Predicate doubling and parallel chains

Doubling and <i>do</i>-support in verbal fronting: Towards a typology of repair operations

“…The answer is that the verb actually moves twice in those constructions thereby creating two distinct movement relations whose respective heads are spelled out while their tail is deleted/empty (Aboh 2006;Collins & Essizewa 2007;Chomsky 2008;Kandybowicz 2008;Aboh & Dyakonova 2009). Although similar to the notion of parallel chains suggested in Chomsky (2008) and developed in Aboh (2006); Aboh & Dyakonova (2009) the current proposal differs in that the two movements do not take place simultaneously but rather sequentially.…”

“…The answer is that the verb actually moves twice in those constructions thereby creating two distinct movement relations whose respective heads are spelled out while their tail is deleted/empty (Aboh 2006;Collins & Essizewa 2007;Chomsky 2008;Kandybowicz 2008;Aboh & Dyakonova 2009). Although similar to the notion of parallel chains suggested in Chomsky (2008) and developed in Aboh (2006); Aboh & Dyakonova (2009) the current proposal differs in that the two movements do not take place simultaneously but rather sequentially. In VP fronting, one of these movements is Ā-movement of the VP into SpecCP, where the verb moves as part of the VP, whereas the other is head movement of the verb to v and/or T. In V fronting, there are two different kinds of movement into SpecCP: (i) the verb either moves as part of a remnant VP that has been evacuated by the internal argument(s) (see den Besten & Webelhuth 1990;Grewendorf & Sabel 1994;Koopman 1997;Müller 1998Müller , 2014Takano 2000;Abels 2001;Hinterhölzl 2002;Aboh & Dyakonova 2009;Bondaruk 2012) or (ii) the verb undergoes Ā-head movement as has first been suggested by Koopman (1984) (see also van Riemsdijk 1989;Larson & Lefebvre 1991;Holmberg 1999;Fanselow 2002;Landau 2006;Vicente 2007Vicente , 2009Harbour 2008;Bastos-Gee 2009).…”

“…Vata and Nweh, Koopman 1984Koopman , 1997Yoruba, Manfredi 1993;Cho & Nishiyama 2000;Gungbe, Aboh 1998Tuki, Biloa 1997Buli, Hiraiwa 2005;Ewegbe, Ameka 1992;Ga, Kropp Dakubu 2005;Dàgáárè, Hiraiwa & Bodomo 2008;Mani, Childs 2011;Fongbe, Lefebvre & Brousseau 2002;Kisi, Childs 1995;Krachi, Kandybowicz & Torrence 2016;Berbice Dutch Creole, Kouwenberg 1994;Pichi, Yakpo 2009;Sranan Tongo, Parkvall 2000;Papiamentu, Kouwenberg & Murray 1994; among many others) but is also attested in other languages (e.g. Hebrew, Landau 2006;Yiddish, Travis 2003;Cable 2004;Russian, Abels 2001;Aboh & Dyakonova 2009;Polish, Bondaruk 2009Brazilian Portuguese, Bastos-Gee 2009;Spanish, Vicente 2007Hungarian, Ürögdi 2006;Vietnamese, Trinh 2011), where it is largely used to express verbal topics. A few illustrative examples from some of the aforementioned languages are given in (3) (glosses as found in the sources with minor typographical changes).…”

“…This conflict is then resolved by doubling the verb such that one copy of it is moved to the designated focus/topic position while another copy of the same verb is placed within TP to encode finiteness (see e.g. Cho & Nishiyama 2000;Abels 2001;Travis 2003;Kobele 2006;Landau 2006;Bayer 2008;Fleischer 2008;Kandybowicz 2008;Aboh & Dyakonova 2009;Vicente 2009;Müller 2009b;Trinh 2011). As these conflicting requirements arise in V fronting and VP fronting alike, the most economical, and hence expected, strategy is for a language to employ the same repair in both configurations.…”

Nominalization in the Japanese Predicate Doubling Construction

“…3 The fact that nominalization is involved in this construction is not peculiar to Japanese. In Yorùbá (Manfredi (1993)), Bùlì (Hiraiwa (2005)), Korean (Nishiyama and Cho (1998)) and Russian (Aboh and Dyakonova (2009)), the first verb is nominalized (along with its arguments) as well.…”