjects and syntactic change in Medieval French. PhD
dissertation, Cornell University.
Vendryes, J. (1908) Grammaire du vieil-irlandais. Paris.
Vennemann, T. (2002). Semitic > Celtic > English: The transitivity of language
contact. M. Filppula, J. Klemola & H. Pitkänen (eds.), The Celtic roots of
English (Studies in Languages 37). Joensuu: University of Joensuu, Faculty of
Humanities, 295–330.
Vikner, S. (1995). Verb Movement and Expletive Subjects in the Germanic
Languages. New York: Oxford University Press.
Vikner, S. (1997). V-to-I movement and inflection for person in all tenses. L.
Haegeman (ed.) The new comparative syntax. London: Longman, 189–213.
Vincent, N. (1999). The evolution of c-structure: prepositions and PPs from Indo-
European to Romance. Linguistics 37, 1111–1153.
Wackernagel, J. (1892). Über ein Gesetz der Indogermanischen Wortstellung.
Indogermanische Forschungen 1, 333–436.
Watkins, C. (1963). Preliminaries to a historical and comparative analysis of the
syntax of the Old Irish verb. Celtica 6, 1–49.
Watkins, C. (1976). Towards Proto-Indo-European syntax: problems and pseudo-
problems. S. Steever, C. Walker and S. Mufwene (eds.), Papers from the
parasession on diachronic syntax. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society, 305–
326.
Watkins, C. (2001). How to kill a dragon: aspects of Indo-European poetics. New
York: Oxford University Press.
REFERENCES
251
Weinreich, U., W. Labov & W. Herzog (1968). Empirical foundations for a theory of
language change. W. Lehmann & Y. Malkiel (eds.) Directions for historical
linguistics. Austin: University of Texas Press. 95–195.
Westergaard, M. (to appear). Triggering V2: The Amount of Input Needed for
Parameter Setting in a Split-CP Model of Word Order. A. Belletti, E. Bennati,
C. Chesi, E. DiDomenico & I. Ferrari (eds.) Language Acquisiton and
Development: Proceedings of GALA 2005. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars
Press. 658-671.
Wilford, E. (2005). An analysis of the Breton auxiliary system. MPhil dissertation,
University of Cambridge.
Willis, D. (1998). Syntactic change in Welsh: a study of the loss of verb-second
Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Wurmbrand, S. (2000). The structure(s) of particle verbs. Unpublished ms, McGill
University.
Zanuttini, R. (1997). Negation and clausal structure: A comparative study of
Romance languages. New York: Oxford University Press.
Zeller, Jochen (2001) Particle Verbs and Local Domains Amsterdam: John
Benjamins.
Zwart, J-W. (1997). Morphosyntax of Verb Movement. A Minimalist Approach to the
Syntax of Dutch. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Zwart, J-W. (2001). Syntactic and phonological verb movement. Syntax 4, 34–62.
Zwicky, A. & G. Pullum (1983). Cliticization vs. inflection: English n’t. Language
59, 502–513.
Top Related