Download French object clitics: a multimodal analysis 1 Facts on clitics

French object clitics: a multimodal analysis
Esther Kraak
[email protected]
Abstract
Clitic systems pose particularly challenging problems for a theory of grammatical reasoning
because of the intricate way in which their grammatical organization interleaves the dimensions
of form and meaning. In this paper we present an account of French object clitics within the
framework of multimodal categorial grammar logic as developed by Moortgat, Oehrle and Morrill
([8], [6], [9], [10]). The central components of the analysis are the following. (i) Clitics are
assigned second-order pronoun types. The binding of argument slots in the thematic structure
of the predicates they combine with is accounted for in terms of hypothetical reasoning. (ii)
Clitics attach to their hosts in terms of head adjunction. The identication of heads is governed
by modal control operators. The clitic-host combinations are realized in terms of the interaction
postulates governing communication between head adjunction and regular phrasal composition.
(iii) Linear order constraints within the clitic cluster are handled by netuning the distributivity
laws regulating the percolation of the head control features through head adjunction and regular
phrasal composition congurations.
1 Facts on clitics
\In most languages, there are certain morphemes which are problematic because they have a status
which is neither obviously that of an independent word, nor that of an ax. Such morphemes
appear to have an intermediate status between these two well established categories. Typically, they
do not have the autonomy of a normal word and must `lean' on an adjacent word, the host. The
special status of such items was recognized by comparative and structuralist linguists who called
them clitics." With this characterization, given by Miller in his dissertation ([4]), we take a rst
step towards a description of clitics. The purpose of the present Section is to briey review the
constructions in which they can occur, contrasting these with constructions in which they cannot.
We will concentrate here on clitic pronouns, in view of the fact that the emphasis in the present work
will be almost exclusively on a subset of those pronouns: the French object clitics.
Clitics are pronouns in their weak form. French pronouns can be classied as weak or strong forms.
The rst group includes the subject pronouns je, tu, il, elle, ce, on, nous, vous, ils, elles ; the
direct object pronouns me, te, le, la, se, nous, vous, les ; the indirect object pronouns me, te, se,
lui, nous, vous, leur ; locative y and genetive or quantitative en (1a), while the latter consists of the
corresponding strong forms moi, toi, lui, elle, nous, vous, eux, elles and cela (1b). Not all clitics have
a corresponding strong pronoun, like for example y , which replaces a combination of the preposition
a and a normal NP.
(1) (a) Je le donnerai a Paul.
(I will give it to Paul)
(b) Lui n'aurait pas fait cela.
(He would not have done that)
Clitics are in complementary distribution with strong pronouns and normal NPs. Clitic pronouns
occur in positions that cannot be occupied by a normal NP; the same holds the other way around in
that clitics cannot occupy NP positions:
1
(Marie knows them)
(2) (a) Marie les conna^t.
(b) *Marie mes amis conna^t.
(Marie knows my friends)
(c) Marie conna^t mes amis.
(d) *Marie conna^t les.
Apart from contrastive constructions like 3(a,b) below, a clitic pronoun can never occur simultaneously with its NP counterpart or with its strong pronoun variant:
(Marie knows them, my friends)
(3) (a) Marie les conna^t, mes amis.
(b) Moi, je n'aime pas cela.
(Me, I don't like that)
(c) *Marie le voit Jean.
(Marie sees him Jean)
Clitics can not occur at all in the absence of a host. Contrary to strong pronouns and full NPs, clitics
need an adjacent, phonologically strong word to support them. Without such a host the sentence is
ungrammatical:
(Who did you see?)
(4) (a) Qui as-tu vu?
(b) *Les. Eux.
(They. Them)
(c) Ou as-tu ete?
(Where have you been?)
(d) *Y. A la maison.
(There. At home)
Clitics occur preverbally. Apart from their occurrence in positive imperatives, Wh-questions and
Yes/No questions, clitics can only occupy preverbal positions, the verb serving as their host:
(Jean gives them presents)
(5) (a) Jean leur donne des cadeaux.
(b) *Jean donne leur des cadeaux.
(c) Donne-les-lui.
(Give them to him)
(d) *Les lui donne.
Attachment of the postposed clitic to the verb is reected phonologically in the (obligatory) appearance of -t- between the verb and the clitic. This -t- cannot occur between the verb and a postposed
NP:
(When will he leave?)
(6) (a) Quand partira-t-il?
(b) *Quand partira il?
(c) Quand partira Yves?
(When will Yves leave?)
(d) *Quand partira-t-Yves?
A clitic's verbal host can not be a past participle. Although every clitic or combination of clitics needs
an adjoining verb to lean on, not all verb forms are possible hosts for clitics. Verbs in their nite,
innitival or present participle form (including the gerondif construction with en ) can fulll this role,
whereas past participles can not:
(I will speak to him tomorrow)
(7) (a) Je lui parlerai demain.
(b) Marie veut la lui montrer.
(Marie wants to show it to her)
(c) Jean regarde Paul en l'ecoutant.
(Jean looks at Paul while listening to him)
(d) *Elle a les manges.
(She has eaten them)
(e) Elle les a manges.
Nothing can intervene between a clitic and the verb. Apart from another clitic, no lexical material
can intervene between an object clitic and its host verb:
(8) (a) Jean ne l'a pas vu.
(b) *Jean le n'a pas vu.
(c) Marie le lui dira.
(d) *Marie le lui souvent a dit.
(Jean has not seen him)
(Marie will say it to him)
(Marie has often said it to him)
2
Clitics can occur on a host of which they are not a complement. Some verbs allow a clitic to be
associated with a verb that is higher up in the sentence structure than the verb of which it is a
complement. This is the case with verbs expressing causation such as faire and perception verbs like
voir, entendre and others:
(9) (a) Jean la voit manger une pomme.
(Jean sees her eat an apple)
(b) Il la lui fait manger.
(He makes her eat it)
In these examples the clitics are attached to the nite verb, although they are the subject and object
of the innitive lower in the structure. Most verbs do not allow this so-called clitic climbing, leaving
the clitic(s) attached to the innitive:
(10)(a) Jean veut les manger.
(Jean wants to eat them)
(b) *Jean les veut manger.
But even verbs that do trigger clitic climbing cannot make a clitic move out of a sentential domain:
(11)(a) *Elle l'a vu que tu as mange.
(She saw that you ate it)
(b) Elle a vu que tu l'as mange.
Clitics appear in a xed order. A very important property of clitics is that the order in which they
can appear is not subject to any variation. It is generally assumed that French pronominal clitics
are realized according to some kind of `template' describing the order in which clitics must occur:
Position:
I
II III
IV
V
VI VII
me
te
NOM ne nous 3ACC 3DAT y en
vous
se
Here NOM represents the subject clitics, 3ACC the third person accusative clitics le, la, les and
3DAT the third person dative clitics lui and leur. Usually the following assumptions accompany this
template: clitics must occur in the indicated order, there can be only one clitic per position, normally
there are at most two object clitics and in a cluster of clitics the positions III and V cannot be lled
simultaneously. The following examples reect these restrictions on order and cooccurrence of the
clitic pronouns:
(I will not give it to him)
(12)(a) Je ne le lui donnerai pas.
(b) *Je ne lui le donnerai pas.
(c) Jean me l'a dit.
(Jean has said it to me)
(d) *Jean le m'a dit.
(e) *Elle te lui presentera.
(She will introduce you to him)
(f) Je l'y ai vu.
(I saw him there)
(g) *Jean me lui semble dele.
(Jean seems to me to be faithful to her)
The phenomena described in this Section will have to be accounted for by any adequate theory of
clitic pronouns.
2 Multimodal calculus
The starting point for our treatment of French object clitics is the multimodal categorial grammar
logic developed by Moortgat, Oehrle and Morrill ([8], [6], [9], [10]). The multimodal framework is set
up as a logic for reasoning about structured linguistic resources. Resources can be put together in
dierent ways. To account for this fact, the grammar logic accommodates dierent families of connectives, each with their individual resource management regime. To distinguish the dierent resource
3
management modes, we use indexing. For each family of logical connectives, there is a corresponding
structural connective, putting together the type assumptions into a structured conguration: for the
binary connectives of mode i we have the structural operation ( ; )i , for the unary connectives of
mode i the unary structural ( )i. The multimodal Gentzen calculus is presented below. Notice that
the rules of use and proof for the logical connectives are applicable only when the connectives are in
the appropriate structural conguration.
? A [A] C [Cut]
[Ax] A A
[?] C
)
)
)
)
[R3i] (?)?i
?[(A)i]
?[3iA]
A
3i A
)
)
B
B [L3i]
)
)
i
[R2#i ] ?(?) 2#A
iA
?[A] B
#
?[(2#i A)i] B [L2i ]
i
[R=i] (??; B )A= BA
i
? B [A] C [L= ]
i
[(A=iB; ?)i] C
i
[R i] (?B; ?)B AA
i
? B [A] C [L ]
i
[(?; B iA)i] C
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
n
)
)
)
)
n
)
n
n
)
A; B )i] C ? A B [R i]
[L i] ?[(
?[A i B ] C
(?; )i A i B
Interpretation for the multimodal logic is given in terms of frame semantics, with an accessibility
relation Ri of arity n + 1 for the n-ary families of connectives. The accessibility relations model
structural composition of linguistic resources, cf.[2] for a detailed semantic investigation. In an
axiomatic presentation of the logic the rules of use and proof above take the form of residuation laws,
relativized to resource management modes:
A C=iB i A i B C i B A iC
3i A B i A 2#i B
In a multimodal system, we can capture the resource management properties of dierent families of
connectives in terms of structural postulates (structural rules, in the Gentzen style). Structural postulates are of two types. We have postulates characterizing the management properties of individual
modes of composition, e.g. a specic mode i could be Associative, Commutative, or a combination.
But more importantly, we can obtain communication between dierent modes via interaction principles. As an example, see the postulates of mixed commutativity and associativity below. Rather
than global associativity or commutativity options, they give access to restricted forms of these laws,
occurring only when the modes f and p are in construction. Mode p here is to be understood as
regular phrasal composition, mode f as phrasal inxation.
MC : A p (B f C )
B f (A p C )
MA : (A f B ) p C
A f (B p C )
In the Gentzen presentation the postulates take the form of the structural rules of Mixed Commutativity and Mixed Associativity below. These rules will help us regain certain attractive properties
of L that are lost in moving to a non-associative `base' system: they allow a controlled form of permutation and rebracketing, without risking the collapse into insensitivitity for constituent structure
or linear order that would be the consequence of adopting the unrestricted (unimodal) versions of
the structural rules. In our account of cliticization, we use the f , p interaction principles to `raise'
the clitics from their head-adjoined position to a position where they have the appropriate semantic
scope.
)
)
)
)
)
!
!
!
!
!
4
!
!
n
?[(2; (1 ; 3 )p)f ] A ?[(1; (2 ; 3 )p)f ] A
[MA]
?[(1; (2 ; 3 )f )p] A ?[((1; 2 )f ; 3 )p] A
The [MA] and [MC] interaction principles regulate communication between binary modes. The
distribution principles K 1; K 2; K govern the interaction between the unary and the binary modes of
composition. These distribution principles will play a crucial role for two components of our analysis:
they identify the head for the purposes of head adjunction, and they regulate the order within the
clitic group. Heads will be marked with a 2# decoration. This decoration functions as a `lock': to
identify a head the 2# has to be `unlocked' by the matching 3 key. For regular phrasal composition
(mode p), the 3 non-deterministically looks for the head in the right or left subphrase. Clitics
combine with their verbal bases in head-adjunction mode h: when the 3 control operator hits on the
h mode, it distributes over both components, switching the binary mode to the phrasal inxation
mode f that allows the clitic to disentangle from the head. We will rene this rough characterization
in the following Section.
K 1 : i (A p B ) i A p B
K 2 : i (A p B ) A p i B
K : i (A h B ) i A f i B
[MC]
)
)
)
)
h i
! h i
h i
!
h i
?[((1)i; 2 )p]
?[((1; 2 )p)i]
)
)
! h i
h i
h i
?[((1)i; (2 )i)f ] A
?[(1; (2 )i)p]
A
K
K
1
A
?[((1; 2 )h)i] A
?[((1; 2 )p )i]
)
)
)
)
A
A K2
3 Fine-tuning the system
We now introduce the necessary renements of the apparatus described above to create a calculus
suitable for our purpose. These renements will enable us to tackle the core problems that the description of French object clitics poses us:
- Clitics appear on (i.e immediately to the left of) some verbs but not on others.
- Clitics appear in a xed order with respect to each other, depending on their case
and person values.
- Some combinations of clitics are ungrammatical.
- Certain local domains are islands to clitic extraction.
- Clitics can be extracted from non-peripheral positions.
3.1 Featural specications
A crucial step we take towards a categorial description of the data on French object clitics is to
ne-tune the concept of the unary 3 and 2# connectives. Until now, they have been regarded as
modal operators devoid of any content and whose only distinguishing characteristic is their resource
management mode. For the unary head-marking operators we would like to introduce sensitivity for
properties such as case, number, aspect and (in)transitivity. Therefore, we give more structure to
the connectives 3 and 2# by inscribing them with (very simple) feature structure formulas in the
following way: ' and [']# . The feature-decorations ' are dened inductively from a set of atomic
attribute-value descriptions A as follows:
' ::= A '; '
Valuation for types with the new unary operators ' and [']# is as follows:
v( ' A) = x y(R'xy y v(A)
v([']# A) = x y(R'yx y v(A)
h
i
j
h
h
i
i
f
j 9
^
f
j 8
)
5
2
2
g
g
The binary relation R ' with ' atomic is a subset of W W. If ' is a composed feature decoration
; the relation R ; is dened as the union of the relations for the two components, interpreting
the comma as disjunction:
R'; yx = (R' R )yx
As atomic feature decorations we take statements of the form feature:value, like for example number:singular, case:dative, gender:masculine. Each category in the lexicon will be annotated with a
box feature structure which serves as a lexical marker and contains the feature decoration appropriate for that type. (For reasons of eciency and readability we will only use the value part of the
decoration, represented by a unique abbreviation.) For noun phrases this includes features such as
number, gender, person and case with values plural (pl ), singular (s ), female (f ), male (m ), third
(3 ), nominative (n ), accusative (a ) and dative (d ); personal pronouns will be marked for rst (1 )
and second (2 ) person as well. Similarly, verbs are marked with a box feature structure representing
characteristics as aspect (nite ( ), innitive (i ), participle (p )), argument structure (transitive (t ),
intransitive (it )) and the kind of tense auxiliary required (avoir (av ) or ^etre (e ) for French past participles). A box or diamond can have at most one decoration for each feature, to avoid redundancy
or even inconsistency of the information it contains.
The feature structure operators ' and [']# logically behave the same way as the original diamond
and box operators did: their use and proof is governed by the same logical rules, if we substitute '
for the diamond and [']# for the box. But instead of indexing the unary structural operator (.) with
a resource management mode i, we will use the feature decoration ' as an index, written in diamond
brackets to indicate the operator's correspondence to the logical, product-like diamond. The rules
of use and proof for the new diamond and box will be as follows (we keep the original symbols for
naming the rules):
?[(A)h'i] B [L3]
[R3] (?)h?'i A' A
?[ ' A] B
[
h
i
h
)
i
)
) h
i
h
i
)
h'i
?[A] B
A
#
[R2# ] (?)
? [']# A
?[([']# A)h'i] B [L2 ]
Note that the disjunctive interpretation of the comma in a composed feature decoration allows us to
adopt the inclusion priciple '
', since ' is more informative than ' . With the left rule
for the box, we can then derive [', ]# A [']# A.
)
)
)
h
i ! h
)
i
_
)
3.2 Verb selection
Consider the following sentences, where a clitic is combined with a nite auxiliary (a,d,e), an innitive
(b,c) and a past participle (f):
(Marie sees him leave)
(13)(a)Marie le voit partir.
(b)*Marie voit le partir.
(c)Marie veut la manger.
(Marie wants to eat it)
(d)*Marie la veut manger.
(e)Marie lui a parle.
(Marie has spoken to him)
(f)*Marie a lui parle.
In the sentences (a) and (b) the auxiliary voit must be the clitic's host; it does not allow the clitic
to attach itself to the innitive partir. For veut it is the other way around: it cannot serve as
a host for the clitic, so la must attach itself to the innitive. Sentences (e) and (f) demonstrate
that clitics can never appear on a past participle and thus always show up on the accompanying
temporal auxiliary. To capture the fact that French object clitics (in non-inverted sentences) are
situated immediately before their host verb, we give them a higher order functor type that looks
rightward for a suitable verb argument, from wich a noun phrase (namely the one that was cliticized)
is missing. Assuming for the moment that this verb argument is of the category VP, we can assign
the higher order type skeleton VP/(VP/NP) to the clitics. Note that because the VP argument of
6
the clitic has to be incomplete for an NP, cooccurrence of the clitic and its corresponding full NP
form is blocked. This will ensure the complementary distribution of the pair (clitic,NP) mentioned
in Section 1 (examples 2{3).
If we want to accommodate for the facts that are illustrated in sentences 13(a{f), there must be
two dierent types for each clitic: one type for the instances where it is attached to a nite verb,
and another type for when it appears with an innitival host. This implies that the verbs must be
marked for the feature aspect, with values nite, innitive and past participle. We have already
introduced the box feature structure as the location where this information can be represented. The
clitic can then select the appropriate host by marking its VP argument with a box containing the
feature decoration or i. By using only these two values in the decorations and not the one for past
participles, we ensure that a clitic can never attach itself to a verb of that type. Since a nite VP
([ ]# VP) is equivalent to [n ]# NP p S, which in turn can be abbreviated as IV (intransitive verb), the
two types for object clitics will roughly look like this:
IV/(IV/NP)
[i ]# VP/([i ]#VP/NP)
Because the clitic, by attaching itself to a VP, does not change the verb's aspect value, the resultant
VP is marked with a box containing the same feature decoration as that of the argument.
n
3.3 Clitic order and combination
We now move to our second point on the `problems list', which is the xed order in which clitics stand
with respect to each other. Third person dative clitics lui and leur always follow an accusative clitic,
whereas rst and second person datives (me, te, nous, vous) precede any accusative clitic. Some
clitic combinations are ruled out as ungrammatical altogether: a rst or second person dative clitic
cannot be followed by a rst (or second) person accusative, and a rst or second person accusative
clitic is not allowed in front of a third person dative. A combination of two accusative or two dative
clitics is always ungrammatical, whatever their person is. We can dene a strict ordering relation
on clitics such that A B means that A immediately precedes B, and put all the facts concerning
the order of a group of clitics together in the following order schema:
3
2 1;d
3;a
3;d 7
6 2;d
7
6
n
5
4
1;a
2;a
Note that the schema bears a strong resemblance to the template for clitic order stated in Section 1. It
should be read as a branching path, splitting up after n ominative and coming back together directly
before . (Although subject clitics are outside the scope of our present investigations, we include
the case value nominative in the order schema to indicate that the object clitics immediately follow
the subject (clitic or other)). In words, what this schema tells us is that object clitics immediately
follow the subject and immediately precede their verb host (the bottom element in the schema). The
clitic group can consist either of a rst or second person accusative clitic or of one or two clitics from
the sequence [1,d or 2,d] 3,a 3,d, in that order. If there is no rst or second person dative clitic,
the subject will be followed directly by a third person accusative clitic if present, and otherwise by a
third person dative. The impossibility of combining two accusative or two dative clitics with identical
person values follows from the fact that the relation is not reexive, so for example 3,a 3,a. Since
the accusative clitics of third and rst or second person are in two dierent branches of the ordering
schema, it follows that 3,a [1,a or 2,a] and likewise that [1,a or 2,a] 3,a. Moreover, for both the
datives and the accusatives, combinations of two clitics that have the same case but dierent person
values (example 12g) are automatically ltered out as ungrammatical, because a verb needs at most
one accusative and one dative argument. If there are no clitics at all in a sentence, we can move in
one big jump from to . This procedure for the empty clitic sequence is embodied in the calculus
as the inclusion principle
.
>
?
?
6
>
6
6
?
> ! ?
7
What we still need to do is to establish a link between the order schema on one hand and the types
for the clitics on the other. To this eect, we must incorporate the information that forms the basis
for the ordering, i.e. the case and person feature decorations of the clitics, into our type assignments.
The appropriate locus for this information is the box feature structure that was introduced at the
beginning of this Section and which we already used to represent aspect information for verb phrases.
Using the abbreviations introduced in Section 3.1, we can assign the following types to the clitics:
me := [1,a ]# (IV/(IV/[1,a ]#NP))
[1,a ]# ([i ]#VP/([i ]#VP/[1,a ]# NP))
Translating to ordinary language, these types dene a clitic, for instance me, as a rst person accusative lexical item. This item yields a nite or innitival verb phrase when it nds on its right
hand side such a verb phrase missing an NP of the same person and case as the clitic itself. Clitics
also have gender and number feature decorations, but since these have no inuence on the order of
the clitics we omit them from the type-declarations.
Now that we have equipped the clitic types with the appropriate set of feature decorations, we
must also add the renements of the binary connectives that were introduced in Section 2, namely
the distinction between the phrasal composition, phrasal inxation and head-adjunction modes of
linguistic composition. Clitic types contain two division operators and both must be marked for
one of these modes. The subordinate functor will be in normal (phrasal composition) mode, for
it is generally assumed that a VP is the head and its NP argument is not, which rules out the
head-adjunction mode. To decide which mode would be appropriate for the main connective of clitic
types, we need to determine whether both elements of a clitic + VP combination are heads. A clitic
diers from a normal NP in that it is not an argument to the verb, but the verb is an argument
to the clitic. The fact that no lexical material is allowed to intervene between the two (example 8)
seems to indicate that the kind of linguistic composition that is used to conjoin a clitic and its verb
argument is stronger than the kind that combines a verb with its NP arguments. To reect this
stronger bond in the type-assignment for the clitics, we would like to dene their main connective
to be in head-adjunction mode. However, for reasons we will come to shortly, we choose the phrasal
inxation mode which is a variant of the head-adjunction mode. Both the clitic and the verb are now
considered to be heads; this will turn out to be important for the proper functioning of our method
to enforce the correct order for the clitics. Below the adapted types for the clitic me (adaptation for
the other clitics being straightforward) with the proper modes added to the slashes:
me := [1,a ]# (IV/f (IV/p[1,a ]# NP))
[1,a ]# ([i ]#VP/f ([i ]#VP/p[1,a ]# NP))
We still need to ascertain whether the calculus can handle the fact that clitics appear in certain
combinations and in a certain order only. The elements of our system that will prove to be essential
in this respect are the distribution rule K and the clitic order schema. The case and person feature
decorations in the schema are ordered in such a way as to reect the order in which clitics having
those decorations must stand: if a certain clitic C must precede another clitic C' then the feature
decoration of C precedes that of C' in the schema. Because clitics are head-adjoined to their host
verb, the rule K must now be adapted in such a way that it assigns the proper diamonds to the clitics
and the verb (the rules K1 and K2, dened for the phrasal conjunction mode, remain unchanged):
K : ' (A h B )
h
i
A
! h
i
f
h
B
i
?[((1)hi; (2 )h i )f ] A
K
?[((1; 2 )h)h'i ] A
)
)
' The variables ', and represent feature decorations from the clitic order schema. The change in
product mode is necessary to enforce head-adjunction of the clitic with the verb, which reects the
phonological data on clitic-verb groups (examples 6,8). Crucially, the rule K assigns the decorated
diamonds in a left-to-right fashion: its left conjunct gets a diamond whose decoration precedes (stands
to the left of) the one assigned to the diamond for the right conjunct. Below we will demonstrate with
8
an example that the combined action of the adapted rule K and the order schema allows derivation
of correct sequences of clitics while blocking the ungrammatical cases.
The general idea behind the mechanism of rules and schema is the following. The bracketed
structure of a sentence containing one or more clitics shows one or more head-adjunction brackets.
If we want to derive such a string, for example (Jean, (la, (lui, donne)h)h)p as being a sentence, we
take this bracketed structure as the antecedent and assign to the consequent the type [ ]# S. What
the box in this type does is to start a search for the head of the antecedent sentence, via the right
rule for the box (given in its new form at the end of Section 3.1) and the rules that distribute the
diamond over the normal and head-adjunction brackets. In a sentence containing clitics, this head
will be the group clitic(s)+verb. Until it arrives at this head, the diamond that is being distributed
will have kept its original ( ) feature decoration content. This is because it has up to that point
only been distributed over the phrasal composition product, and the rules K1 and K2 do not alter
the decorations in the diamond operator. This changes as the diamond comes to the head-adjunction
brackets. Of the clitic+verb group, each element is a head and therefore gets a diamond. By the K
rule, the left conjunct receives a diamond whose feature decoration is `lower' in the clitic order (i.e.
more to the right in our schema) than , and `higher' than or equal to the decoration of the diamond
assigned to the right conjunct. The rst (leftmost) decoration is assigned non-deterministically, but
in practice the types of the lexical items will enforce the correct decoration for each item: all the
others would result in failure of the derivation. The same goes for the choice between applying the
K1 or the K2 rule when encountering a normal bracket: the type-assignments we made will cause the
derivation to fail if the incorrect rule is applied. In what follows we will therefore use the right feature
decorations and distribution rules immediately, leaving the incorrect cases out of consideration.
Because the verb is the last element of the clitic+verb group, we assign it the lexical marker [ ]#.
The type of donne for instance is [ ]#((([n ]#NP p S)/p[d ]# NP)/p[a ]# NP). For the NP subtypes of the
verbs we will use only the case decoration, which is essential to our treatment of the object clitics.
Distinctions such as male/female and plural/singular can be added, but have no inuence on the
order of the clitics and as such are ignored for the present. In the derivations we must abbreviate
certain types to avoid sequents of unmanageable length and to enhance readability. We therefore
use the abbreviations IV (intransitive verb), TV (transitive verb), TDV (transitive dative verb) and
DTV (ditransitive verb) that represent the subtypes [n ]# NP p S, ([n ]# NP p S)/p[a ]# NP, ([n ]# NP p
S)/p[d ]# NP and (([n ]# NP p S)/p[d ]# NP)/p[a ]# NP respectively. Having said all this, we can give the
derivation of the sentence Jean la lui donne:
>
>
>
?
?
n
n
n
n
n
&c
#
((([ ] DTV ) ; [3; a] NP )p; [3; d]# NP )p IV L2
lex; R=p
((donne)h?i; [3; a]# NP )p IV=p [3; d]# NP
IV IV
L=f
#
h?i
#
p
f
(IV=f (IV=p [3; d] NP ); ((donne) ; [3; a] NP ) ) IV
#
(([3; d]# (IV=f (IV=p [3; d]# NP )))h3;di; ((donne)h?i; [3; a]# NP )p)f IV L2
lex
((lui)h3;di ; ((donne)h?i; [3; a]# NP )p)f IV
[n]# NP [n]# NP
MA
(((lui)h3;di; (donne)h?i)f ; [3; a]# NP )p IV
Jean [n]# NP lex S S
R=
p
L
((lui)h3;di ; (donne)h?i)f IV=p [3; a]# NP
(Jean; IV )p S
L=
f
(Jean; (IV=f (IV=p [3; a]# NP ); ((lui)h3;di; (donne)h?i)f )f )p S
#
(Jean; (([3; a]# (IV=f (IV=p [3; a]# NP )))h3;ai; ((lui)h3;di; (donne)h?i)f )f )p S L2
lex
(Jean; ((la)h3;ai ; ((lui)h3;di; (donne)h?i)f )f )p S
K
(Jean; ((la)h3;ai; ((lui; donne)h )h3;ai)f )p S
K
(Jean; ((la; (lui; donne)h )h)h>i)p S
K
2
((Jean; (la; (lui; donne)h )h)p)h>i S #
(Jean; (la; (lui; donne)h )h)p [ ]#S R2
?
#
h?i
#
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
9
>
n
p
The diamond is ditributed rst over the normal product, arrives at the outermost head-adjunction
bracket and is distributed over it by the rule K to the conjuncts la and (lui, donne)h. The feature
decoration that K assigns to the diamond for the left conjunct la is 3,a which corresponds to the
decoration la has in its box lexical marker. The right conjunct gets an identical diamond and is then
subject to another application of the strong distribution rule. But now the only decorations K can
pass to its conjuncts are those located to the right of 3,a in the order schema. This follows from the
condition on the rule K which states that ' (here the value before the second distribution, 3,a) must
strictly precede (the decoration for the left conjunct), which in turn precedes or is equal to (the
decoration for the right conjunct). Since 3,a only precedes the decorations 3,d and , lui and donne
will get these decorations respectively. It turns out that this assignment is correct: the rule L2#
can cancel a box against a diamond provided their feature decorations are identical. The distributed
diamond then serves as the key that unlocks (i.e. removes the box marker from) the lexical items, so
that they can combine with their respective arguments. This is what happens in our derivation, since
the clitics and the verb have been assigned diamonds whose feature decorations are identical to those
in their lexical box markers. Evidently, any other assignment of diamonds would result in failure of
the derivation as the unlocking step cannot take place. So the fact that we give the diamonds their
proper decorations from the beginning is not a trick but the outcome of a self-regulating selection
process.
Before the clitic lui halfway in the derivation can consume its arguments, another step in the
derivation is required. Lui is adjoined with the verb only, whereas it needs as an argument a verb
combined with its arguments. We can realize the proper structure for the sequent by making use of
the structural rule of Mixed Associativity, that was introduced in its appropriate form at the end of
Section 2. This rule restructures congurations where a phrasal inxation product is in construction
with a phrasal composition product. This situation holds so Mixed Associativity can be applied,
followed by the introduction of the type for lui from the lexicon and an application of the left rule
for the box, cancelling the logical box operator of lui against the structural diamond operator, which
share the same decorations for the features person and case.
Sentences containing clitics in the wrong order, like for instance (Jean, (lui, (la, donne)h)h)p do
not get a successful derivation in our system. The rule K can distribute the correct diamond 3,d
to lui, but then it must assign to la and donne diamonds whose feature decorations are located to
the left of 3,d in the order schema. The only decoration satisfying this condition is , so that la and
donne both get a diamond . The derivation proceeds normally up to the point where the type
of la must be unlocked by L2# . Since the feature decorations of the diamond and the box are not
identical, removal of the box is blocked and the derivation fails:
h>i
?
h
i
?
h?i
FAIL
#
(([3; a]# (IV=f (IV=p [3; a]# NP )))h?i; ((donne)h?i; [3; d]# NP )p)f IV L2
lex
((la)h?i; ((donne)h?i; [3; d]# NP )p)f IV
[n]# NP [n]# NP
MA
h?i
h?i
f
#
p
(((la) ; (donne) ) ; [3; d] NP ) IV
Jean [n]# NP lex S S
R=
L
p
((la)h?i; (donne)h?i)f IV=p [3; d]# NP
(Jean; IV )p S
L=f
(Jean; (IV=f (IV=p [3; d]# NP ); ((la)h?i; (donne)h?i)f )f )p S
#
(Jean; (([3; d]# (IV=f (IV=p [3; d]# NP )))h3;di; ((la)h?i; (donne)h?i)f )f )p S L2
lex
(Jean; ((lui)h3;di ; ((la)h?i; (donne)h?i)f )f )p S
K
(Jean; ((lui)h3;di; ((la; donne)h)h3;di)f )p S
K
(Jean; ((lui; (la; donne)h)h)h>i)p S
K2
((Jean; (lui; (la; donne)h)h)p)h>i S #
(Jean; (lui; (la; donne)h)h)p [ ]#S R2
)
)
)
)
)
)
n
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
>
Some combinations of clitics are ungrammatical whatever their order is. We can distinguish two
kinds of such combinations: those containing a rst or second person accusative clitic (example 12e)
10
p
and those consisting of clitics with identical case values (example 12g). In the clitic order schema,
rst and second person accusative decorations are put in a separate branch. This ensures that clitics
annotated with a lexical box marker containing 1,a or 2,a cannot precede or follow any other type
of object clitic. Because of the condition on rule K, any clitic following a 1,a or 2,a clitic can only
get a
diamond, which cannot remove the box from its type. If some clitic precedes a 1,a or 2,a
clitic, the latter will not get the appropriate diamond either, for the rst clitic will need a diamond
whose feature decoration is in a dierent branch of the order schema.
As for the clitic pairs with identical case values: because the precedence relation is not reexive,
and because the feature decoration in the diamond for the second of two clitics must be strictly lower
than that for the rst, a sequence consisting of two clitics that have identical case and person values
is not allowed by the system. Combinations of a rst or second person accusative with a third person
accusative clitic have been ruled out already. Now the only cases that still need to be ltered out
are pairs consisting of two dative clitics with dierent person values. However, an attempt to derive
such a combination would result in failure anyhow, for a verb cannot combine with two arguments
that fulll the same (dative) role. So this last problem is solved at the lexical level as well, through
the types of the verbs.
h?i
3.4 Islands and medial extraction
Compare the following two sets of sentences (all variants of `Marie lets Jean eat an apple'):
(14)(a) Marie laisse manger une pomme a Jean.
(b) Marie lui laisse manger une pomme.
(c) Marie la laisse manger a Jean.
(d) Marie la lui laisse manger.
(a') Marie laisse Jean manger une pomme.
(b') Marie le laisse manger une pomme.
(c') *Marie la laisse Jean manger.
(d') *Marie le la laisse manger.
What we see here is that auxiliaries such as laisser can take as their arguments two kinds of construction. These consist either of an innitival transitive VP (innitive + direct object) followed by
a dative NP, as is the case in (a), or of an accusative NP followed by an innitival transitive VP as in
(a'). The examples (b){(d) show that these constructions dier with regard to the constituents they
allow to be cliticized. In the rst case, both the dative argument a Jean (b) and the VP-internal
accusative argument une pomme (c) can be cliticized, as well as the two of them together. But in
the second case only the accusative subject Jean of the innitive can appear in clitic form, not the
VP-internal direct object une pomme. We would like to have a mechanism to prevent clitic extraction
from innitival VPs, but only in those cases where the VP is preceded by an accusative NP. Such
islands to clitic extraction can be dened with the help of our diamond operator. To this eect,
we introduce a new diamond with feature decoration isl (for island). If we want to dene a certain
constituent as an island, we annotate it with this isl operator. Now we can dene the two types
for laisse as:
laisse := [ ]# ((([n ]#NP p S)/p[d ]# NP)/p[ ]#[t,i ]# VP)
[ ]# ((([n ]#NP p S)/p isl [ ]#[t,i ]# VP)/p[a ]# NP)
h
?
n
?
n
i
>
h
i >
In trying to derive the sentence (c') with this new type, we will eventually arrive at the point where
the constituent manger must derive the type isl [t,i ]#VP. This can only be done if manger has
island brackets (.)hisli around it so that the rule R3 can remove the diamond on both sides and
the derivation can proceed. But if we put these brackets around manger, it cannot consume its
hypothetical NP argument because the NP cannot penetrate the island brackets (cf. the temporal
domain modality of [11]). Since manger is a transitive verb, without its object it will fail to derive
a VP so that the sentence (c') has now become underivable (Figure 1). The new type for the clitic
and the rule RA used in this derivation will be explained later in this section.
If the direct object is not cliticized, as in example (b'), it will remain within the VP's island brackets where it can be consumed in the usual way by the verb (Figure 2). The bracketed structure for
this sentence, projected from the lexicon, is (Marie, ((le, laisse)h, ((manger, une pomme)p)hisli)p)p.
h
i
11
FAIL
R3 IV IV
((manger)hisli; [3; a]# NP)p isl [ ]#[t; i]# VP
[a]# NP [a]# NP
L=p
Jean [a]# NP lex (IV=p isl [ ]#[t; i]# VP; ((manger)hisli; [3; a]# NP)p)p IV
L=p
(((IV=p isl [ ]#[t; i]# VP)=p[a]# NP; Jean)p; ((manger)hisli; [3; a]# NP)p)p IV
#
((([ ]#((IV=p isl [ ]#[t; i]# VP)=p[a]# NP))h?i; Jean)p; ((manger)hisli; [3; a]# NP)p)p IV L2
lex
(((laisse)h?i; Jean)p ; ((manger)hisli; [3; a]# NP)p)p IV
can
(((laisse)h?i; Jean)p; ((manger)hisli; pa [pa]# [3; a]# NP)p)p IV
[n]# NP [n]# NP S S
RA
L
h?i
p
h
isl
i
p
#
#
p
# NP; IV)p
((((laisse) ; Jean) ; (manger) ) ; pa [pa] [3; a] NP) IV
([
n
]
S
R=
(((laisse)h?i; Jean)p; (manger)hisli)p IV=p pa [pa]# [3; a]# NP p
(Marie; IV)p S lex
L=f
(Marie; (IV=f (IV=p pa [pa]#[3; a]# NP); (((laisse)h?i; Jean)p; (manger)hisli)p)f )p S
#
(Marie; (([3; a]# (IV=f (IV=p pa [pa]#[3; a]# NP)))h3;ai; (((laisse)h?i; Jean)p; (manger)hisli)p)f )p S L2
lex
(Marie; ((la)h3;ai ; (((laisse)h?i; Jean)p ; (manger)hisli)p)f )p S
MA
(Marie; (((la)h3;ai; ((laisse)h?i; Jean)p )f ; (manger)hisli)p)p S
MA
(Marie; ((((la)h3;ai; (laisse)h?i)f ; Jean)p; (manger)hisli)p)p S
K
(Marie; ((((la; laisse)h)h>i; Jean)p; (manger)hisli)p)p S
K1
(Marie; ((((la; laisse)h; Jean)p)h>i; (manger)hisli)p)p S
K1
(Marie; ((((la; laisse)h; Jean)p; (manger)hisli)p)h>i)p S
K2
((Marie; (((la; laisse)h; Jean)p; (manger)hisli)p)p)h>i S #
(Marie; (((la; laisse)h; Jean)p; (manger)hisli)p)p [ ]# S R2
) h
)
)
h
h
?
h
i >
)
i >
)
i >
)
i >
)
)
h
i
h
)
i
)
h
h
)
)
h
)
i
)
i
)
i
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
>
Figure 1: Derivation of the sentence *Marie la laisse Jean manger.
12
p
n
)
[a]# NP [a]# NP
une pomme [a]# NP lex [t; i]# VP [t; i]# VP
L=p
([t; i]# VP=p[a]# NP; une pomme)p [t; i]# VP
#
(([ ]#([t; i]# VP=p[a]# NP))h?i; une pomme)p [t; i]# VP L2
lex
((manger)h?i; une pomme)p [t; i]# VP
((manger)h>i; une pomme)p [t; i]# VP
K1
((manger; une pomme)p)h>i [t; i]# VP #
(manger; une pomme)p [ ]#[t; i]# VP R2
R3
((manger; une pomme)p)hisli isl [ ]#[t; i]# VP
IV IV
L=p
#
#
#
#
p
h
isl
i
p
[3; a] NP [a] NP
(IV=p isl [ ] [t; i] VP; ((manger; une pomme) ) ) IV
L=p
(((IV=p isl [ ]#[t; i]# VP)=p[a]# NP; [3; a]# NP)p; ((manger; une pomme)p)hisli)p IV
#
((([ ]#((IV=p isl [ ]#[t; i]# VP)=p[a]# NP))h?i; [3; a]# NP)p; ((manger; une pomme)p)hisli)p IV L2
lex
(((laisse)h?i; [3; a]# NP)p; ((manger; une pomme)p)hisli)p IV
can
(((laisse)h?i; pa [pa]# [3; a]# NP)p; ((manger; une pomme)p)hisli)p IV
[n]# NP [n]# NP
RC
(((laisse)h?i; ((manger; une pomme)p)hisli)p; pa [pa]# [3; a]# NP)p IV
Marie [n]# NP lex S S
R=
p
L
((laisse)h?i; ((manger; une pomme)p)hisli)p IV=p pa [pa]#[3; a]# NP
(Marie; IV)p S
L=
f
(Marie; (IV=f (IV=p pa [pa]#[3; a]# NP); ((laisse)h?i; ((manger; une pomme)p)hisli)p)f )p S
#
(Marie; (([3; a]# (IV=f (IV=p pa [pa]# [3; a]# NP)))h3;ai; ((laisse)h?i; ((manger; une pomme)p)hisli)p)f )p S L2
lex
(Marie; ((le)h3;ai ; ((laisse)h?i; ((manger; une pomme)p)hisli)p)f )p S
MA
(Marie; (((le)h3;ai; (laisse)h?i)f ; ((manger; une pomme)p)hisli)p)p S
K
(Marie; (((le; laisse)h)h>i; ((manger; une pomme)p)hisli)p)p S
K
1
(Marie; (((le; laisse)h; ((manger; une pomme)p)hisli)p)h>i)p S
K2
((Marie; ((le; laisse)h; ((manger; une pomme)p)hisli)p)p)h>i S #
(Marie; ((le; laisse)h; ((manger; une pomme)p)hisli)p)p [ ]# S R2
)
)
)
)
?
)
)
> ! ?
)
)
)
>
) h
)
h
?
h
h
i >
)
i >
)
i >
)
i >
)
)
h
i
)
h
i
)
)
)
)
n
)
h
h
h
i
)
i
)
i
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
>
Figure 2: Derivation of the sentence Marie le laisse manger une pomme.
13
p
We have come to the last problem that needs to be dealt with in this paper: clitic extraction from
medial positions. So far, we oversimplied the types for the clitics by dening them as VPs looking
for VPs missing an NP immediately to their right (the meaning of the slash). In reality, the argument
position bound by the clitic does not have to be right-peripheral as we can see from the following
example:
(15)(a) Marie donne souvent ses livres a Jean.
(b) Marie les donne souvent a Jean.
The type for donne requires it to combine with its (hypothetical) accusative argument rst, but
the adverb and the dative NP standing between them make this impossible. What we need for the
hypothetical NP assumption is controlled access to the structural rule of Commutativity (and/or
Associativity), so that it can nd its place within the VP. In the work of [12] such controlled permutability is accounted for in terms of a 2 structural modality with S 4 logical rules. It is shown in
[6, 3] that these structural modalities can be simulated with the minimal residuation logic for 3; 2#
via a translation of the S 4 2 operator into the combination 32# . The 3 part of the decoration in
this case gives controlled access to the `modal' version of the relevant structural rule, and the combination 32# A cancels out to A (via the combination of L3 and L2# which we have abbreviated as
can) at the point where the modally decorated resource can be used as an ordinary datum of type
A. In our multimodal setup we will write pa [pa]# A for an A type resource which has access to the
restricted versions of Associativity and Commutativity below.
h
[RC]
?[(2 ; 1 )p]
?[(1 ; 2 )p]
)
)
A
A
i
?[((1; 2 )p; 3 )p]
?[(1; (2 ; 3 )p)p]
)
)
A
A [RA]
Provided one of the i is of the form (0)hpai
To give the hypothetical NPs from the clitic types access to these rules, we assign the following types
to the clitics, which is going to be their nal form:
nous := [1,a ]# (IV/f (IV/p pa [pa ]# [1,a ]# NP))
[1,a ]# ([i ]#VP/f ([i ]# VP/p pa [pa ]# [1,a ]# NP))
h
i
h
i
The use of these new types in combination with the rules RC and RA is illustrated in Figure 1
and Figure 2. Notice that the medial extraction operator of [5] can be dened with our enriched
vocabulary as shown below. One can use this abbreviation, and the compiled logical rules that go
with it, to simplify type assignments and derivations.
A B def
= A=p pa [pa]#B
"
h
i
3.5 Tense and modal auxiliaries
Having shown the working of our system for simple sentences, we will now consider sentences whose
verb phrase consists of a tense auxiliary (avoir or ^etre) and a past participle. The following types
are assigned to the participles (see Section 3.1 for the abbreviated feature decorations):
parti := [p,e ]# VP
achete := [p,av ]# VP/p[a ]# NP
donne := ([p,av ]# VP/p[d ]# NP)/p[a ]# NP
14
Because a participle can never be a host to clitics, it does not get the [ ]# box indicating the last
element in a clitic+verb group. Clitics attach themselves to the tense auxiliary instead, which is
reected in the types for these verbs by a main connective [ ]# . We do not assume the auxiliary to
form a head-adjunction cluster with the participle since elements like pas and peut-^etre can intervene
between the two.
est := [ ]#(([n ]# NP p S)/p[p,e ]# VP)
a := [ ]#(([n ]# NP p S)/p[p,av ]# VP)
?
?
?
n
?
n
With these types we can derive a sentence like Marie l'a achete. Derivation fails for ungrammatical
cases such as *Marie a l'achete where the clitic is attached to the participle, because the VP argument
of a doesn't have a [ ]# to start a search for the head in (l', achete)h. Consequently, the clitic will
not get the diamond it needs to unlock its type:
>
FAIL
(l'; achete)h [p; av]# V P (Marie; IV )p S L=
(Marie; (IV=p [p; av]# V P; (l'; achete)h )p)p S p
#
(Marie; (([ ]#(IV=p [p; av]# V P ))h?i; (l'; achete)h)p)p S L2
(Marie; (([ ]#(IV=p [p; av]# V P ))h>i; (l'; achete)h)p)p S
lex
(Marie; ((a)h>i; (l'; achete)h)p)p S
K
1
(Marie; ((a; (l'; achete)h )p)h>i)p S
K2
((Marie; (a; (l'; achete)h )p)p)h>i S #
(Marie; (a; (l'; achete)h )p)p [ ]#S R2
)
)
)
?
)
?
)
> ! ?
)
)
)
)
>
Another construction in which clitics can occur is a verb phrase consisting of an innitive verb and
a modal auxiliary (vouloir, devoir etc.). We assign the following types to innitives:
partir := [ ]#[it,i ]# VP
acheter := [ ]#([t,i ]# VP/p[a ]# NP)
donner := [ ]#(([t,i ]#VP/p[d ]# NP)/p[a ]# NP)
?
?
?
Innitives can be hosts to clitics and therefore get a [ ]# operator. Modal auxiliaries can never
form a head-adjunction cluster with clitics: they do not allow clitic extraction from the innitival
VP domain. To prevent such extraction, the argument subtype of the auxiliary is equipped with an
island diamond which seals o the structure consisting of the innitive and its arguments:
?
veut := [ ]#(([n ]#NP p S)/p isl [ ]#[i ]#VP)
?
n
h
i >
These types allow derivation of for instance Marie veut l'acheter. Derivation of the ungrammatical
*Marie le veut acheter is blocked as the hypothetical NP from the clitic cannot penetrate the island
brackets around acheter to be combined with the verb:
15
FAIL
L3 IV IV
((acheter)hisli; [3; a]# NP )p isl [ ]#[i]# V P
L=p
(IV=p isl [ ]#[i]# V P; ((acheter)hisli; [3; a]# NP )p)p IV
#
(([ ]#(IV=p isl [ ]#[i]# V P ))h?i; ((acheter)hisli; [3; a]# NP )p)p IV L2
can
((veut)h?i; ((acheter)hisli; [3; a]# NP )p)p IV
lex
((veut)h?i; ((acheter)hisli; pa [pa]# [3; a]# NP )p)p IV
RA
(((veut)h?i; (acheter)hisli)p; pa [pa]# [3; a]# NP )p IV
[n]# NP [n]# NP
R=p
h?i
h
isl
i
p
#
#
((veut) ; (acheter) ) IV=p pa [pa] [3; a] NP
Marie [n]# NP lex S S
L=
f
(Marie; (IV=f (IV=p pa [pa]#[3; a]# NP ); ((veut)h?i; (acheter)hisli)p)f )p S
(Marie; IV )p S # L
R2
(Marie; (([3; a]# (IV=f (IV=p pa [pa]# [3; a]# NP )))h3;ai; ((veut)h?i; (acheter)hisli)p)f )p S
lex
(Marie; ((le)h3;ai; ((veut)h?i; (acheter)hisli)p)f )p S
MA
(Marie; (((le)h3;ai; (veut)h?i)f ; (acheter)hisli)p )p S
K
(Marie; (((le; veut)h)h>i; (acheter)hisli)p)p S
K1
(Marie; (((le; veut)h; (acheter)hisli)p)h>i)p S
K2
((Marie; ((le; veut)h; (acheter)hisli)p)p)h>i S #
(Marie; ((le; veut)h; (acheter)hisli)p)p [ ]#S R2
) h
h
?
h
i >
)
i >
)
i >
)
)
h
i
)
h
i
)
h
)
h
)
i
)
i
)
)
h
)
i
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
>
3.6 Clitic climbing verbs
Finally, we will consider the interaction between object clitics and verb phrases that consist of an
innitive preceded by the auxiliaries faire, laisser or an auxiliary of perception. These auxiliaries are
called clitic climbing verbs in the literature, because they allow clitics to `climb' over them in the
sentence structure:
(16) Marie le voit partir.
(Marie sees him leave)
This means that in contrast to modal auxiliaries such as vouloir, clitic climbing auxiliaries can
themselves serve as a host to clitics. The examples below show the behaviour of this type of auxiliary
in sentences with full NP arguments (a-e) and clitics (a'-e').
(a') Marie le voit partir.
(17) (a) Marie voit partir Jean.
(b) Marie voit Jean partir.
(b') *Marie voit le partir.
(c) Marie voit Jean manger une pomme.
(c') Marie le voit manger une pomme.
(d) *Marie voit manger une pomme Jean.
(d') *Marie la voit Jean manger.
(e) Marie laisse manger une pomme a Jean.
(e') Marie la lui laisse manger.
To account for these facts, we have to assign several types to the clitic climbing auxiliaries (see [4],
who does the same in his approach), the rst of which is:
voit := [ ]# ((([n ]#NP p S)/p[a ]# NP)/p[ ]#[it,i ]# VP)
(Type 1)
?
n
>
The [ ]# on the VP argument starts a new search for the head of the embedded phrase (which in this
case consists only of the verb itself). This type takes care of example (a) where the argument VP
is intransitive and it is followed by an accusative NP. In this construction the accusative NP is the
(understood) subject of the innitive. The clitic version of this sentence, (a'), is derivable with this
type as well. Examples (b) and (c) show that the clitic climbing auxiliaries can also be followed rst
by the subject and then by the VP argument. To licence this construction we assume the following
type:
voit := [ ]#((([n ]# NP p S)/p isl [ ]#[i ]# VP)/p[a ]# NP)
(Type 2)
>
?
n
h
i >
16
n
p
This type covers cases where the VP is intransitive (b) as well as transitive (c), and of course also
the clitic variants (a') and (c'). To rule out the ungrammatical sentence (d') in which the direct
object of the embedded VP is cliticized, we have equipped the VP in Type 2 with the island operator
isl . Assigning this operator to the argument subtype of voit prevents clitic extraction from the
VP domain by forcing the entire VP in the goal sequent to be enclosed in island brackets. Since
these brackets are impenetrable to any operation in our system, the only way they can be removed
is by application of the rule R3. If a clitic was extracted from the VP it cannot return within this
domain because of the island brackets. Then R3 cannot apply since the brackets will not contain
the entire antecedent, and the derivation will fail, as we have seen in Figure 1. Sentence (d) is ruled
out because there is simply no type matching this order of constituents, and derivation of sentence
(b') where the clitic hasn't climbed over the auxiliary will fail because le partir forms one constituent
whereas voit needs two arguments:
h
i
FAIL
([it; i]# VP; [3; a]# NP)p [i]# VP
#
(([ ]#[it; i]# VP)h?i; [3; a]# NP)p [i]# VP L2
lex
((partir)h?i; [3; a]# NP)p [i]# VP
can
((partir)h?i; pa [pa]# [3; a]# NP)p [i]# VP
FAIL
R=
(partir)h?i [i]# VP=p pa [pa]#[3; a]# NP p [i]# VP [it; i]# VP
L=f
([i]#VP=f ([i]# VP=p pa [pa]# [3; a]# NP); (partir)h?i)f [it; i]# VP
#
(([3; a]# ([i]#VP=f ([i]# VP=p pa [pa]# [3; a]# NP)))h3;ai; (partir)h?i)f [it; i]# VP L2
lex
((le)h3;ai; (partir)h?i)f [it; i]# VP
K
((le; partir)h)h>i [it; i]# VP #
FAIL
(le; partir)h [ ]#[it; i]# VP R2
(Marie; IV=p[a]# NP)p S
L=p
(Marie; ((IV=p[a]# NP)=p[ ]# [it; i]# VP; (le; partir)h)p)p S
#
(Marie; (([ ]#((IV=p[a]# NP)=p[ ]# [it; i]# VP))h?i; (le; partir)h )p)p S L2
lex
(Marie; ((voit)h?i; (le; partir)h)p)p S
(Marie; ((voit)h>i; (le; partir)h)p)p S
K1
(Marie; ((voit; (le; partir)h)p )h>i)p S
K2
((Marie; (voit; (le; partir)h)p )p)h>i S #
(Marie; (voit; (le; partir)h)p)p [ ]#S R2
)
?
)
)
h
i
)
)
h
h
h
i
)
i
)
i
)
)
)
)
>
)
>
?
)
>
)
)
> ! ?
)
)
)
)
>
The last type we will assign to the clitic climbing verb covers sentence (e') where the auxiliary is
followed by a transitive VP argument and a dative NP subject. This construction is captured by
Type 3:
laisse := [ ]#((([n ]#NP p S)/p[d ]# NP)/p[ ]# [t,i ]# VP)
?
n
>
(Type 3)
We cannot omit the transitive feature decoration here because that would make derivable ungrammatical sentences like *Marie voit partir a Jean. In contrast to Type 2 (sentence d'), Type 3 lacks
an island diamond on its VP subtype, which allows the VP-internal argument to be cliticized. This
takes care of our last example (e'):
17
[3; a]# NP [a]# NP [t; i]# VP [t; i]# VP
L=
([t; i]# VP=p[a]# NP; [3; a]# NP)p [t; i]# VP p
#
(([ ]#([t; i]# VP=p[a]# NP))h?i; [3; a]# NP)p [t; i]# VP L2
lex
((manger)h?i; [3; a]# NP)p [t; i]# VP
((manger)h>i; [3; a]# NP)p [t; i]# VP
[d]# NP [d]# NP
K
1
((manger; [3; a]# NP)p)h>i [t; i]# VP #
a Jean [d]# NP lex IV IV
L=p
(manger; [3; a]# NP)p [ ]# [t; i]# VP R2
(IV=p[d]# NP; a Jean)p IV
L=p
(((IV=p[d]# NP)=p[ ]#[t; i]# VP; (manger; [3; a]# NP)p)p; a Jean)p IV
#
((([ ]#((IV=p[d]# NP)=p[ ]#[t; i]# VP))h?i; (manger; [3; a]# NP)p)p; a Jean)p IV L2
lex
(((fait)h?i; (manger; [3; a]# NP)p)p ; a Jean)p IV
can
(((fait)h?i; (manger; pa [pa]# [3; a]# NP)p)p; a Jean)p IV
RA
((((fait)h?i; manger)p; pa [pa]# [3; a]# NP)p; a Jean)p IV
[n]# NP [n]# NP
RC
((((fait)h?i; manger)p; a Jean)p ; pa [pa]# [3; a]# NP)p IV
Marie [n]# NP lex S S
R=
p
L
(((fait)h?i; manger)p; a Jean)p IV=p pa [pa]#[3; a]# NP
(Marie; IV)p S
L=f
(Marie; (IV=f (IV=p pa [pa]# [3; a]# NP); (((fait)h?i; manger)p; a Jean)p)f )p S
#
(Marie; (([3; a]# (IV=f (IV=p pa [pa]# [3; a]# NP)))h3;ai; (((fait)h?i; manger)p ; a Jean)p)f )p S L2
lex
(Marie; ((la)h3;ai; (((fait)h?i; manger)p; a Jean)p)f )p S
MA
(Marie; (((la)h3;ai ; ((fait)h?i; manger)p)f ; a Jean)p)p S
MA
(Marie; ((((la)h3;ai; (fait)h?i)f ; manger)p; a Jean)p)p S
K
(Marie; ((((la; fait)h )h>i; manger)p; a Jean)p)p S
K1
(Marie; ((((la; fait)h ; manger)p)h>i; a Jean)p)p S
K
1
(Marie; ((((la; fait)h ; manger)p; a Jean)p)h>i)p S
K2
((Marie; (((la; fait)h ; manger)p; a Jean)p)p)h>i S #
(Marie; (((la; fait)h; manger)p; a Jean)p)p [ ]#S R2
)
)
)
?
)
)
> ! ?
)
)
)
)
)
) >
)
>
?
)
>
)
)
h
i
h
)
i
h
i
)
)
)
)
)
n
)
h
h
h
i
)
i
)
i
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
>
The behaviour of the causative clitic climbing auxiliary faire diers from that of the others; it allows
only one order for its arguments and only one type of subject with each type of VP:
(Marie makes Jean leave)
(18)(a) Marie fait partir Jean.
(b) *Marie fait (a) Jean partir.
(c) *Marie fait partir a Jean.
(d) *Marie fait manger une pomme Jean.
(Marie makes Jean eat an apple)
(e) *Marie fait (a) Jean manger une pomme.
(f) Marie fait manger une pomme a Jean.
By assigning Type 1 and not Type 2 to fait, the correct derivability results are obtained for the
intransitive cases (a-c) while transitive constructions as in (d-f) are ruled out. Fait can however take
transitive VP arguments, but only if that VP is followed by a dative NP which is the understood
subject of the innitive verb, as in example (f). Any other combination or order of arguments
results in an ungrammatical sentence (d and e). Assigning also Type 3 to fait enables us to derive
constructions like (f) but not (d) or (e). With types 1 and 3 we can derive the clitic versions of the
sentences above and rule out incorrect constructions like the one in example 19(b) below.
(19)(a) Marie le fait partir.
(b) *Marie fait le partir.
(c) Marie la fait manger a Jean.
(d) Marie lui fait manger une pomme.
(e) Marie la lui fait manger.
18
p
4 Conclusion
We have seen that by ne-tuning a pure logic of residuation it can be turned into an adequate tool
for describing a natural language fragment. Although we have restricted ourselves in this paper to a
small subdomain of the clitic data, Kraak [1] has shown that extending the coverage of the system
presented here yields promising results. A number of derivations for the sentences that were discussed
but not shown in the present work can be found there as well.
References
[1] Kraak, E. (1995). French Clitics: A Categorial Perspective. MA Thesis, Universiteit Utrecht.
[2] Kurtonina, N. (1995). Frames and Labels. A Modal Analysis of Categorial Inference. PhD Dissertation OTS Utrecht, ILLC, Amsterdam.
[3] Kurtonina, N. and Moortgat, M. (1995). Structural Control. In Blackburn and de Rijke (eds.),
Logical structures and Syntax. Reidel, Dordrecht.
[4] Miller, P.H. (1991). Clitics and Constituents in Phrase Structure Grammar. Doctoral dissertation, Universiteit Utrecht.
[5] Moortgat, M. (1988). Categorial Investigations. Logical and Linguistic Aspects of the Lambek
Calculus. Foris, Dordrecht.
[6] Moortgat, M. (1995). Multimodal Linguistic Inference. In R. Kempson (ed.), Special Issue of
the IPGL Bulletin.
[7] Moortgat, M. and Morrill, G. (1991). Heads and Phrases. Type Calculus for Dependency and
Constituent Structure. Ms OTS, Utrecht.
[8] Moortgat, M. and Oehrle, R. (1993). Logical Parameters and Linguistic Variation. Lecture notes
on Categorial Grammar. 5th European Summer School in Logic, Language and Information,
Lisbon.
[9] Moortgat, M. and Oehrle, R. (1994). Adjacency, Dependency and Order. In Proceedings 9th
Amsterdam Colloquium, 447{466.
[10] Morrill, G. (1994). Type Logical Grammar. Kluwer, Dordrecht.
[11] Morrill, G. and Gavarro, A. (1992). Catalan Clitics. In A. Lecomte (ed.), Word Order in Categorial Grammar. Editions Adosa, Clermont-Ferrand, 211{232.
[12] Morrill, G., Leslie, N., Hepple, M. and Barry, G. (1990). Categorial Deductions and Structural
Operations. In G. Barry and G. Morrill (eds.), Studies in Categorial Grammar. Edinburgh
Working Papers in Cognitive Science, Volume 5, Centre for Cognitive Science, Edinburgh, 1{21.
19