The syntax of ke-clause and clausal extraposition in modern Persian
MetadataShow full item record
Ke-clauses (CPs) in Persian can be proposition-denoting or propertydenoting. Proposition-denoting ke-clauses can combine directly with a predicate or appear embedded in a DP. CPs embedded in a DP can be preverbal or postverbal but unembedded CPs can only appear postverbally. A further option consists of a postverbal CP associated with a preverbal DP. We show that postverbal CPs associated with a preverbal DP pattern with CPs embedded in a DP with respect to complementizer optionality and extractability. We treat viii postverbal CPs associated with a preverbal DP as derivationally related to CPs embedded in preverbal DPs. Such CPs are adjuncts while postverbal CPs which appear by themselves are complements. The differences between the different classes of proposition-denoting CPs receive an explanation in terms of the different configurations in which these CPs appear. Property-denoting ke-clause CPs function as relative clauses. We introduce a new set of facts from Case Attraction and the distribution of the -i (RES/INDEF) marker, which we argue provide support for a relative clause internal origin for the head NP. These facts receive a straightforward explanation under a head raising/promotion analysis. On the other hand, an exploration of locality in the context of Persian RCs shows that the abstraction in the relative clause can cross islands. Moreover, the diagnostics that indicates a CP-internal origin for the head NP seem to be unaffected by the presence of islands. This unexpected result indicates that a reconsideration of locality considerations or/and the import of the CP-internal diagnostics is in order. We also examine the postverbal syntax of Persian. Both DPs and CPs can appear postverbally. While there seem to be few constraints on the postverbal occurrence of multiple DPs, there are severe constraints on postverbal CPs. These restrictions are characterized by the Government Condition according to which there can be only one ungoverned postverbal CP. We show that there are differences between complement CPs, DP associated CPs, and relative clauses ix with respect to their postverbl syntax. These differences are shown to follow from how these CPs come to be in their postverbal positions.