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).
Cuvinte-cheie:
auxiliary, word order, 16th-century Romanian, subordination, focalization
Lista citărilor/referințelor nu cuprinde decît texte prezente în baza de date, nefiind deci exhaustivă. Pentru trimiterea de texte, semnalarea oricăror greșeli, și eventualul refuz ca „Diacronia” să facă publice textele, vă rugăm să folosiți adresa de email [Please enable javascript to view.].
pdf 
html 
