Trondheim Summer School, June 23-27, 2003

Poster Presentation:
Li-Attachment in Multi-Verb Constructions
in Bulgarian
Rositsa Dekova, NTNU, Norway
SOME FACTS ABOUT LI
Li is a question marker in Bulgarian
It is a clitic element
There can be only one li in the sentence (as opposed to the
possibility of multiple wh-questions in Bulgarian)
We can find both li and a wh-word in one sentence,
i.e. in Bulgarian they are not in complementary distribution
2
CURRENT ACCOUNTS
Rivero (1992): Li is a bound morpheme, generated in Co.
Two options for verb support for li were offered:
V-raising, incorporating V to li (the main option)
Affix-hopping as li-lowering (only if the main option
was constrained)
Penchev (1993): Li is searching for the focus of the sentence
and can be attached to any word (phrase) in it.
Dimitrova-Vulchanova and Hellan (1996): Li is generated
in the FRONT site identified as part of a double ClargP,
where special Spec-Head relations obtain depending on what
raises to Spec-li. Lowering of li from its original position
accounts for the cases of independent questioning of the
embedded clauses in a multi-verb construction.
3
THE EMPIRICAL DATA
1. Ivan prochete knigata. Ivan read the book.
Ivan read-past book-the
2. Ivan li prochete knigata? Was it Ivan who read the book?
Ivan li read-past book-the
3. Ivan prochete li knigata? Did Ivan read the book?
Ivan read-past li book-the
4. Ivan prochete knigata li? ?Was it the book that Ivan read?
Ivan read-past book-the li
[Ivan prochete knigata] li? (Did you say that) Ivan read the book?
5. Knigata li prochete Ivan? Was it the book that Ivan read?
Book-the li read-past Ivan
4
EVIDENCE FROM WH-QUESTIONS
6. Kakvo shte e vremeto utre?
What will is weather-the tomorrow
What will the weather be tomorrow?
7. Kakvo li shte e vremeto utre?
What li will is weather-the tomorrow
(I wonder) What will be the weather tomorrow?
8. [Kakvo shte e vremeto utre] li?
What will is weather-the tomorrow li
(You ask me) What will be the weather tomorrow?
9. *Kakvo shte e vremeto li utre?
What will is weather-the li tomorrow
10. *Kakvo shte e li vremeto utre?
What will is li weather-the tomorrow
5
EVIDENCE FROM CLITIC DOUBLING
11.Kogo koi dea go vidjaha?
whom which children him see-past
Whom did which children see?
12. Kogo li koi dea go vidjaha?
whom li which children him see-past
(You ask me) whom which children saw?
13. Kogo koi li dea go vidjaha?
whom which li children him see-past
(I wonder) which children saw whom?
14. Kogo koi dea li go vidjaha?
whom which children li him see-past
(You ask me) which children saw whom?
15. *Kogo koi dea go li vidjaha?
whom which children him li see-past
6
Li-ATTACHMENT AND TOPICALITY
The topic of a sentence is what a sentence primarily
provides or requests information about.
(for ABOUTNESS, cf. Reinhart 1982, Lambrecht 1994, Jacobs 2001)
The empirical data show that in terms of distribution li is
largely dependent on the topic of the sentence (given in italics)
In the simple sentence, li is primarily attached to the topic
of the sentence and takes it in its scope
Topics are often subjects, but not every constituent can act
as topic (indefinite NPs or certain quantifiers are difficult to
be construed as topics)
Within the definition of topic given above some or all
wh-words in questions can be treated as topics.
7
THE MULTI-VERB CONSTRUCTION IN BULGARIAN
THE STATUS OF DA-CLAUSES
Multi-verb constructions in Bulgarian are formed with da
(cf. Dimitrova-Vulchanova & Hellan, 1998)
Da does not fit into familiar complementizer categories
Differences:
Da does not allow a FRONT complex under it
(as opposed to - the Bulgarian counterpart of that)
Da is followed by a T/Agr[p,n]P, i.e. it is finite
(as opposed to infinitival complementizers like English to)
Similarity:
Da functions as a domain for cliticization for Argument clitics
(one of the complementizer-like characteristics of da)
8
LI WITHIN THE MULTI-VERB CONSTRUCTION
16. [
S
Ivan obeshta [
S
da otide [
S
da kupi knigata]]].
Ivan promise-past to go to buy book-the.
Ivan promised to go and buy the book.
17. [
S
[
ClP
Ivan li] obeshta [
S
da otide [
S
da kupi knigata]]]?
Ivan li promise-past to go to buy book-the?
Was it Ivan who promised to go and buy the book?
18. [
S
[
ClP
Ivan [
ClP
obeshta li ]][
S
da otide [
S
da kupi knigata]]]]?
Ivan promise-past li to go to buy book-the?
Did Ivan promise to go and buy the book?
9
LI WITHIN THE MULTI-VERB CONSTRUCTION
19. a) [
S
Ivan obeshta [
S
da otide [
S
da kupi [
ClP
knigata li]]]]?
Ivan promise-past to go to buy book-the li?
Did Ivan promise to go and buy the book?
b) [
S=ClP
[Ivan obeshta [
S
da otide [
S
da kupi knigata]]] li]?
Ivan promise-past to go to buy book-the li?
Was it the case that Ivan promised to go and buy the book?
20. a) [
S
[
ClP
Knigata li] [
S
Ivan obeshta [
S
da otide [
S
da kupi]]]]?
book-the li Ivan promise-past to go to buy?
b) [
S
[
ClP
Ivan [
ClP
knigata li]] obeshta [
S
da otide [
S
da kupi]]]?
Ivan book-the li promise-past to go to buy
c) [
S
Ivan obeshta [
S
[
ClP
knigata li] [
S
da otide [
S
da kupi]]]]]?
Ivan promise-past book-the li to go to buy?
d) [
S
Ivan obeshta [
S
da otide [
S
[
ClP
knigata li] [
S
da kupi]]]]]?
Ivan promise-past book-the li to go to buy?
10
Was it the book that Ivan promised to buy?
CONSTRAINTS AND GRAMMATICALITY
In multi-verb constructions independent questioning of the
embedded clause is also allowed as in sentences (15)- (18) above.
Yet, there are certain restrictions in the positions li can occupy:
21. *Ivan obeshta da otide li da kupi knigata?
*Ivan promise-past to go li to buy book-the?
22. *Ivan obeshta da otide da kupi li knigata?
*Ivan promise-past to go to buy li book-the?
A plausible account for the restrictions on the otherwise
flexible movement of li is seen in the segmentation constraints
within the MVC in Bulgarian, as well as some semantic
constraints on the conceptual units li can take in its scope. The
11
possibility (or rather the impossibility) of those segments to act
as topic of the sentence may also play an important role.
THE HPSG ACCOUNT
With regard to the possible segmentation of the complex
predicate and the unification of li-semantics with the semantics
of the particular unit over which li has scope, li-attachment in
multi-verb constructions is formally presented in an HPSG
perspective, relying on the MOD feature, basically employing
the analysis of adjunction and the Linearization Principle.
In addition a variant of HPSG that contains the notion of
order domain (Kathol, 1998, cf. Hinrichs et al. 1998) is used to
license the combination of the potential constituents to be
unified within the multi-verb construction.
12
THE FORMAL REPRESENTATION
S[DOM<[1],[2],{[3],[4]},{[5],[6]},[7]>]
VP[DOM<[2],{[3],[4]},{[5],[6]},[7]>]

S[DOM<{[3],[4]},{[5],[6]},[7]>]

S[DOM<{[5],[6]},[7]>]

IP [DOM<[3],[4]>] IP[DOM<[5],[6]>]


[1]
NP
[2]
V
[3]
I/Comp
[4]
V
[5]
I/Comp
[6]
V
[7]
NP
| | | | | | |
Ivan obeshta da otide da kupi knigata
13
Ivan promissed-3Psg to go-3Psg to buy-3Psg book-Def
The clitic li:
14
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
]
1

1
1
1
]
1

'

1
]
1

1
1
1
1
]
1

1
1
1
]
1

1
]
1

[ 2 ]
[ 1 ] A R G
r e l - Q
R E S T R I C
[ 1 ] I N D E X
C O N T
s a t u r a t e d V A L

[ 2 ] R E S T R I C
[ 1 ] I N D E X
: X P M O D
c l i t i c
H E A D
C A T
l i P H O N
15
Where XP can be any member of the set [NP, V, VP, CP] and
is marked with the features {+[Topic], +[Q(uestion)]}
THE ATTACHMENT OF LI
S [CONT [2] ]
H A
16
[1]XP
1
]
1

+
+
[ Q u e s t i o n ]
[ T o p i c ]
li
1
]
1

[ 2 ] C O N T
[ 1 ] M O D

Conclusion:
The distribution of the question word li in Bulgarian is
largely dependent on the topic of the sentence
17
The attachment of li in multi-verb constructions depends
also on the possible segmentation in the sentence
Syntactically, li-attachment is presented as an adjunction
of li to a head XP : [NP, V, VP, CP]
Semantically, li has a scope over the pharse it modifies and
imposes some semantic restrictions upon it {[+T], [+Q]}
Referneces:
Dimitrova-Vulchanova, Mila and Lars Hellan, 1996. Clitics and the Bulgarian Clause
Structure. In: Henk Van Riemsdijk (ed.) Clitics in the Languages of Europe,
Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter
Hinrichs, E. et al. (ed) 1998. Syntax and Semantics, 30. San Diego: Academic Press
18
Jaeger, Florian. 2003a. Topicality and Superiority in Bulgarian wh-questions.
Jaeger, Florian. 2003b. Multiple wh-questions, Superiority and Clitic Doubling in
colloqual Bulgarian, A Construction-based HPSG account.
Lambrecht, Knud. 1994. Information structure and sentence form. Topic, Focus, and
the mental representations of discourse referents; Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press
Penchev, Jordan 1993. Bulgarski sintaksis upravlenie i svurzvane. Plovdiv:
Plovdivsko univirsitetsko izdatelstvo.
Reinhart, Tanya 1982. Pragmatics and linguistics: an analysis of sentence topics;
Distributed by Indiana University Linguistics Club, Bloomington, Indiana
Rivero, Maria-Luisa. 1992. Bulgarian and Serbo-Croatian Yes-No Questions:
Vo-Raising vs. Li-Hopping.
19