Chapter 4 Indirect Object Want-Passives in Southern Italy
In: Passives Cross-LinguisticallySearch for other papers by Adam Ledgeway in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Purchase instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Abstract
The canonical be-passive in the dialects of southern Italy is not a particularly common structure, especially when the surface subject is animate and/or the agent by-phrase is overtly expressed, giving rise at best to marginal results. In their place are typically preferred active structures involving clitic left-dislocation of the theme. Nonetheless, these same dialects exceptionally make very frequent use of the canoncial be-passive when embedded under the subject control predicate volere ‘want’. However, not only are be-passives, with animate surface subjects (including overt agent by-phrases), hugely improved when embedded under volere, but indirect object passives are also licensed, despite the fact that recipient passives prove entirely ungrammatical in root clauses. In what follows, we investigate why be-passives attain full grammaticality under volere and how such embedding also exceptionally gives rising to the full grammaticality of indirect object passives which otherwise prove ungrammatical. Among other things, the analysis explores the nature of the structural and inherent Case distinction in the dialects of southern Italy, the variation witnessed among dialects in the role of participle agreement and the presence of the passive auxiliary be in licensing indirect object passivization, how such minimal differences in agreement give rise to differing locality conditions operating on A-movement, and the role of subject control on licensing indirect object passives.