Cover not available
Article published In:
Languages in Contrast
Vol. 19:2 (2019) ► pp.310–333

Slavic and Romance pro-drop in contrast

Evidence from Czech and Spanish

ORCID logo | University of Osnabruck
The present paper investigates similarities and differences between Czech and Spanish regarding the (non-)expression of pronominal subjects (PS). The nature of this comparative study is qualitative, and its central question is whether Czech and Spanish use the same strategies for omission and expression of PS. Previous research describes both Czech and Spanish as consistent pro-drop languages, and at first glance their strategies for (non-) expression of PS are identical. However, in certain structures, Czech allows overt pragmatic as well as grammatical expletives, a feature which – in combination with several further structural properties – substantially distinguishes it from Spanish. The differences that may emerge when comparing two languages leads automatically to a discussion of the typology of pro-drop languages.
Keywords: pro-drop , pronominal subjects, Czech, Spanish
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Czech vs. Spanish pro-drop
    • 2.1Rich verbal morphology and (referential) PS
    • 2.2No overt expletives (?)
      • 2.2.1Pragmatic use of pronouns in (Dominican) Spanish
      • 2.2.2Pragmatic use of to in Czech
      • 2.2.3Pragmatic use of ono in Czech
      • 2.2.4Pragmatic use of on, ona, etc. in Czech
    • 2.3Generic constructions
    • 2.4Additional cases of divergence
      • 2.4.1Echo yes/no questions
      • 2.4.2Auxiliary-drop in Czech
      • 2.4.3PS as a placeholder and ellipsis of the first position in Czech
  • 3.Discussion
  • 4.Concluding remarks
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
  • Literary texts
Published online: 24 January 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lic.17011.pes
References (61)
References
Amaral, P. M. and S. A. Schwenter. 2005. Contrast and the (non-)occurrence of subject pronouns. In D. Eddington (ed.), Selected proceedings of the 7th Hispanic Linguistics Symposium, 116–127. Somerville: MA, Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar
Barbosa, P. 1995. Null subjects. Cambridge: MA, MIT Press.Google Scholar
Bartra-Kaufmann, A. 2011. Recycled neuter expletive pronouns and the nature of the left periphery: ell and relatives revisited. Catalan Journal of Linguistics 101:185–219. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bayley, R. and L. Pease-Álvarez. 1997. Null pronoun variation in Mexican-descent children’s narrative discourse. Language Variation and Change 91:349–371. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bello, A. 1847. Gramática de la lengua castellana destinada al uso de los americanos. Alicante: Biblioteca Virtual Miguel de Cervantes (2002).Google Scholar
Biberauer, T., A. Holmberg, I. Roberts and M. Sheenan (eds). 2010. Parametric variation: Null subjects in minimalist theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Borer, H. 1986. I-Subjects. Linguistic Inquiry 171:375–416.Google Scholar
Bosque, I. 1989. Clase de sujetos tácitos. Philologica II. Homenaje a Antonio Llorente, 91–111.Google Scholar
Carrilho, E. 2005. Expletive ele in European Portuguese dialects . PhD Thesis, Universidade de Lisboa. [URL]. [last accessed 16 December 2015].
Carvalho, A. M., R. Orozco and N. Shin (eds). 2015. Subject pronoun expression in Spanish: A Cross-dialectal perspective. Washington: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. 1981. Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
1982. Some concepts and consequences of the theory of Government and Binding, Cambridge: MA, MIT Press.Google Scholar
1995. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge: MA, MIT Press.Google Scholar
Croft, W. 2002. Typology and Universals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dryer, M. S. 2013. Expression of pronominal subjects. In The World Atlas of Language Structures Online, M. S. Dryer and M. Haspelmath (eds), Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. [URL] [last accessed 3 January 2018]
Dryer, M. S. and M. Haspelmath (eds). 2013. The World Atlas of Language Structures Online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. [URL] [last accessed 3 January 2018].
Duarte, M. E. L. 2000. The loss of the ‘Avoid pronoun’ principle in Brazilian Portuguese. In Brazilian Portuguese and the null subject parameter, M. A. Kato and E. V. Negrão (eds), 17–36. Frankfurt am Main: Vervuert. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fehrmann, D. and U. Junghanns. 2008. Subjects and scales. In Scales, Marc Richards and A. L. Malchukov (eds), (Linguistische Arbeitsberichte 86), 189–220. Universität Leipzig.Google Scholar
Fernández Soriano, O. F. 1999. El pronombre personal. Formas y distribuciones. Pronombres átonos y tónicos. In Gramática descriptiva de la lengua española, I. Bosque and V. Delmonte (eds), 1209–1273. Madrid: Espasa.Google Scholar
Ferrer, A. 1999[1914]. Rondaies de Menorca. Ciutadella: Nura.Google Scholar
Franks, S. 1995. Parameters of Slavic morphosyntax. (Oxford studies in comparative syntax). New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gilligan, G. M. 1987. A cross linguistic approach to the pro-drop parameter. PhD Thesis, University of Southern California.Google Scholar
Goodall, G. 2010. Experimenting with Wh-movement in Spanish. In Romance linguistics 2008: Interactions in Romance, K. Arregi, Z. Fagyal, S. A. Montrul and A. Tremblay (eds), 233–248. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gupton, T. and S. Lowman. 2013. An F Projection in Cibeño Dominican Spanish. In Selected Proceedings of the 16th Hispanic Linguistics Symposium, J. Cabrelli Amaro, G. Lord, A. de Prada Pérez and J. E. Aaron (eds), 338–348. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar
Hajičová, E., M. Mikulová and J. Panevová. 2015. Reconstructions of deletions in a dependency-based description of Czech: Selected Issues. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Dependency Linguistics, E. Hajičová and J. Nivre (eds), 131–140. [URL] [last accessed 7 November 2015].
Haspelmath, M. 2009. Pourquoi la typologie des langues est-elle possible? Bulletin de la Société de linguistique de Paris 104(1):17–38. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Havránek, B. and A. Jedlička. 1981. Česká mluvnice. Prague: Státní pedagogické nakladatelství.Google Scholar
Henríquez Ureña, P. 1939. Ello. Revista de Filología Hispánica: 209–229.Google Scholar
Hinzelin, M. O. and G. A. Kaiser. 2006. Das neutrale Pronomen ello im dominikanischen Spanisch und die Nullsubjekteigenschaft. Arbeitspapiere des Fachbereichs Sprachwissenschaften 1161, Universität Konstanz.Google Scholar
Hnátková, M. 2013. Automatická slovnědruhová desambiguace to v ustálených větných výrazech. Korpus-Gramatika-Axiologie 071: 22–35.Google Scholar
Hoffmannová, J. and I. Kolářová. 2013. “ Se vám to nelíbí?” Jednoslabičné začátky českých výpovědí / dialogických replik: v běžné mluvené češtině a beletristické stylizaci. Korpus-Gramatika-Axiologie 071: 36–47.Google Scholar
Huang, J. C. T. 1984. On distribution and reference of empty pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry 271: 1–68.Google Scholar
Jaeggli, O. A. and K. J. Safir. 1989. The null subject parameter. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jakobson, R. 1981[1938]. Zero signs. In Roman Jakobson, Russian and Slavic grammar (Studies 1931–1981), Janua Linguarum (Series Maior 106), L. R. Waugh and M. Halle (eds), 398–421. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Kaiser, G. A. and Jürgen Meisel. 1981. Subjekte und Null-Subjekte im Französischen. In Det, Comp und Infl: Zur Syntax funktionaler Kategorien und grammatischer Funktionen, G. Fanselow and S. Olsen (eds), 110–136. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Karlík, P., M. Nekula and Z. Rusínová (eds). 1995. Příruční mluvnice češtiny. Praha: Lidové noviny.Google Scholar
Kosta, P. 1990. Zur formalen Lizensierung und inhaltlichen Determination leerer Subjekte im Russischen. In Slavistische Linguistik (Slavistische Beiträge 260), W. Breu (ed.), 117–165. München: Sagner.Google Scholar
Lindseth, M. 1998. Null-subject properties of Slavic languages. With special reference to Russian, Czech and Sorbian. (Slavistische Beiträge 361). München: Sagner. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Luján, M. 1999. Expresión y omisión del pronombre personal. In Gramática descriptiva de la lengua española, I. Bosque and V. Demonte (eds), 1275–1315. Madrid: Espasa Calpe.Google Scholar
Otheguy, R., A. C. Zentella and D. Livert. 2007. Language contact in Spanish in New York toward the formation of a speech community. Language 83(4): 770–802. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Perlmutter, D. M. 1971. A typological difference among languages. In Deep and surface structure constraints in syntax, D. M. Perlmutter (ed.), 99–122. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
Pešková, A. 2015. Sujetos pronominales en el español porteño: Implicaciones pragmáticas en la interfaz sintáctico-fonológica, Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für romanische Philologie 394. Berlin and Boston: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2017. Czech ToBI. Paper presented at the PaPE 2017 Conference. University of Cologne (Germany), 12 June 2017.
Posio, P. 2012a. Pronominal subjects in Peninsular Spanish and European Portuguese. Semantics, pragmatics, and formulaic sequences. PhD Thesis, University of Helsinki.Google Scholar
2012b. Who are « we » in spoken Peninsular Spanish and European Portuguese? Expression and reference of first person plural subject pronouns. Language Sciences 341:339–360. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Prieto, P. and P. Roseano (eds). 2009–2013. Atlas interactivo de la entonación del español. [URL] [last accessed 10 July 2017].
RAE. 2009–2011. = Real Academia Española. Nueva gramática de la lengua española, Madrid, Espasa Calpe.Google Scholar
Raposo, E. and J. Uriagereka. 1990. Long-distance case assignment. Linguistic Inquiry 21(4):505–537.Google Scholar
Rezac, M. 2004. Elements of cyclic syntax: Agree and merge. PhD Thesis, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
Rizzi, L. 1986. Null object in Italian and the theory of pro . Linguistic Inquiry 171:501–557.Google Scholar
Roberts, I. 2010. Varieties of French and the null subject parameter. In Parametric variation: Null subjects in minimalist theory, T. Biberauer, A. Holmberg, I. Roberts and M. Sheenan (eds), 303–327. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
SSČ = Slovník spisovné češtiny pro školu a veřejnost (SSČ). [URL] [last accessed 10 October 2015].
SSJČ = Slovník spisovného jazyka českého. [URL] [last accessed 10 October 2015].
Suñer, M. 1983. proarb . Linguistic Inquiry 141:188–191.Google Scholar
Toribio, A. J. 2000. Setting parametric limits on dialectal variation in Spanish. Lingua 101:315–341. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Torres Cacoullos, R. and Travis, C. E. 2018. Bilingualism in the Community: Code-switching and Grammars in Contact. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Travis, C. E. and A. M. Lindstrom. 2016. Different registers, different grammars? Subject expression in English conversation and narrative. Language Variation and Change 28(1):103–128. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Trávníček, F. 1951. Mluvnice spisovné češtiny II. Skladba. Prague: Slovanské nakladatelství.Google Scholar
1962. Historická mluvnice česká III. Skladba. Prague: Statní pedagogické nakladatelství.Google Scholar
Literary texts
Čapek, K. 1936. Válka s mloky. English version: The War with the Newts translated by M. and R. Wheatherall (SF Gateway, 2014). Spanish version: La guerra de las salamandras translated by A. Falbrová and C. Elizondo (Ediciones Hiperión S.L., 1992).Google Scholar
Hašek, J. 1921–1923. Osudy dobrého vojáka Švejka za světové války. English version: The Good Soldier Švejk translated by C. Parrott (Penguin Classics, 2005). Spanish version: Las aventuras del valeroso soldado Schwejk translated by A. Janés (Ediciones Destino, 1996).Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Israeli, Alina
2024. Null Subjects. In The Cambridge Handbook of Slavic Linguistics, ► pp. 430 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.