This paper focuses on a specific case of variation between the (dominant) auxiliary-main verb order and the main verb-auxiliary order. By analyzing a corpus of 16th-century texts, we describe certain regularities displayed by the encliticization of the participle and the infinitive in the Romanian compound past and periphrastic future, respectively (a phenomenon traditionally described as "auxiliary inversion"). We aim at offering a set of reliable data about the relation between participle/infinitive fronting and the main vs. embedded status of the clause. The corpus investigation demonstrates that in the 16th century the encliticization of the auxiliary is very rare in subordinate clauses. In the 16th century, auxiliary encliticization mainly functions as a focalization strategy (as demonstrated by Alboiu & Hill 2012), but the alternation between a preverbal and post-verbal auxiliary can be also interpreted as a marker of solidarity between some syntactic blocks (free relatives/if-clauses - main clauses, coordinated main clauses).
Key words:
auxiliary, word order, 16th-century Romanian, subordination, focalization
The citations/references list is based on indexed publications only, and may therefore be incomplete. For any and all inquiries related to the database, please contact us at [Please enable javascript to view.].
Preview:
Journal “Diacronia” ISSN: 2393-1140 Frequency: 2 issues / year