Linearization Constraints

Большое изменение начинается с малого: Прономинальные клитики в тексте древнерусских летописей XII-XV. вв. Аннотация В противоположность западно-и южнославянским языкам, современные восточнославянские языки не имеют энклитических форм местоимений. Однако в древнерусском языке употреблялось широкий набор таких форм. Они вышли из употребления в конце древнерусского периода, в XV-XVI вв. В статье рассматривается употребление энклитических местоимений в тексте пяти летописей XII-XV. вв., взятых из НКРЯ. Анализ сосредоточивается на частотность употребления энклитических форм, на синтаксическую позицию энклитик, на устройство цепочек энклитик и на аномальные структуры. В статье предлагается взгляд, согласно которому исчезновение прономинальных энклитических местоимений является не самостоятельным, обособленным от других языковых изменений процессом, а «побочным явлением» значительного исторического преобразования, разрушения видо-временной системы и следовательного ослабления категории Т.

This paper explores the use of bound forms in coordination constructions and ʔijjā and ʔijja in Modern Standard Arabic (MSA) and Jordanian Arabic (JA), respectively. Using the Minimalist Program (Chomsky 1995, 2000, 2005) as a theoretical framework, the paper proposes that the use of bound forms in such constructions is ruled by a Phonetic-Form constraint that prohibits cliticization of a bound form onto another bound form, i.e. the combination of two bound forms does not result in a free form; hence it is blocked. The paper demonstrates that the use of ʔijjā and ʔijja in MSA and JA, respectively, is a direct consequence of this constraint, so that ʔijjā/ʔijja is a Phonetic-Form object used to serve as a lexical host of bound forms (cf. Fassi Fehri 1993). The use of ʔijjā/ʔijja is also shown to be prosodically ruled; it is prosodically dependent so that ʔijjā/ ʔijja should be a member of the prosodic unit which also includes the preceding word.

The paper discusses syntactic features of Slavic possessive clitics and Slavic constructions with socalled-Possessor Raising‖. I prove that only a minority of Slavic languages have true phrase-level (NP-level or DP-level) possessive clitics and arguing against a generalized syntactic account of all Slavic constructions with possessive operators. The weak aspects of the PR hypothesis are that it takes the mapping of syntax and possessive semantics to be iconic and the rules/principles of extracting a NP/DP-level possessive operator out of the NP/DP to be trivial. The analysis has shown that these assumptions are poorly justified. Slavic languages typically apply different case-marking for nonagreeing phrase-level possessive operators and non-agreeing clause-level possessive operators. A group of languages including Modern Russian lacks phrase-level possessive clitics. For this group the PR hypothesis cannot be retained. Most cases where the PR hypothesis has been proposed in previous Slavic studies do not conform to the definition of Raising as a syntactic operation, since the identity of structures with a clause-level or phrase-level possessive operator cannot be established. Such cases must be reanalyzed in terms of Possessive Shift, i.e., alternation of a true possessive construction with a NP/DP-level possessive element and its quasi-synonym, a pseudo-possessive construction with a case-marked verbal argument. 1 The paper is written with financial support from the Russian Ministry of Education and Culture, project 2012-1.2.1-12-000-3004-9859 «Models of Case Grammar and Natural Languages». The author is grateful to the audience of SLS-6 conference (Aix-en-Provence 2011) and, personally, to Steven Franks, Frank Gladney and Grigory Kreidlin for the valuable comments. I am also grateful to the anonymous reviewers for their criticism. All responsibility for shortcomings is my own.

This paper explores the use of bound forms in coordination constructions and ʔijjā and ʔijja in Modern Standard Arabic (MSA) and Jordanian Arabic (JA), respectively. Using the Minimalist Program (Chomsky 1995, 2000, 2005) as a theoretical framework, the paper proposes that the use of bound forms in such constructions is ruled by a Phonetic-Form constraint that prohibits cliticization of a bound form onto another bound form, i.e. the combination of two bound forms does not result in a free form; hence it is blocked. The paper demonstrates that the use of ʔijjā and ʔijja in MSA and JA, respectively, is a direct consequence of this constraint, so that ʔijjā/ʔijja is a Phonetic-Form object used to serve as a lexical host of bound forms (cf. Fassi Fehri 1993). The use of ʔijjā/ʔijja is also shown to be prosodically ruled; it is prosodically dependent so that ʔijjā/ ʔijja should be a member of the prosodic unit which also includes the preceding word.

Clitic climbing, i.e. the realization of one or more clitics in a syntactic constituent hierarchically higher than the clitics' licensing predicate, has been accounted for in terms of a restructuring approach. The embedded infinitive the clitics are extracted from has been assumed to be structurally deficient-that is, a bare VP. Due to the lack of projections above the lexical V-head, clitics escape the infinitival domain to get their morphosyntactic features licensed in the matrix clause. However, the predictions of the restructuring approach do not withstand a corpus linguistic examination and are falsified by empirical data of Czech and Polish. Clitic climbing cannot be adequately accounted for by syntax proper and alternative accounts have to be taken into consideration seriously. It will be proposed to exploit information structure as a feasible explanatory account of clitic climbing.

Andrej A. Zaliznjak's recent book, Drevnerusskie ènklitiki, explains the need for a book about Old Russian enclitics by stating that while the enclitics of the South and West Slavic languages have attracted great interest, those of Old Russian have been largely ignored. Very little literature on the subject exists, and Zaliznjak cites only two studies, both dating from 1935: Gunnarsson's study of sę and Jakobson's small article about the Slavic enclitics as a whole. In Zaliznjak's opinion, this lack of interest has been caused by the absence of good sources for colloquial Old Russian speech, until the discovery of the Novgorod birch bark documents in 1951. The author also notes that histories of the Russian language do not contain chapters on the enclitics of Old Russian. Thus, the present study has the goal of providing the first modern, comprehensive study of Old Russian enclitics, in which the sources of Old Russian colloquial speech are fully taken into account. In addition to the author's use of the birch bark documents, he also makes extensive use of all the instances of direct speech, found in the Kievan letopis', since this also provides good evidence about colloquial uses of Old Russian. This book is intended as a complete and comprehensive expansion of the author's earlier 1993 article on the birch bark documents. It also draws from the author's 1985 book on the history of Slavic accentuation. The author makes the important statement that the goal of the book is not the comparison of Old Russian enclitics with those of other Indo-European languages or with the South and West Slavic languages. It appears that this statement was made for the purpose of explaining the absence of a discussion of the many recent studies of Slavic enclitics which have appeared in recent years, since it has become a topic of great interest to Slavists. At first glance, it seemed surprising that the references about Slavic enclitics are little more than the two 1935 sources mentioned above. One does not find such recent work as the Handbook of Slavic Clitics (Franks and King, 2000), or the large number of clitic references that one can find in their bibliography (pp. 377-392). One might have expected a bit more about the current literature on the subject, although Zaliznjak's position is understandable. After all, his book is the first to bring the enclitics of the birch bark documents and many other Old Russian manuscripts into the field of scholarly study. As the author mentions, the study of clitics has both phonological and syntactic aspects. Further, he states that "practically the only Old Russian manuscript from which one could directly extract information about enclitic accentuation" (p. 11) is the Čudov New Testament, due to the fact that it is accented. Therefore, in order to utilize the birch bark documents and other colloquial sources, it is necessary to use unaccented sources. Thus, accentological analysis plays only a secondary role, and the syntactic position of clitics is the main basis for judgements about their behavior. In fact, the central concept of this entire book is the explanation and prediction of those instances of Old Russian enclitics which do not conform to Wackernagel's Law, which specifies that enclitics must occupy the second position in a sentence. Therefore, every possible instance of a non-second place location of enclitics is analyzed by the author on the basis of many parameters, which constitute the chapters of this book. I will now give a brief account of the book's contents and how each chapter relates to the main theme of explaining how deviations from Wackernagel's Law might be explained. The first chapter, devoted to the main rules of enclitic behavior, introduces the most important concepts and parameters which are in constant use throughout the book. If one looks at enclitic order (i.e. "ranking"), the first five ranks of enclitics to occur-že, li, bo, ti (not the dative pronoun), and by-are considered to be the older and more stable group, and also can be called the "strong clitics" (p. 51). Conversely, the latter three ranks (dative pronouns mi, si, ti, accusative pronouns mę, sę, tę, and the copula) are the "weak clitics," although there is a descending scale of strength within each group.

This paper explores the use of bound forms in coordination constructions and ʔijjā and ʔijja in Modern Standard Arabic (MSA) and Jordanian Arabic (JA), respectively. Using the Minimalist Program (Chomsky 1995, 2000, 2005) as a theoretical framework, the paper proposes that the use of bound forms in such constructions is ruled by a Phonetic-Form constraint that prohibits cliticization of a bound form onto another bound form, i.e. the combination of two bound forms does not result in a free form; hence it is blocked. The paper demonstrates that the use of ʔijjā and ʔijja in MSA and JA, respectively, is a direct consequence of this constraint, so that ʔijjā/ʔijja is a Phonetic-Form object used to serve as a lexical host of bound forms (cf. Fassi Fehri 1993). The use of ʔijjā/ʔijja is also shown to be prosodically ruled; it is prosodically dependent so that ʔijjā/ ʔijja should be a member of the prosodic unit which also includes the preceding word.

In this article, we trace the diachronic phases of so-called genitive-dative syncretism in Old Bulgarian, a phenomenon which marks the beginning of the process of disintegration of the Case system in the history of Bulgarian. We base our research on a corpus study (comprising the texts of Codex Marianus, Codex Zographensis and Codex Suprasliensis) and we show, after a careful examination of the available syntactic positions for the Genitive and the Dative, that the main reason for the Dative shift in Old Bulgarian was the so-called External Possessive construction (also known as dativus sympatheticus) which allowed the dative to be interpreted outside the noun phrase but with reference to an inalienable possessive element inside the noun phrase. We discuss each stage of the functional reanalysis leading to the establishment of noun phrase internal dative possessives, and in particular the role of the emerging clitic pronouns and their second position syntactic behaviour as a main tr...

The paper discusses issues in the grammar of Case marking in the DP by focusing on two interrelated puzzles in the syntax of Bulgarian nominalizations. The first puzzle concerns the ban on strong pronouns to act as DP-internal subjects. We argue that this is due to a morphological Case conflict, and we also discuss some historical considerations bearing on the loss of the genitive in Bulgarian. The second puzzle we discuss concerns DPs headed by an object nominal which show no traces of a Case conflict. The paper offers some considerations bearing on the genitive-dative Case syncretism in the history of Bulgarian. * We dedicate this paper to Catherine Rudin, whom we admire very much as a linguist and as a person. We would like to thank Steven Franks for discussing various relevant issues with us and an anonymous reviewer for highly valuable comments, which have helped us improve the paper. For the requirements of the Italian academic system Iliyana Krapova takes responsibility for sections 1, 2, and 3 and Guglielmo Cinque for sections 4 and 5.

This paper presents a novel framework for selecting socially responsible investment (SRI) portfolios. The Hedonic Price Method (HPM) is applied to obtain an evaluation of SRI criteria that is integrated into a multiobjective mathematical programming model. The HPM breaks away from the traditional view that goods are the direct object of utility; on the contrary, it assumes that utility is derived from the properties or characteristics of the goods themselves. As far as the investment decision is concerned, we assume that socially responsible investmentmutual funds (SRI funds) constitute heterogeneous goods. Our approach allows us to obtain a portfolio, the financial performance of which is similar to that which the investor would have reached if he or she had not taken into account social, ethical, and environmental considerations when making his or her investment decisions. This is achieved by designing a two-stage multi-objective mathematical programming procedure. In the first stage, we achieve the maximum level of financial satisfaction that the investor can receive. In the second stage, the portfolio with the best financial-social behavior is built. For the purpose of this second stage, the first stage portfolio is used as a benchmark for the financial performance of a socially responsible portfolio. To apply this methodology, we use portfolios composed of socially responsible and conventional mutual funds domiciled in Spain. Keywords Socially responsible investment Á Portfolio selection Á Mutual funds Á Multi-objective programming Á Hedonic prices Á Variance Á Conditional value-at-risk Á Certainty equivalent

This paper gives an account of inalienable possession (IP) in Brazilian Portuguese (BP) that involves semantics and pragmatics, in addition to the expected morpho-syntactic factors. It argues that colloquial BPIP has moved away from the standard Romance pattern of manifesting IP via definite article, accompanied by a dative clitic under certain semantic conditions concerning the nature of the event. The data, consisting of narrative from two novels and a set of interviews with semi-literate subjects, are intended to represent both extremes and the midpoint of the formality continuum. The 3 corpora show the drift from a clitic-based syntax in the most conservative register to a nearly clitic-free situation at the colloquial extreme, where only prototype semantics reveals any codally relevant IP correlates. The link between possessor and possessum, co-designation, is shown to be inferential rather than syntactic, and satisfies the criteria for GRICE'S generalized conversational implicature.

This paper explores the use of bound forms in coordination constructions and ʔijjā and ʔijja in Modern Standard Arabic (MSA) and Jordanian Arabic (JA), respectively. Using the Minimalist Program (Chomsky 1995, 2000, 2005) as a theoretical framework, the paper proposes that the use of bound forms in such constructions is ruled by a Phonetic-Form constraint that prohibits cliticization of a bound form onto another bound form, i.e. the combination of two bound forms does not result in a free form; hence it is blocked. The paper demonstrates that the use of ʔijjā and ʔijja in MSA and JA, respectively, is a direct consequence of this constraint, so that ʔijjā/ʔijja is a Phonetic-Form object used to serve as a lexical host of bound forms (cf. Fassi Fehri 1993). The use of ʔijjā/ʔijja is also shown to be prosodically ruled; it is prosodically dependent so that ʔijjā/ ʔijja should be a member of the prosodic unit which also includes the preceding word.

Th e authors are interested in the semantic (= not formal) evolution of the dative case relationship. Th ey carry their analysis in the framework of the anthropocentric case theory and argue that the referent of the dative NP (NP D) is the second (in the communicative hierarchy) human protagonist of the event (benefi ciens and/or experiencer). Also the D ~ G opposition is analyzed on the semantic plane, with the referent of the NP G interpreted as the possessor in contexts when the possessor-possessum relation is realized at the level of a NP, and not at the sentential level. Th e syntactic, adverbal vs. adnominal position is understood as the basic, defi nitional diff erence between NP D and NP G at the formal plane.

This paper analyses the placement of clitics that occupy the so-called "second" position in Serbian, in which both the first word or the first constituent can serve as host positions for clitics. In both corpus investigations and experimental research, we found that in Serbian there is more than one type of first position, both in the case of first word, and in the case of first constituent. Moreover, we found two types of cases depending on whether the sentence initial element is, or belongs to, either an argument or the predicate, yielding a four part classification. The experiments clearly establish preferred clitic placement in the two types of sentences. All four types are represented both in the investigated corpora and in the production and perception patterns, albeit in very different proportions. We attribute these differences to different discourse conditions between the first word and first phrase positions within each category.

This paper deals with a small set of data from clusters of three clitics in Spanish that questions the empirical adequacy and scope of previous analyses of clitic clusters in Romance. It is shown that the output of the Spurious se Rule is not identical to genuine se, at some level that is relevant for linearization of clitics within a cluster. A proposal is presented to capture the neglected data, and this is done in a way that illuminates the debate on the division of labour in clitic phenomena between phonology, morphology and syntax. Central questions in morphology, such as ordering of operations, syncretisms, linearization principles and consequences of lexical insertion are addressed and re-examined.

I discuss the methodology and conclusiveness of the corpus-based historical linguistics and analyze two formal models predicting the language-internal variation in Early Old Russian syntax. Linguistic models claiming a rigid distribution of grammatical features like ± overt realization of agreement markers activate hidden corpus characteristics such as profiles of text genres, chronology, vector of change, ± impact of L2, ± presence of supra-dialect features. In this case they can be valued and checked on text samples, where genre features are stable, while location and time vary.

Apologies for the duplication. This 2012 paper of mine was automatically recognized by academia.edu. A slightly edited version of this text is available as a chapter of my 2021 book А.В.Циммерлинг. От интегрального к аспективному. М.-Спб.: Нестор-История, 2021. ISBN 978-5-4469-1792-1. https://www.academia.edu/61854112/ .

The paper proposes a unified analysis of complex syntactic objects defined as clitic clusters. A cluster is by definition a string of elements {a,b,c...n} which can function independently without combining with each other but are arranged in a rigid order when they assume a contact position, so that for each pair (a, b) the linear order a > b, i. e. ‘a precedes b’ is fixed. Elements conforming to this definition are called clusterizing. Rules ordering language elements in clusters are called Template Rules.

In theory, investors choosing to invest only in socially responsible entities restrict their investment universe and should thus be penalized in a mean-variance framework. When computed, this penalty is usually viewed as valid for all socially responsible investors. This paper shows however that the additional cost for responsible investing depends essentially on the investors' risk aversion. Social ratings are introduced in mean-variance optimization through linear constraints to explore the implications of considering a social responsibility (SR) threshold in the traditional Markowitz (1952) portfolio selection setting. We consider optimal portfolios both with and without a risk-free asset. The SR-efficient frontier may take four different forms depending on the level of the SR threshold: a) identical to the non-SR frontier (i.e. no cost), b) only the left portion is penalized (i.e. a cost for high-risk-aversion investors only), c) only the right portion is penalized (i.e. a cost for low-risk aversion investors only) and d) the whole frontier is penalized (i.e. a positive cost for all the investors). By precisely delineating under which circumstances SRI is costly, those results help elucidate the apparent contradiction found in the literature about whether or not SRI harms diversification.

Further steps Can we get rid of such cases? Could they simply be mistakes? No! Too frequent, too systematic… Are they metri causa? Maybe... But: "preventive censure" (Jakobson & Bogatyrev 1929) → inevitable premise: All attested data are grammatical / acceptable. Research questions: Is deviant placement arbitrary? Or can we identify recurrent patterns? If so, are these patterns related to the canonical placement? Götz Keydana Wackernagel enclitics in all the wrong places

Apologies for cross-posting. This 2011 paper of mine published in Issue 10 (17) in the "Computational Linguistics and Intellectual Technologies" was automatically recognized by academia.edu. 
Статья содержит классификацию разновидностей скрэмблинга т.е. отношения нефиксированного порядка категорий предложения в славянских языках. Принимается точка зрения о том, что все виды скрэмблинга возникают в результате факультативных синтаксических перемещений. Для систем порядка слов и формальных грамматик, предназначенных для распознавания структур со скрэмблингом, релевантны как свойства конечных областей перемещения, так и свойства исходных областей. В славянских языках представлены все четыре возможных типа скрэмблинга полноударных элементов предложения. Впервые выделены диагностические признаки двух типов скрэмблинга клитик. The paper discusses the types of scrambling in the Slavic languages and in Universal Grammar. It is argued that all kinds of scrambling may be explained as instances of optional movement. Scrambling types are classified on the basis of final and initial movement domains in the clausal complex where sentence categories move. Slavic languages have all fourtheoretically possible scrambling types of non-clitic elements and both types available for clitic elements.

This paper explores the use of bound forms in coordination constructions and ʔijjā and ʔijja in Modern Standard Arabic (MSA) and Jordanian Arabic (JA), respectively. Using the Minimalist Program (Chomsky 1995, 2000, 2005) as a theoretical framework, the paper proposes that the use of bound forms in such constructions is ruled by a Phonetic-Form constraint that prohibits cliticization of a bound form onto another bound form, i.e. the combination of two bound forms does not result in a free form; hence it is blocked. The paper demonstrates that the use of ʔijjā and ʔijja in MSA and JA, respectively, is a direct consequence of this constraint, so that ʔijjā/ʔijja is a Phonetic-Form object used to serve as a lexical host of bound forms (cf. Fassi Fehri 1993). The use of ʔijjā/ʔijja is also shown to be prosodically ruled; it is prosodically dependent so that ʔijjā/ ʔijja should be a member of the prosodic unit which also includes the preceding word.

This paper is addressed the issues in Slavic clitic syntax, with focus on clausal-initial proclitic-enclitic sequences in Old Russian. • I argue that Early Old Russian in XI-XII centuries had a parameter setting licensing free clause-level accusative clitics including the reflexive marker ся and 1-3 p. clitic auxiliaries есмь, еси, есть, etc. after the clausal-initial conjunctions like и, a, нъ, да.

The paper discusses syntactic features of Slavic possessive clitics and Slavic constructions with socalled-Possessor Raising‖. I prove that only a minority of Slavic languages have true phrase-level (NP-level or DP-level) possessive clitics and arguing against a generalized syntactic account of all Slavic constructions with possessive operators. The weak aspects of the PR hypothesis are that it takes the mapping of syntax and possessive semantics to be iconic and the rules/principles of extracting a NP/DP-level possessive operator out of the NP/DP to be trivial. The analysis has shown that these assumptions are poorly justified. Slavic languages typically apply different case-marking for nonagreeing phrase-level possessive operators and non-agreeing clause-level possessive operators. A group of languages including Modern Russian lacks phrase-level possessive clitics. For this group the PR hypothesis cannot be retained. Most cases where the PR hypothesis has been proposed in previous Slavic studies do not conform to the definition of Raising as a syntactic operation, since the identity of structures with a clause-level or phrase-level possessive operator cannot be established. Such cases must be reanalyzed in terms of Possessive Shift, i.e., alternation of a true possessive construction with a NP/DP-level possessive element and its quasi-synonym, a pseudo-possessive construction with a case-marked verbal argument. 1 The paper is written with financial support from the Russian Ministry of Education and Culture, project 2012-1.2.1-12-000-3004-9859 «Models of Case Grammar and Natural Languages». The author is grateful to the audience of SLS-6 conference (Aix-en-Provence 2011) and, personally, to Steven Franks, Frank Gladney and Grigory Kreidlin for the valuable comments. I am also grateful to the anonymous reviewers for their criticism. All responsibility for shortcomings is my own.

This paper accounts for the distribution of two second position effects, the V2 (verb second) order observed in continental Germanic languages and second position cliticization, attested in some Slavic languages. It shows that it is necessary to distinguish two types of second position effects: one of them affects finite verbs and pronominal and auxiliary clitics, whereas the other one is restricted to the contexts of marked illocution and is observed among a small class of so-called operator clitics. Furthermore, this paper addresses Bošković’s (2016) generalization concerning the distribution of clitics, which states that second position pronominal and auxiliary clitics are found only in languages without articles. This paper shows that although this generalization is empirically correct, it does not account for the distribution of auxiliary clitics and is not supported by diachronic considerations. It proposes an alternative generalization, which restricts verb-adjacent cliticiza...

In this article, we trace the diachronic phases of so-called genitive-dative syncretism in Old Bulgarian, a phenomenon which marks the beginning of the process of disintegration of the Case system in the history of Bulgarian. We base our research on a corpus study (comprising the texts of Codex Marianus, Codex Zographensis and Codex Suprasliensis) and we show, after a careful examination of the available syntactic positions for the Genitive and the Dative, that the main reason for the Dative shift in Old Bulgarian was the so-called External Possessive construction (also known as dativus sympatheticus) which allowed the dative to be interpreted outside the noun phrase but with reference to an inalienable possessive element inside the noun phrase. We discuss each stage of the functional reanalysis leading to the establishment of noun phrase internal dative possessives, and in particular the role of the emerging clitic pronouns and their second position syntactic behaviour as a main tr...

This paper discusses clitic reduplication constructions in Bulgarian. In contrast to traditional analyses, it distinguishes clitic doubling proper, which is restricted to clauses with psych and physical perception predicates, from other constructions that involve reduplication of an argument by a clitic, notably, left and right dislocation, focus movement, and hanging topic construction. Several properties of clitic doubling proper are identified, among which obligatory doubling of quantifiers, wh-phrases and focus phrases. These are argued to be the distinguishing features of this construction in Bulgarian, given the cross-linguistic evidence from Romance and other languages. 1.

The study offers novel evidence on the grammar and processing of clitic placement in heritage languages. Building on earlier findings of divergent clitic placement in heritage European Portuguese and Serbian, this study extends this line of inquiry to Bulgarian, a language where clitic placement is subject to strong prosodic constraints. We found that, in heritage Bulgarian, clitic placement is processed and rated differently than in the baseline, and we asked whether such clitic misplacement results from the transfer from the dominant language or follows from language internal
reanalysis. We used a self-paced listening task and an aural acceptability rating task with 13 English-dominant, highly proficient heritage speakers and 22 monolingual speakers of Bulgarian.
Heritage speakers of Bulgarian process and rate the grammatical proclitic and ungrammatical enclitic positions as equally acceptable, and we contend that this pattern is due to language-internal
reanalysis. We suggest that the trigger for such reanalysis is the overgeneralization of the prosodic Strong Start Constraint from the left edge of the clause to any position in the sentence.

The authors are interested in the semantic (= not formal) evolution of the dative case relationship. They carry their analysis in the framework of the anthropocentric case theory and argue that the referent of the dative NP (NPD) is the second (in the communicative hierarchy) human protagonist of the event (beneficiens and/or experiencer). Also the D ~ G opposition is analyzed on the semantic plane, with the referent of the NPG interpreted as the possessor in contexts when the possessor - possessum relation is realized at the level of a NP, and not at the sentential level. The syntactic, adverbal vs. adnominal position is understood as the basic, definitional difference between NPD and NPG at the formal plane.

The world's languages with clitic clusters pattern with four major types of the word order systems, depending on the presence or absence of the 2P condition and the parameter of clitic-verb adjacency. Bulgarian has a double-focus system of clitic placement (2P condition and clitic-verb adjacency), which has typological parallels outside Europe but lacks direct counterparts in modern European languages. Neither the analogy with standard 2P languages without clitic-verb adjacency nor the analogy with the Romance systems with vP-internal clitics captures the profile of the Bulgarian clitic syntax. Historically, the rise of the clitic-verb adjacency is an innovation of Bulgarian, but its exact time and triggers are unclear. The language of the Wallachian letters (ca. 1386-1509) has a marked tendency towards the clitic-verb adjacency and is typologically similar to Modern Bulgarian but still has residual #XP-CL-[Y]-V orders. This idiom spoken by the L2 speakers of Middle Bulgarian cannot be viewed as a source of the Modern Bulgarian but hints that the clitic-verb adjacency parameter could develop in the history of Bulgarian because of the contact influence on the part of some Non-Slavic clitic systems.

The paper deals with the acquisition of Slovak word order in written texts of students of Slovak as a foreign language. Its attention is focused on identifying the correct and incorrect placement of enclitic components, and their erroneous usage is analysed with respect to different investigated variables (types of enclitic components, types of syntactic construction, distance from lexical/syntactic anchor, and realization in pre- or post-verbal position). The paper also pays attention to the error rate regarding individual proficiency levels of students, and error distribution in two language groups, Slavic and Non-Slavic learners, is compared.

Andrej A. Zaliznjak's recent book, Drevnerusskie ènklitiki, explains the need for a book about Old Russian enclitics by stating that while the enclitics of the South and West Slavic languages have attracted great interest, those of Old Russian have been largely ignored. Very little literature on the subject exists, and Zaliznjak cites only two studies, both dating from 1935: Gunnarsson's study of sę and Jakobson's small article about the Slavic enclitics as a whole. In Zaliznjak's opinion, this lack of interest has been caused by the absence of good sources for colloquial Old Russian speech, until the discovery of the Novgorod birch bark documents in 1951. The author also notes that histories of the Russian language do not contain chapters on the enclitics of Old Russian. Thus, the present study has the goal of providing the first modern, comprehensive study of Old Russian enclitics, in which the sources of Old Russian colloquial speech are fully taken into account. In addition to the author's use of the birch bark documents, he also makes extensive use of all the instances of direct speech, found in the Kievan letopis', since this also provides good evidence about colloquial uses of Old Russian. This book is intended as a complete and comprehensive expansion of the author's earlier 1993 article on the birch bark documents. It also draws from the author's 1985 book on the history of Slavic accentuation. The author makes the important statement that the goal of the book is not the comparison of Old Russian enclitics with those of other Indo-European languages or with the South and West Slavic languages. It appears that this statement was made for the purpose of explaining the absence of a discussion of the many recent studies of Slavic enclitics which have appeared in recent years, since it has become a topic of great interest to Slavists. At first glance, it seemed surprising that the references about Slavic enclitics are little more than the two 1935 sources mentioned above. One does not find such recent work as the Handbook of Slavic Clitics (Franks and King, 2000), or the large number of clitic references that one can find in their bibliography (pp. 377-392). One might have expected a bit more about the current literature on the subject, although Zaliznjak's position is understandable. After all, his book is the first to bring the enclitics of the birch bark documents and many other Old Russian manuscripts into the field of scholarly study. As the author mentions, the study of clitics has both phonological and syntactic aspects. Further, he states that "practically the only Old Russian manuscript from which one could directly extract information about enclitic accentuation" (p. 11) is the Čudov New Testament, due to the fact that it is accented. Therefore, in order to utilize the birch bark documents and other colloquial sources, it is necessary to use unaccented sources. Thus, accentological analysis plays only a secondary role, and the syntactic position of clitics is the main basis for judgements about their behavior. In fact, the central concept of this entire book is the explanation and prediction of those instances of Old Russian enclitics which do not conform to Wackernagel's Law, which specifies that enclitics must occupy the second position in a sentence. Therefore, every possible instance of a non-second place location of enclitics is analyzed by the author on the basis of many parameters, which constitute the chapters of this book. I will now give a brief account of the book's contents and how each chapter relates to the main theme of explaining how deviations from Wackernagel's Law might be explained. The first chapter, devoted to the main rules of enclitic behavior, introduces the most important concepts and parameters which are in constant use throughout the book. If one looks at enclitic order (i.e. "ranking"), the first five ranks of enclitics to occur-že, li, bo, ti (not the dative pronoun), and by-are considered to be the older and more stable group, and also can be called the "strong clitics" (p. 51). Conversely, the latter three ranks (dative pronouns mi, si, ti, accusative pronouns mę, sę, tę, and the copula) are the "weak clitics," although there is a descending scale of strength within each group.

This paper presents an analysis of certain aspects of Czech sentential clitics in Higher Order Grammar. I focus on the relative order of clitics within the clitic cluster. The overall aim of the paper is to show that constraints governing Czech sentential clitics, though quite complex, can be captured relatively easily within a higher order formalism such as Higher Order Grammar. In this paper, I present an analysis of some aspects of Czech sentential clitics in Higher Order Grammar (C.f. Pollard and Hana, 2003) - a framework currently under develop- ment, based on higher order logic (Church, 1940). I start with a general discussion of clitic phenomena in Czech (§1 & §2); I then briefly and informally describe the HOG for- malism and sketch the formalization of syntactic structures in HOG (§3). Finally, I discuss the treatment of several clitic-related issues in HOG (§4).

This paper investigates the issue of head directionality in Old Slavic. This issue has played an important role in diachronic studies on Germanic, in which a switch in head directionality was assumed to have triggered word order changes in the history of these languages. Within Slavic, Old Bulgarian and Old Church Slavonic have been claimed to partly feature head-final grammars by Pancheva (2005; 2008) andDimitrova-Vulchanova&Vulchanov (2008), in contrast to contemporary Slavic languages, which are head-initial. This paper shows that there is little evidence for head-finality in Old Slavic.

This dissertation discusses the non-agentive Bulgarian verbal construction opitva se. Though normally it carries the meaning of ‘to try’, this special usage allows a meaning roughly equivalent to French risquer (‘Il risque de pleuvoir’) or English threaten (‘The numbers threaten to rise’). I argue that the underlying syntax of non-agentive opitva se is different from its agentive counterpart, as it does not fit any the descriptions that have been given for so-called “Balkan subjunctives” (Landau 2005, Krapova 2001). Ultimately, I defend that the verbal construction in question is a monoclausal construction, which is superficially similar to the obligatory control configuration that some Bulgarian subjunctives have. This work is particularly interesting with the new data it presents and the hitherto undescribed nature of the phenomenon.

The paper deals with the word order of reflexive sě, which is an item on the boundary between a pronominal form and a discrete morpheme. In the first part of the study, we investigate the (en)clitic status of sě in eight books of the oldest complete Czech Bible translation. The analysis focuses only on sě that is dependent on a finite verb: it identifies all possible word order positions of sě in a clause and interprets them in the light of the main competing positions of Czech (en)clitics during the development of the language: 1. the postinitial position, i.e. when an (en)clitic is located after first word/phrase; 2. the contact (verb-adjacent) position, i.e. when an (en)clitic is located immediately before (preverbal position) or after (postverbal position) its syntactically or morphologically superordinate item. 2. The investigated material Reflexive sě is investigated in the text of the first edition of the Old Czech Bible translation, specifically in selected books from the Olomouc Bible (Bible olomoucká, BiblOl) and the Litoměřice-Třeboň Bible (Bible litoměřicko-třeboňská, BiblLitTřeb).

The paper deals with the word order of reflexive sě, which is an item on the boundary between a pronominal form and a discrete morpheme. In the first part of the study, we investigate the (en)clitic status of sě in eight books of the oldest complete Czech Bible translation. The analysis focuses only on sě that is dependent on a finite verb: it identifies all possible word order positions of sě in a clause and interprets them in the light of the main competing positions of Czech (en)clitics during the development of the language: 1. the postinitial position, i.e. when an (en)clitic is located after first word/phrase; 2. the contact (verb-adjacent) position, i.e. when an (en)clitic is located immediately before (preverbal position) or after (postverbal position) its syntactically or morphologically superordinate item. 2. The investigated material Reflexive sě is investigated in the text of the first edition of the Old Czech Bible translation, specifically in selected books from the Olomouc Bible (Bible olomoucká, BiblOl) and the Litoměřice-Třeboň Bible (Bible litoměřicko-třeboňská, BiblLitTřeb).

Pronominal clitics comprise one of the important traits of the majority of West Iranian languages. Nevertheless, while these person clitics have been the subject of virtually systematic studies in certain languages, e.g. Central Kurdish dialects, and Persian, they are hardly studied in the majority of languages where they are attested. More specifically, the existing scholarship has faintly dealt with the rise of procliticization, the development of person marking system, the placement of clitics, the cluster internal ordering of clitics, and the clitic-affix combinations. This study is an attempt to fill the lack of knowledge across the aspects mentioned. The development of proclitic attachment forms an integral part of the thesis. Originally enclitics in the second position in the sense of Wackernagel, a subset of West Iranian languages have developed proclitics. The hypothesis postulated in the thesis is that this evolution results from a change in the domain of cliticization, more precisely, the abandonment of the clause as the domain of cliticization. This shift in turn leads to the reanalysis of the clause-initial particles, hosts of the second position clitics, and their integration into the clitic paradigm. Having lost their host, the second position clitics change their attachment orientation and become incorporated into the element which follows them in the form of proclitics. Proclitic attachment is thus a secondary development from erstwhile second positioning of enclitics (Steele 1977; Wanner 1987). The person marking system points to the inverse development of subject indexing and object indexing in the past transitive constructions: in the former, the original ‘pronominal’ clitics have grammaticalized into markers of agreement, further pointing to the cross-linguistic tendency for subject agreement (Siewierska 1999; Haig 2018a). In the latter, the originally object agreement inflectional affixes on the verb are lending/have lent themselves to varying degrees of deinflectionalization (Norde 2009; Haig 2018a), hence deviating from the typological tendencies in associating inflectional affixes with the agreement relation (Siewierska 2004). Three domains are accountable for clitic placement across WILs: the clause, the verb phrase (VP), and the verb. A subgroup of VP-based clitic systems provides a rich source for the study of endoclitics: the endoclitics of the latter are the result of the interplay between second position requirement for clitics and the stress factor. V-based proclitic systems are characterised by ditropic attachment of clitics. The cluster internal ordering of clitics is determined by argument hierarchy (A > O > R > POS) across Iranian: the argument ranked higher in the hierarchy appears second in the cluster. This property brings Iranian languages close to Romance languages (Gerlach 2002). Finally, in some clitic-affix combinations, clitics interrupt morphological words, further overshadowing a categorical distinction between the categories of clitics and affixes on the one hand, and the concept of wordhood on the other (Haspelmath 2011).

Andrej A. Zaliznjak's recent book, Drevnerusskie ènklitiki, explains the need for a book about Old Russian enclitics by stating that while the enclitics of the South and West Slavic languages have attracted great interest, those of Old Russian have been largely ignored. Very little literature on the subject exists, and Zaliznjak cites only two studies, both dating from 1935: Gunnarsson's study of sę and Jakobson's small article about the Slavic enclitics as a whole. In Zaliznjak's opinion, this lack of interest has been caused by the absence of good sources for colloquial Old Russian speech, until the discovery of the Novgorod birch bark documents in 1951. The author also notes that histories of the Russian language do not contain chapters on the enclitics of Old Russian. Thus, the present study has the goal of providing the first modern, comprehensive study of Old Russian enclitics, in which the sources of Old Russian colloquial speech are fully taken into account. In addition to the author's use of the birch bark documents, he also makes extensive use of all the instances of direct speech, found in the Kievan letopis', since this also provides good evidence about colloquial uses of Old Russian. This book is intended as a complete and comprehensive expansion of the author's earlier 1993 article on the birch bark documents. It also draws from the author's 1985 book on the history of Slavic accentuation. The author makes the important statement that the goal of the book is not the comparison of Old Russian enclitics with those of other Indo-European languages or with the South and West Slavic languages. It appears that this statement was made for the purpose of explaining the absence of a discussion of the many recent studies of Slavic enclitics which have appeared in recent years, since it has become a topic of great interest to Slavists. At first glance, it seemed surprising that the references about Slavic enclitics are little more than the two 1935 sources mentioned above. One does not find such recent work as the Handbook of Slavic Clitics (Franks and King, 2000), or the large number of clitic references that one can find in their bibliography (pp. 377-392). One might have expected a bit more about the current literature on the subject, although Zaliznjak's position is understandable. After all, his book is the first to bring the enclitics of the birch bark documents and many other Old Russian manuscripts into the field of scholarly study. As the author mentions, the study of clitics has both phonological and syntactic aspects. Further, he states that "practically the only Old Russian manuscript from which one could directly extract information about enclitic accentuation" (p. 11) is the Čudov New Testament, due to the fact that it is accented. Therefore, in order to utilize the birch bark documents and other colloquial sources, it is necessary to use unaccented sources. Thus, accentological analysis plays only a secondary role, and the syntactic position of clitics is the main basis for judgements about their behavior. In fact, the central concept of this entire book is the explanation and prediction of those instances of Old Russian enclitics which do not conform to Wackernagel's Law, which specifies that enclitics must occupy the second position in a sentence. Therefore, every possible instance of a non-second place location of enclitics is analyzed by the author on the basis of many parameters, which constitute the chapters of this book. I will now give a brief account of the book's contents and how each chapter relates to the main theme of explaining how deviations from Wackernagel's Law might be explained. The first chapter, devoted to the main rules of enclitic behavior, introduces the most important concepts and parameters which are in constant use throughout the book. If one looks at enclitic order (i.e. "ranking"), the first five ranks of enclitics to occur-že, li, bo, ti (not the dative pronoun), and by-are considered to be the older and more stable group, and also can be called the "strong clitics" (p. 51). Conversely, the latter three ranks (dative pronouns mi, si, ti, accusative pronouns mę, sę, tę, and the copula) are the "weak clitics," although there is a descending scale of strength within each group.

The authors are interested in the semantic (= not formal) evolution of the dative case relationship. They carry their analysis in the framework of the anthropocentric case theory and argue that the referent of the dative NP (NPD) is the second (in the communicative hierarchy) human protagonist of the event (beneficiens and/or experiencer). Also the D ~ G opposition is analyzed on the semantic plane, with the referent of the NPG interpreted as the possessor in contexts when the possessor - possessum relation is realized at the level of a NP, and not at the sentential level. The syntactic, adverbal vs. adnominal position is understood as the basic, definitional difference between NPD and NPG at the formal plane.

Th e authors are interested in the semantic (= not formal) evolution of the dative case relationship. Th ey carry their analysis in the framework of the anthropocentric case theory and argue that the referent of the dative NP (NP D) is the second (in the communicative hierarchy) human protagonist of the event (benefi ciens and/or experiencer). Also the D ~ G opposition is analyzed on the semantic plane, with the referent of the NP G interpreted as the possessor in contexts when the possessor-possessum relation is realized at the level of a NP, and not at the sentential level. Th e syntactic, adverbal vs. adnominal position is understood as the basic, defi nitional diff erence between NP D and NP G at the formal plane.

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is first to give an in-depth discussion of the criticism of socially responsible investment's (SRI) alleged incompatibility with the concept of rational investment constituting an inferiority to conventional investment so as to disprove unwarranted arguments and identify potential for improvement of SRI. The second objective is to propose a framework that places SRI and conventional investment on the same level of rationality. Methodology – The discussion is based on a literature study. The framework uses a previously published multidimensional optimization approach and embeds it into a new, integrated methodology for investment decisions in the presence of SRI objectives. The framework is empirically evaluated using historic stock market data. Findings – The main findings show that SRI is not necessarily less rational than conventional investment; it can be implemented in an equally stringent and clearly defined methodology. The empirical res...

We present a framework for inverse optimization in a Markowitz portfolio model that is extended to include a third criterion. The third criterion causes the traditional nondominated frontier to become a surface. Until recently, it had not been possible to compute such a surface. But by using a new method that is able to generate the nondominated surfaces of tri-criterion portfolio selection problems, we are able to compute via inverse optimization the implied risk tolerances of given funds that pursue an additional objective beyond risk and return. In applying this capability to a broad sample of conventional and socially responsible (SR) mutual funds, we find that after the screening process there appears to be no significant difference between how assets are allocated in socially responsible and conventional mutual funds, which is likely to be different from what most SR investors would expect.

This paper investigates whether V-toT movement is attested in Old Russian, by examining word order between verbs and other elements such as overt subjects and low adverbs. The position of the be-auxiliary is also examined as a diagnostics of lexical verb movement. Colloquial Old Russian reflected in Old Novgorod birch bark letters and Russkaja pravda does not feature V-toT movement just like Modern Russian, while formal varieties of Old Russian in chronicles show mixed patterns. Given that Old Russian has been analyzed as a consistent null subject language with rich agreement morphology in all tenses, the lack of V-toT movement in colloquial Old Russian implies that the EPP is not met by verb raising to T although null subjects are conditioned by rich subject agreement. This conclusion also weakens the Rich Agreement Hypothesis in that rich agreement morphology does not trigger V-toT movement.

This paper discusses clitic reduplication constructions in Bulgarian. In contrast to traditional analyses, it distinguishes clitic doubling proper, which is restricted to clauses with psych and physical perception predicates, from other constructions that involve reduplication of an argument by a clitic, notably, left and right dislocation, focus movement, and hanging topic construction. Several properties of clitic doubling proper are identified, among which obligatory doubling of quantifiers, wh-phrases and focus phrases. These are argued to be the distinguishing features of this construction in Bulgarian, given the cross-linguistic evidence from Romance and other languages.