Clitic left dislocation and inverse scope: Plain indefinites versus numerals

Abstract

The syntax of Clitic Left Dislocation (CLLD) has been widely debated due to its mixed properties, which in some cases indicate movement (e.g. island sensitivity, certain connectivity effects) and in other cases base generation of the CLLD-ed phrase (wide scope, lack of weak crossover). In this paper we discuss scope facts with CLLD in Greek, revealing a contrast depending on the type of quantifier. We present experimental evidence that whereas CLLD-ed plain indefinites take wide scope, CLLD-ed numerals can get a low scope interpretation. We argue that the inverse scope interpretation with CLLD-ed numerals is only apparent, presenting, in fact, an instance of split scope between the degree quantifier and the existential operator. This analysis presents evidence in favor of a movement analysis for CLLD, thus patterning with the observation that binding reconstruction is possible. At the same time, the non-availability of scope reconstruction with CLLD is attributed to stricter locality constraints which have been discussed for quantifier raising as opposed to other types of movement and dependencies.

Greek Topicalization: How do properties move?

“…To conclude, the reconstruction properties of topicalization argue for a movement analysis. It is worth mentioning that reconstruction tests have been also applied to Greek CLLD in support of a movement analysis (Grohmann 2003 and more recently Angelopoulos &Sportiche 2021 andOikonomou et al 2022;see Anagnostopoulou 1994;Iatridou 1995;Tsimpli 1995;Philippaki-Warburton et al 2004 among others for a base-generation analysis of CLLD).…”