In this paper, we account for different patterns found in complement clauses of se constructions in Romanian and Spanish. In Romanian, a se construction cannot host an infinitival complement, an apparently controlled clause, whereas in Spanish a se construction can. However, when an additional se is added to the complement clause (a “double se construction”), the Romanian structure becomes grammatical, while the Spanish equivalent becomes ungrammatical. The Romanian patterns have been previously argued in Giurgea & Cotfas (2021) to be cases of control, with a failed agreement relation forcing the obligatory presence of se in the complement. We propose an alternative based on two major differences found in Romanian and Spanish. First, in se constructions, Spec, Voice is saturated by the external argument in Spanish, but it is unsaturated in Romanian. We argue that this prevents the external argument in Romanian from acting as a controller. Second, Romanian infinitival clauses appear to share properties with finite clauses, in contrast to Spanish. We argue that the grammatical Romanian double se construction is not an instance of control and suggest that it is the finite nature of the infinitival complement that allows for a double se construction.

Abstract We discuss the ungrammaticality of Spanish impersonal se (Impse) in combination with another se in control structures. Our main goal is to critically evaluate Martins & Nunes’s (2017) account of parallel phenomena in European Portuguese, who, adopting a movement theory of control, claim that Impse merges in the external argument of the non-finite embedded verb and moves to the matrix clause. When Impse and the other se are transferred within the same phase, the result is ungrammaticality due to an identity violation. We illustrate that their approach cannot be extended to Spanish. Instead, we put forth MacDonald & Vázquez-Lozares’s (2021) proposal as an alternative, which as we show allows for an extension to ungrammatical contexts in which the identity of se cannot be appealed to.

in Alteplateau Mexican Spanish,” whether the presence of an onset or coda consonant drives compression in AMS, to what extent onset and coda branching may further impact it, and what interactions between stress and compression can be observed. Based on the acoustic analyses of reading passages by six female participants born and raised in the city of Toluca and aged between 18 and 25, the authors show that mid and low vowels centralize and also display significant shortening in CVC contexts. However, coda-driven compression in AMS is implemented variably: both stressed and unstressed vowels have significantly shorter durations in CVC contexts than in CV contexts and vowels in closed syllables show more stress-driven centralization than vowels in open syllables. Contrary to previous findings, the results do not show evidence that onset complexity triggers shortening, although the authors document it in some CCV structures. The authors also show evidence that coda-induced vowel shortening occurs in AMS in environments of

In this chapter, we discuss sequences of (un)grammatical direct object clitics with impersonal se (Impse). We focus mainly on the patterns in Honduran Spanish, although we discuss several points of variation among Romance languages. It is shown that when Impse forms a clitic cluster with lo(s)/la(s), ungrammaticality results, and as a repair le(s) surfaces instead. It is argued that lo(s)/la(s) is specified for [D(efiniteness)] and Impse spells out a valued [D] feature on T. A Distributed Morphology account of the change from lo(s)/la(s) to le(s) is provided. It is argued that, as a clitic cluster on T, the two [D] features are filtered out by impoverishment; [D] on lo(s)/la(s) is deleted prior to Vocabulary Insertion, resulting in the only third person clitic underspecified for [D] that can be inserted: le(s). We illustrate how this change to le(s) has no semantic or structural consequences, as expected if the operations take place after syntax.

German sich and Spanish se can have reflexive or anticausative interpretations but only Spanish se can have a passive interpretation. We argue that Spanish Passse is the result of interaction between the subject agreement cycle and the reflexive object cycle. We make two claims: i) pro merges in Spec-Voice in Passse, due to the subject agreement cycle; and ii) se heads Voice due to the reflexive cycle. The types of reflexive constructions a language has depends on the presence/absence of pro and the categorial status of the reflexive pronoun (head or DP). French appears problematic since it has Passse but lacks subject pro. However, Passse existed in Old French (Cennamo 1993), which was a null subject language (Vance 1997). Thus, French is consistent with this claim; i.e., it developed Passse when it had subject pro and se as a head. Passse survived into Modern French as a historical remnant.

In this chapter, we outline a framework for understanding the syntactic and semantic complexity of the SE clitic. We adopt the idea that the source of the multiple uses of SE is reflexive SE itself. Moreover, assuming that reflexive SE is syntactically tied to Voice/little v, we argue that we can profitably understand SE’s diverse uses as a result of two directions of change, one where SE takes on novel syntactic and semantic functions related to Voice/little v and above; the other where SE takes on novel syntactic and semantic functions in positions below Voice/little v. We also summarize the remaining chapters in the volume and situate them within these two broad divisions. Finally, we highlight directions for further research that naturally emerge from this study.

Abstract In this paper, we offer an analysis of impersonal se (Impse) constructions in control infinitivals. We claim that se itself spells out the valued version of the [uD] feature that Holmberg (2010) and Roberts (2010) propose is a property of T in consistent null subject languages. As a corollary, we link Impse constructions to the consistent null subject status of a language (in the spirit of Belletti, 1982). Moreover, we claim that in Impse constructions there is a projected null external argument (pro se) interpreted as non-referential because of the valued version of Holmberg’s [uD] feature in T that se spells out. We also argue that ungrammatical sequences of Impse and other se result from the featural deficiency of pro se; specifically, it lacks a specification for number.

In this article, we discuss passive se constructions in Romanian and Spanish. We argue that there is a projected implicit external argument in passive se constructions in both languages based on an available inalienable possession interpretation of body parts. These constructions, however, differ from each other in one important way: Romanian passive se allows a 'by'-phrase, while Spanish passive se shows severe restrictions. Moreover, we illustrate that in Old Spanish, passive se freely allowed 'by'-phrases. Thus, Modern Romanian reflects an earlier stage of Spanish. We propose a linguistic cycle to explain these differences, where Spanish and Romanian are at different stages of that cycle. The approach offers an explanation for a general pattern within Romance, where 'by'-phrases are initially grammatical with passive se, but then become ungrammatical over time, a pattern to date that has not yet been explained. It also offers a thereotical account for why some languages do not develop passive se constructions.

This study investigates Omani academic writing in English as an example of English for Special Purposes produced by authors in an Arab context. Specifically, it explores the differences in attitudes towards academic authorities/sources manifested in the construction and use of deontic verb phrases within the particular academic genre on the topic of English Language Teaching (ELT). In response to the perceived threats from the spreading of English as an international language in academia to the cultural values of the Sultanate of Oman, this conservative Islamic nation has stated aims to modernise itself but still preserve its inner cultural thrust by producing ‘global workers with local values’. However, the difficulties experienced by many Omani novice academic writers in engaging with the wider academic community are well documented and a difference in attitudes towards authority has been mooted as a potential cause for their pragmatic failures. In addressing this issue, this project uses a qualitative evaluation to compare the work of locally published Omani writers alongside established authors, i.e. (non)native speakers using English systematically in the Western world. The results identify a number of key differences between the two sets of authors in the construction and use of deontic verb phrases which reveal the culturally embedded values and attitudes towards academic authority of the Omani writers.

This article discusses four properties of Spanish aspectual se constructions. 1. The telicity inducing effects of se; 2. The ungrammaticality of bare noun direct objects; 3. Leista Spanish Person Case Constraint (PCC) repairs; and 4. A central/terminal coincidence relation between the direct object and the subject. I show that aspectual se does not induce telicity with stative VPs. The ungrammaticality of bare noun direct objects results from the direct object functioning as an 'inner subject' of a complex predicate formed by the verb and a null preposition, the complement of which is a pro coreferential with the external argument. The semantics of the null P plus verb give rise to a central/terminal coincidence relation between the direct object and the complement of P. Moreover, I argue that the null pro moves to Spec, Appl and functions as an indirect object. In this respect, aspectual se is an indirect object reflexive. The resulting structure, moreover, is fundamentally a double object construction, a construction in which PCC effects are known to hold.

This article argues for the presence of an implicit projected argument in Spec,Voice in Spanish impersonal- and passive-se constructions. The main empirical support comes from an available inalienable-possession interpretation of the sole overt DP when it is a body part in both constructions. This interpretation is only possible in the presence of a syntactically present c-commanding possessor. I argue that the implicit projected external argument serves as the inalienable possessor of the body part. Neither the periphrastic passive nor the anticausative-se construction in Spanish allows an inalienable-possession interpretation of the sole overt DP when it is a body part. In these instances, I claim, no implicit argument projects in Spec,Voice. I discuss how the presence of a projected argument in Spec,Voice is responsible for by-phrase restrictions in impersonal- and passive-se constructions and person restrictions in passive-se constructions; the lack of a projected implicit argument in Spec,Voice of both the periphrastic passive and the anticausative-se construction is responsible for the lack of the person restrictions in both, and the lack of by-phrase restrictions in the periphrastic passive.

In this paper, we discuss the contrast between two classes of predicates in Spanish: those that can embed fragment answers and those that cannot. We show that these predicate classes differ not only in the general the availability of fragment answers but also in the availability of the complementizer que in certain constructions as well as the availability of the phenomenon known as recomplementation, as discussed by Villa-García (2012) and Demonte & Fernández-Soriano (2009). We propose that the syntactic differences between the two classes of predicates arise because these predicates select different types of clausal complements.