Abstract Valencian vowel harmony has been analyzed as a process that spreads the color features of the stressed open-mid vowels /ˈɛ, ˈɔ/ to a following final posttonic open vowel /a/ within the morphological word. Although this statement correctly depicts the prevailing pattern, recent experimental studies within the framework of laboratory phonology show that harmony may extend further. In light of these new data, we postulate that the scope of Valencian vowel harmony is conditioned by the prosodic structure, and that part of the variation found is due to the different ways in which clitics can prosodically integrate with their lexical hosts. We examine in detail the variation that arises from enclitics being parsed as either affixal or internal clitics and their interaction with the lexical host, providing additional evidence for the suitability of internally layered ternary feet. In our proposal, vowel harmony arises from licensing constraints demanding the features of the mid-open vowels to be attached to salient enough positions. We develop a prominence-based analysis in which features extend over increasingly larger prosodic domains in order to improve their perceptibility, giving rise to the whole typology of Valencian harmonic patterns without generating unattested forms.

Abstract While Standard Italian only displays word-final consonants in loanwords and some function words, Italo-Romance varieties show a wide range of variation in which major classes of consonants can be found in this position. This survey provides a first overview and finds that the northern varieties and the southern varieties are two different systems, the north gravitating to sonorants and the south showing a preference for obstruents. In the vast majority of cases, unattested consonant classes are excluded by non-application of apocope, which, in Optimality Theory, can only be accounted for with positional markedness or licensing, not with positional faithfulness. The typological relationship between different sets of final consonants as well as types of final clusters shows, furthermore, that an account of the southern system in terms of final onsets is undesirable.

Abstract We investigate the status of weak crossover violations (WCO) in Spanish restrictive relative clauses. Claims in the literature lead to the expectation that Spanish does not show sensitivity to WCO in this context; however, ours is the first systematic investigation of the phenomenon in the language. We find that Spanish restrictive relative clauses do exhibit WCO violations: when the relative clause is headed by que , participants rate crossover configurations lower than configurations without crossover; when the relative clause is introduced by a quien , the status of WCO violations is less clear. We consider two explanations for our results in a quien clauses: potential structural differences between que and a quien , and the possibility for an appositive parse for some of our a quien configurations. Our results set the stage for further cross-linguistic investigations of crossover phenomena.

Abstract Some grammatical phenomena are more resistant to diachronic change than others. The syntactic core is particularly resilient, raising the question why this is the case and what causes the least vulnerable properties to change. Since fundamental alterations of grammars do not occur across the lifespan of adults, first language acquisition is commonly considered to be the main locus of syntactic change. Under the assumption that language contact leads to cross-linguistic interaction, early bilinguals have been claimed to be the main agents of change. I revisit this debate, focusing on head directionality and V2. Summaries of studies of various acquisition types lead to the conclusion that reanalysis in core syntax does not happen in the course of neither monolingual nor bilingual L1 acquisition. Contrary to hypotheses entertained in diachronic linguistics, neither language contact nor structural ambiguity/complexity has this effect. For core properties to change in L1, the triggering information must be contained in the input. Insufficient exposure, as in heritage language acquisition, can cause morphosyntactic change, though not in the syntactic core. Only second language acquisition exhibits such effects. L2 learners are thus the most likely agents of fundamental syntactic change. I conclude that explanations of the resilience of syntactic phenomena cannot rely exclusively on structural aspects. It results from an interaction of syntactic and developmental factors, defined by grammatical constraint, acquisition principles, and processing demands.

Abstract This article presents experimental data assessing the acceptability status of long subject questions (LSQs) in French. It shows that their suboptimal score does not reflect dialect variation and it fails to detect a change in progress. An analysis, developing further the rescuing strategy proposed in Rizzi and Shlonsky's freezing account, is presented. The crux of the proposal is that a Case mismatch obtains within the embedded complementizer, which is shown to be necessarily syncretic in LSQs. The full acceptability of embedded subject questions is then discussed and accounted for within this framework.

Abstract Despite the vast literature which has accrued on the fine structure of the Romance left periphery, there exists no diachronic account of the emergence of the considerable microvariation between Romance varieties today. Focussing in particular on the syntax of French and Venetan varieties, this article suggests that certain northern Romance varieties have diverged maximally from an Early Medieval Romance norm in which each left-peripheral Head attracts a wide variety of suitable Goals for movement, unlike the ‘innovative’ Romance grammars which emerge in the post-medieval period where the suitable class of Goals becomes restricted along categorial or information-structural grounds. The account predicts that the most ‘conservative’ Modern Romance grammars allow widespread argument fronting via movement, whereas their most ‘innovative’ counterparts show heavy restrictions on such operations.

Abstract Research on islands has been central to linguistic theory for more than 50 years. Its importance relies on the theoretical consequences islands posit for movement and long distance dependencies. In this paper we aim to explore the contrast between a variety of islands in Spanish relative clauses to reveal whether there is any gradience in the strength of the island effects. In order to tease apart fine-grained contrasts we run an acceptability judgment study based on the factorial definition of island, an experimental paradigm that aims to isolate the various factors that can affect the acceptability of a sentence involving island violations. Overall, we found that the five constructions tested (embedded wh-questions,whether-clauses, adjuncts, complex NPs and relative clauses) show island effects in Spanish and that there are limited differences in the size of these effects, which points to a more categorical view of islands.

Abstract Linguists have keenly studied the realization of focus – the part of the sentence introducing new information – because it involves the interaction of different linguistic modules. Syntacticians have argued that Spanish uses word order for information-structural purposes, marking focused constituents via rightmost movement. However, recent studies have challenged this claim. To contribute sentence-processing evidence, we conducted a self-paced reading task and a judgment task with Mexican and Catalonian Spanish speakers. We found that movement to final position can signal focus in Spanish, in contrast to the aforementioned work. We contextualize our results within the literature, identifying three basic facts that theories of Spanish focus and theories of language processing should explain, and advance a fourth: that mismatches in information-structural expectations can induce processing delays. Finally, we propose that some differences in the existing experimental results may stem from methodological differences.