ROBERT
D.
BORSLEY
AND
MARIA
LUISA
RIVERO
CLITIC AUXILIARIES AND INCORPORATION
IN POLISH*
This paper discussesthe two alternatingsyntacticpatternsof Polish past and conditionalsentences from a Slavicperspective.We argue that what are often referred
to in Polish as past tense verbs, for example widziale.s'you saw', are in fact combinations of a past participleand a perfect auxiliary,e.g., widzial 'seen' and s 'you
have'. These combinationsare the result of syntacticIncorporationin the sense of
Baker(1988). Whennot combinedwiththe participle,the auxiliarycan appearalmost
anywhereto the left of the participlewithin the same clause. We argue, however,
that it alwaysoccupiesthe same syntacticposition, only to undergoPF-cliticization.
The auxiliarycombineswith a varietyof elementsbecause phrasalfrontingssuch as
Wh-movementand Scramblingallow a varietyof categoriesto immediatelyprecede
the I-node occupiedby the auxiliary.The proposalthat the auxiliaryappearsin the
I-nodealone or incorporatesthe participleexplainswhy certainitemscan host a clitic
auxiliarywhile others cannot. A second auxiliarythat incorporatesa participleis the
conditionalauxiliary,as in widzial+ bys 'you would see'. However, the conditional
auxiliaryis not a clitic and hence, unlike the perfect auxiliary,can appearin initial
position. We argue that Polish is uniqueamongWest and South Slaviclanguagesin
havingIncorporation.Bulgariansentenceslike cel sum 'I have read'and counterparts
in Czech, Serbo-Croatian,and Slovak appearsimilarto Polish examples involving
Incorporation.However, they are the productof Long Head Movement, i.e., the
movementof the participledirectlyto the C-positionacrossthe auxiliary.We argue
that PolishsentencesinvolvingIncorporationdifferin syntacticpropertiesfromLong
Head Movementconstructionsin the other languages.
1. THE Two SYNTACTIC PATTERNS OF PASTS
AND
CONDITIONALS
The followingsentences illustratean intriguingfeature of Polish syntax:
(1)a.
es' tq ksiq&q.
Ty widzial+
+
SG2SG this book
you seen MASC
* Researchfor this articlehas been partlysupportedby the EuropeanScienceFoundation
under the Eurotyp Project, and by Grants 410-88-0101and 410-91-0178from the Social
Sciences and HumanitiesResearchCouncil of Canadato the second author. Preliminary
versionswere presentedto the joint meetingof the Cliticsand the Complementationgroups
of the EurotypProjectin Viennain October1991,and to the LinguisticAssociationof Great
Britainin Brightonin April 1992. We thankEwa Jaworskaand Jacek Witkosfor help with
the Polish data, Riny Huybregtsand Henk van Riemsdijkfor helpful comments,Danijela
Kudraand LjiljanaProgovacfor discussionof the Serbo-Croatiandata, three anonymous
reviewersfor insightfulcriticism,and FrederickNewmeyerfor very useful editorialadvice.
Usual disclaimersapply.
NaturalLanguageand LinguisticTheory12: 373-422, 1994.
(D 1994 KluwerAcademicPublishers.Printedin the Netherlands.
374
ROBERT
(1)b.
D.
BORSLEY
AND
MARfA
LUISA
RIVERO
T-s
widzial
te; ksi#?kq.
you 2SG see + MASC + SG this book
You saw/have seen this book.
In (la), we have what is often referred to as a past tense verb form:
widziates''you saw'. In (lb), the element -s, which one might conclude
from (la) is a verbal inflection, is attached to a subjectpronoun. In this
paper, we will look in some detail at this phenomenonand argue that the
so-called 'past tense' is in fact a syntacticcomplex formed by a participle
and a perfect auxiliary.We will also consider how the auxiliarycan be
combinedwith other elements of the sentence; on the face of it, when the
auxiliarydoes not form a syntactic complex with the participle, it can
appear almost anywhereto the left within the same sentence. Consider,
for example, the following:
(2)a.
es.
Ty jego widzialYou him see + MASC + SG- 2SG
b.
Ty- s
jego widzial
You- 2SG him see + MASC + SG
c.
Ty jego- s
widzial
Youhim- 2SG see + MASC + SG
You saw him.
In (2a), the auxiliaryattaches to the precedingparticiple,in (2b) to the
subject, and in (2c) to the object. There are even examplesin which the
auxiliaryappearsto be inside a phrase. Thus we have both (3a) and (3b):
(3)a.
Ewy ksi#?kqczytales.
Ewa's book read + MASC + SG- 2SG
b.
Ewy- s
ksi4zkqczytal.
Ewa's-2SG book read + MASC + SG
You read Ewa's book.
However, there are restrictionson the position of the auxiliary:it cannot
appearin a higher clause than the participle,attach to items to the right
of the participle,or follow the negative particleor transitiveprepositions.
We will argue that the combinationof participleand auxiliaryis the
consequence of syntacticIncorporationin the sense of Baker (1988: 22):
the participleraises to the auxiliaryin the syntax. We will also propose
that when the auxiliaryis not attachedto the participle,it alwaysoccupies
CLITIC
AUXILIARIES
AND
INCORPORATION
IN POLISH
375
the same syntacticposition, the lo-node, and subsequentlyundergoes a
process of PF cliticization.In Polish, clitic auxiliariesare not in a special
second position in the clause and can attach to a variety of elements
because independentlymotivatedphrasalmovementsallow these items to
immediatelyprecede them. Polish auxiliariesfail to attachto items which
cannot prepose independently.
We have similar phenomena in conditional sentences. The following
resemblethe examplesin (1):
(4)a.
Ty wizial-
bys'
tq ksi#zkq
you seen + MASC + SG- COND + 2SG this book
b.
Ty bys
widziat
t
ksi#ikq.
you COND + 2SG seen + MASC + SG this book
c.
Bys
widzial
te ksiBzkq.
COND + 2SG seen + MASC + SG this book
You would see this book.
In (4a) the conditionalauxiliaryis attachedto the participle.In (4b-c) it
is not attachedto the auxiliaryor anythingelse. Like the perfectauxiliary,
the conditionalcan on the face of it appear anywhereto the left of the
participleincludinginside a phrase.Thus we have the examplesin (5) and
(6), parallelto those in (2) and (3):
(5)a.
Ty jego widzialbys.
You him see + MASC+ SG- COND + 2SG
b.
Ty bys
jego widzial.
You COND + 2SG him see + MASC
c.
Ty jego bys
widzial.
You him COND + 2SG see + MASC
You would see him.
(6)a.
Ewy ksi#kq czytalEwa's book
b.
Ewy bys
bys.
read + MASC + SG COND + 2SG
ksi#?kqczytal.
Ewa's COND + 2SG book
You would read Ewa's book.
read + MASC + SG
376
ROBERT
D.
BORSLEY
AND
MARfA
LUISA
RIVERO
We will argue that the conditionalauxiliaryis very much like the perfect
auxiliary,except that it is not a PF clitic.
An importantfeature of the analysesthat we develop here is that they
minimizethe differencebetween Polish, other West Slaviclanguages,and
South Slavic languages. Polish has Incorporation, whereas the other
languages have Long Head Movement, that is, the movement of the
participleto the complementizeracrossthe auxiliary.Otherwisethey are
very similar. In addition, our analysis accounts for the distributionand
positional restrictionsof Polish auxiliaries,providing an explanation of
why certainitems can host a clitic auxiliarywhile others cannot.
The paper is organizedas follows. Section 2 discussesPolish Incorporation of the verb to the auxiliary,and its syntacticcontrastswith Long
Head Movement of the verb to the complementizerin other Slavic languages. Section 3 deals with the position of the auxiliaryin non-incorporated patterns, arguingfor two main conclusions:first, the auxiliaryis in
the I?-position,just like a finite verb; second, word order resultsfrom the
frontingof the phraseprecedingthe auxiliary.This latterconclusionshows
that Polish is a configurationallanguage with movement properties attested in manyother languages.Section4 considersnegationin the Polish
clause and its interaction with Incorporation.Section 5 argues, on the
basis of conditionals in subjunctiveand counterfactualclauses, for the
hypothesisthat Incorporationin Polish is a syntacticratherthan a lexical
operation.
2.
SENTENCES
WITH
INCORPORATION
FROM
A
SLAVIC
PERSPECTIVE
In this section, we develop our analysis for Polish sentences involving
Incorporation.Polishpast and conditionalsentencesare particularlyinteresting from a general Slavic perspectivebecause they differ in important
ways from superficiallysimilar sentences in other Slavic languages. We
argue that this is because they involve the incorporationof a participleto
the auxiliaryin the syntax, a processwhichis absent from the other Slavic
languages.Syntacticdifferencesbetween Polish and languageslike Czech,
Slovak, and Bulgarianmotivate this conclusion.
2.1. Past TenseParadigms
Let us begin with the full range of past tense forms of a typical Polish
verb such as widziec 'see' in (7):
CLITIC
AUXILIARIES
AND
INCORPORATION
SINGULAR
(7)
1P: a. widzial-em 'I saw'
seen + MASC + SG-1SG
a'. widziala-m
seen + FEM + SG-1SG
2P: b. widzial-eg 'you saw'
seen + MASC-2SG
b'. widzialaA
seen + FEM + SG-2SG
3P: c. widzial 'he saw'
seen + MASC + SG
IN POLISH
377
PLURAL
widzieli-smy 'we saw'
seen + VIRILE + PL-1PL1
widzialy-smy
seen + NON-VIRILE+ SG1PL
widzieli-scie 'you saw'
seen + VIRILE + PL-2PL
widzialyAcie
seen + NONVIRILE + PL - 2PL
widzieli 'they saw'
seen + VIRILE + PL
c'. widziala 'she saw'
seen + FEM + SG
widzialy
seen + NON-VIRILE + PL
c". widzialo 'it saw'
seen + NEUT + SG
This paradigmmakes it clear that the verb stem is followed by forms that
show numberand gender and that an additionalmarkerindicatingperson
and numbercompletes the word. For instance, in the firstperson masculine singularform widziatem'I saw', widzi- is the stem, -al- shows number
(Sg) and gender (Masc), and the suffix -em indicates number (Sg) and
person (1P).
Imperfective futures consist of an auxiliary and a participle as free
forms, and as illustratedin (8), the participleswhich follow the future
auxiliaryare identical to the combinationformed by the stem and the
internal markers in the paradigmin (7). For instance, the bound form
widzial- in the masculinesingularpersons in (7) is identical to the free
participlein (8a), which is a masculinesingularform. Gender is a characteristic of participles,but not of other verb forms:
1 'Virile' is the traditional term in Slavic philology for the plural [+male] form, as opposed
to the feminine/neuter plural form.
378
ROBERT
(8)a.
D.
BORSLEY
AND
MARfA
LUISA
RIVERO
Chiopiecbvdziewidzial
ksi#?kq.2
boy
will see + MASC + SG book
The boy will see the book.
b.
ksi?k&.
Dziewczynkabqdzie widziala
will see + FEM + SG book
girl
The girl will see the book.
c.
Chlopcybqd# widzieli
ksi?kq.
will see + VIRILE + PL book
boys
The boys will see the book.
d.
Dziewczynkibqd# widzialy
ksi?kq.
will see + NON-VIRILE+ PL book
girls
The girls will see the book.
Given the formalidentitybetween the initial fragmentsof the 'pasts'and
the participles of imperfective futures, we therefore conclude that the
forms in (7a) consist of a participlefollowed by an auxiliaryfunctioning
as affix, as in (9):
(9)
a.
b.
[[PARTICIPLE ]
[[widzial]
V+MASC+SG
]
[[widzieliV + VIRILE + PL
AUX
em
1SG.
smy
1PL
]
] 'I saw'
J
'we saw'
A similaranalysisseems reasonablefor conditionalslike widzial-bys'you
would see'. We therefore conclude that 'conditionals'also consist of a
participlefollowed by an auxiliary.
2.2. The AlternatingSyntaxof Past Sentences
As we noted at the outset, the Polish past does not always appearin the
forrmshown in (7), but exhibits two alternativesyntacticpatterns. It can
consist of a participlepreceding an auxiliary,as in (10), exemplifiedby
(la) and repeated now as (12a), an order which is frequently used in
2
The futureauxiliarycan also take an infinitivecomplement.(8a) is equivalentto
(i)
Chlopiez bedziewidzied ksia&ke
will see + INF book
boy
CLITIC
AUXILIARIES
AND
INCORPORATION
IN POLISH
379
modernPolish (Andersen 1987). Alternatively,the auxiliarycan precede
the participle,as in (11), exemplifiedby (lb) and repeated now as (12b).
This order is now less frequent:
(10)
(11)
(X) Participle-AUXY.
X-AUX ParticipleY.
(12)a.
Ty
t ksisbok.
eso widzialyou seen + MASC + SG- 25G this book
b.
Ty- s-
widzial
tq ksi#ikq.
you 2SG see + MASC + SG this book
You saw/have seen this book.
Fromour perspective,the synonymouspatterns(12a) and (12b), or parallel conditionalsentences, are the resultof Head-movementwith the participle incorporatingto the auxiliaryin the first instance, as in (13a), and
representauxiliarieswith the participleas complementin situ in the second
instance, as in (13b):3
3 The participlesin the VP could be the result of Head-Movementof the verb to a ccommandingAgreementhead, as in (i). Suchan analysisis in the spiritof Kayne'sproposals
for Romanceparticipleswith Object Agreement(1989 and later work). Since this analysis
is immaterialfor our purposes,we will treat the participleas V:
AuxP
(i)
Aux
Agri)
AgrO
VP
V0
380
ROBERT
D.
BORSLEY
AND
MARfA
LUISA
RIVERO
IP
(13)a.
It
ty
VP
10
V0
widzialieg
NP
fj
tq ksi#zkq
PARTICIPLEINCORPORATION
IP
b.
I
ty
10
VP
widzial
tq ksi#ikq
UNINCORPORATEDPERFECT
It has sometimes been suggested that patterns such as (12b), where the
auxiliaryprecedesthe participle,are the resultof a processmovingcertain
inflectionsaway from a verb stem to the left (Gussman1980, Sussex 1980,
Borsley 1984, amongothers). There are a numberof reasonsfor rejecting
such a floating inflection approach to (12b). One is that it involves a
questionable movement process which separates an affix from a stem.
Another unusualfeature of the analysisis that it appearsto move an affix
to a non c-commandingposition located inside a phrase. In our analysis,
the 'floating'inflection is an auxiliarythat either cliticizes, giving (12b),
or incorporatesthe participle,resultingin (12a).
CLITIC
AUXILIARIES
AND
INCORPORATION
IN POLISH
381
2.3. Incorporation in Past Sentences
The process moving the participle to the perfect auxiliaryin the past
sentence in (13a) has the formal properties of syntactic Incorporation,
pace Baker (1988: 22). Namely, it is an instance of Move a and adjoins
a syntactichead to anotherhead. That is, it takes an X? from an independent base structureposition to combine it with anotherX? in the syntax,
creating a complex category of the X? level and establishinga syntactic
link between two positions in the phrase marker.
The proposed analysisimplies that both the auxiliaryin (13b) and the
participleplus auxiliaryin (13a) occupy the same slot in Io as the verb in
the present in (14), assuming that this last pattern results from headmovement of the verb to I':
(14)
Kiedy widzi-sz
when see-
sig
z
Janem?
Pres + 2SG REFL with Jan
When are you seeing John?
As we shall see in Section 3, the predictionthat Polish auxiliaries,incorporatedforms, and ordinaryinflectedverbshave the same syntacticdistribution appearsto be correct. The parallelism,as we will argue, is due to
the fact that inflectedverbs and incorporatedformshave parallelsyntactic
derivations. In the case of the inflected verb in the present, it is well
accepted that a stem must raise to an affix. We propose a similarprocess
for the incorporatedperfect: a participleraises optionallyto an inflected
auxiliary.
2.4. Motivating Incorporation
Havingsketchedthe differencesbetween patternswith and withoutIncorporation,let us considerargumentsin favor of Incorporation.Supportfor
the idea that Incorporationis responsiblefor sentencesin whichthe participle precedes and is attached to the auxiliarycomes from stress. Polish
has penultimatestress, but past forms are exceptional in that they can
have either penultimateor antepenultimatestress (see Booij and Rubach
1987 for detailed discussion). Thus, phonologicalevidence indicates that
the past czytaliYmy'we have read' is derived in a differentway from the
superficiallysimilarczytamy'we are reading'.Syntacticargumentsfor the
proposal that participle+ auxiliarysequences involve Incorporationare
based on theirdistributionand on the positionof pronominalcliticsviewed
from a general Slavicperspective.
382
ROBERT
D.
BORSLEY
AND
MARIA
LUISA
RIVERO
2.4.1. Incorporation versus Long Head Movement in Slavic
Polish, Bulgarian, Czech, Serbo-Croatian,and Slovak share apparently
identicalparticiple+ auxiliary+ NP object sequences, as (15) illustrates:
(15)a. Kupili- smy lustro.
(Polish)
bought- 1PL mirror
We bought a mirror.
b.
Pro6elisme
read
knigata.
(Bulgarian)
Pres + 1PL book + the
We read the book.
c.
Koupiljsi
knihy.
(Czech)
bought Pres + 2SG books
You bought books
d.
Citao sam
knjigu.
(Serbo-Croatian)
read Pres + 1SG book
I read a book.
e.
Nap'sal som
list.
(Slovak)
written Pres + 1SG letter
I wrote a letter.
However, the paralellismis only apparentand hides a crucialdifference.
On the one hand, Polish (15a) involves.Incorporation,or the movement
of the participleto the head of AuxP, as scheihaticallyshown in (16a).
On the other the hand, the other Slavicexamplesin (15) have Long Head
Movement, or the fronting of the participleto Co, bypassing the finite
Auxo altogether, as shown in its essential aspects in (16b) (see Rivero
(1994) for Rumanianand Bulgarian;Lema and Rivero 1989 and 1992 for
Bulgarian, Czech, European Portuguese, Old Spanish, and Rumanian;
and Rivero 1991 for Serbo-Croatian,Slovak, and Czech in more detail):
CLITIC
AUXILIARIES
AND
INCORPORATION
(16)a. CP
Co
b.
AuxP
Aux0
Vi
CP
C0
VP
Aux0 li
AuxP
Aux0
Vi
VP
ti
NP
POLISH INCORPORATION
383
IN POLISH
NP
SLAVIC LONG HEAD
MOVEMENT
Polish is unique within Slavic because it has Incorporationbut no Long
Head Movement, while the other languageshave Long Head Movement
and no Incorporation.
Similarcomments apply to the Polish conditionalin (17a), in contrast
with Czech and Serbo-Croatian(17b-c). These patternsmay look identical, but they hide a major difference with important syntactic consequences. In Polish they result from Incorporationof the participleto the
conditional, as in (16a), while in the other languagesthey involve raising
of the participleto the tomplementizer,as in (16b):
(17)a.
Czytalbym
tq ksi4ikq.
read- Cond + 1SG this book
(Polish)
I would read this book.
b.
Koupil bych
knihy.
bought Cond + 1SG books
(Czech)
I would buy books.
c.
'itao bih
knjigu.
read Cond + 1SG book
I would read a book.
(Serbo-Croatian)
In Polish the syntacticraisingof the participleresultsin a complexdominated by a single X? in the phrase-marker,and this X? containsthe auxiliary;in addition,in surfacestructurethis Polish X? is in 10,where ordinary
inflected Vs are also located. In the other languages, the raising of the
participleresults in two differentXos in the syntacticphrase-marker:the
384
ROBERT
D.
BORSLEY
AND
MARfA
LUISA
RIVERO
higherX? is the complementizer(CO)and containsthe participle,and the
lower X? containsthe auxiliary.
We will nowjustifythe claimthat Polishparticiple+ auxiliarysequences
are the productof Incorporationof the participleto the auxiliary.Such
sequences are unrestrictedin distribution,in that they are found in root
and non-root environments,includingcomplementsand relative clauses,
as in (18a) and (18c). Incorporationis optional, so (18a), the patternwith
Incorporation,alternateswith (18b), the patternwithoutIncorporation:
(18)a. Janek powiedzial, ze pojechal-es do Warszawy.
that gone2SG to Warsaw
Janek said
Janek said that you went to Warsaw.
b.
Janek powiedzial, ze-s pojechal do Warszawy.
c.
Piotr powiedzialdokladnie, co kazal es
Piotr said
exactly
whatordered-2SG
Piotr said exactly what you ordered
By contrast,SlavicLHMis a root phenomenon,so participle+ auxiliary
sequences occur in main and independent clauses but not in embedded
clauseswith non-rootcharacteristics,such as relativeclauses, or the complement clause in (19):
(19)
*Znam ce proceli sme
knigata.
I + know thatread Pres + 1PL book + the
(Bulgarian)
I know that we read the book.
Notice too that participle+ auxiliarysequenceshave the same distribution
in LHMlanguageswherecliticauxiliariesmustnecessarilybe in the second
syntacticposition in the clause, such as Czech, and in languages where
they need not, such as Bulgarian.In Bulgarian,the clitic auxiliarycan be
in the third syntacticposition in the clause with no ill-effects, as in Znam
[ce nie ste sme proceli knigata]'I know [thatwe will have read the book]'.
This order is impossible in Czech. The root nature of these sequences
follows from the hypothesis that the non-finite verb moves to Co. This
movement is parallel to V2 in Germanic,where the finite verb raises to
C?in sentences with root-like properties.
The hypothesis that Polish participle + auxiliarysequences are the
result of Incorporationof the participle to the auxiliaryin I and not
movement of the participle to C thus accounts for the less restricted
CLITIC
AUXILIARIES
AND
INCORPORATION
IN POLISH
385
distributionof such sequences in Polish comparedwith the other Slavic
languages.
2.4.2. Clitic Pronouns in Slavic
A second argumentfor the view that Polish participle + auxiliarysequences are the result of Incorporationcomes from the distributionof
clitic pronouns. The contrastbetween Polish and other Slavic languages
again provides the basis for our conclusion. Consider first the following
Bulgarianexamples:
(20)a. Toj go e
vizdal.
(Bulgarian)
he him Pres + 3SG seen
He saw/has seen him.
b.
Vizdal go e.
He saw/has seen him.
Sentence (20a) showsthe auxiliaryfollowedby the participleas its complement. In (20b), the participle is in initial position, preceding both the
auxiliarye 'has', and the clitic pronoungo 'him'. The fact that the clitic
pronoun intervenes between participle and auxiliary suggests quite
stronglythatthey do not form a complexX? in the syntax.In other words,
it supports the view that participle + auxiliarysequences in Bulgarian
are the result of LHM, i.e., the movement of the participleto C. The
same fact holds for Serbo-Croatian,old and conservativeRomance, and
Romanian.
Polish cliticpronounsappearin a varietyof positions, and their distribution is quite free (see Spencer 1991: 267-269). For example, they may
follow any firstmajorconstituentsuch as the firstWh-wordin the multiple
Wh-questionin (21) (Rudin 1988). Notice that examplessuch as (21) show
the clitic to be an X? which is independentfrom the verb in syntax:
(21)
Kto siq komu
podoba?
who Refl to + whom likes?
Who likes who?
By contrast,Bulgarianclitic pronounsmust appearstrictlyadjacentto the
inflectedverb or auxiliaryand follow all Wh-phrases.However, like clitic
pronouns in other Slavic languages, Polish pronouns may not appear in
initial position, as (22)-(23) illustrate:
386
ROBERT
D.
BORSLEY
AND
MARfA
LUISA
(22)a. Mariago kocha.
Mariahim loves
RIVERO
(Polish)
Marialoves him.
b.
Kocha go.
She loves him.
c. *Go kocha.
(23)a. Nie go vidiaxme.
we him saw
(Bulgarian)
We saw him.
b. Vidiaxmego.
(We) saw him.
c. *Go vidiaxme.
Given the varietyof positions in which Polish clitic pronounscan appear,
we would expect it to be possible for a clitic pronounto appearbetween a
participleand the followingauxiliary,as in Bulgarian.This is not possible,
however, as the contrastbetween (24) and (25) illustrates:
(24)a. Zmusil-em go do zrobieniatego.
this
forced- 1SG him to doing
I forced him to do this.
b.
Dal- es mi go.
given- 2SG me it
You gave it to me.
c.
Widzial-es go.
seen- 2SG him
You saw him.
(25)a. *Zmusil-go-mdo zrobieniatego.
b. *Dal-mi-go-s.
c. *Widzial-go-s'.
The ungrammaticalityof the examplesin (25) is expected if the participle
and auxiliary form a complex X?. Here, then, we have some further
evidence for the view that Polish participle + auxiliary sequences are
CLITIC
AUXILIARIES
AND
INCORPORATION
IN POLISH
387
the product of Incorporationof the participleto the auxiliary.Although
participle + auxiliarycannot be separatedby a clitic pronoun, auxiliary
+ participlesequencescan, as (26) illustrates:
(26)
Kiedy-s go widzial?
when-2SGhim seen?
When did you see him?
This is predictedby our analysissince auxiliaryand participledo not form
a complexX0. It is also possibleto have a cliticpronounbefore a participle
+ auxiliarysequence, as (27) illustrates:
(27)
Kiedy go widzial-es?
when him seen- 2SG
When did you see him?
Again, this is as we would expect since the participle+ auxiliarysequence
forms a complex X? with the same distributionas the inflected verb in
(22a).
We have now presentedtwo argumentsthat Polishparticiple+ auxiliary
sequences are the productof Incorporationof the participleto the auxiliary and not of LHM to Co, which is responsiblefor superficiallysimilar
sequences in other West and South Slavic languages:these sequences are
not restrictedto root contexts, suggestingthat they are not the result of
movementto CO;they cannotbe separatedby a cliticpronoun,suggesting
that they form a complex X?.
2.4.3. Conditionals
Polish conditionalpatternscan be analyzed in the same way as those of
the perfect. That is, the conditionalauxiliaryallows Incorporationof its
complementparticiple,as illustratedin (29) for (28):
(28)
Czyj artykulchial-byg
przeczytac?
whicharticle liked-Cond+ 2SG read?
Which articlewould you like to read?
(29)
[AuxP [Au'
[AWo
[chiali [AXO bys]] [vp ti [
przeczyta6]]]]
The argumentthat the conditionalinvolves Incorporationand that participle + conditionalsequences are syntacticXos and occupy I is identical
to that alreadydeveloped for the perfect. A varietyof items can separate
auxiliaryand participlewhen the two appear in that relative order: for
388
ROBERT D. BORSLEY AND MARfA LUISA RIVERO
instance, in (30a) demonstrativeto splits.the two. However, when the
participlebegins the clause and precedes the auxiliary,the two items are
not separable,indicatingthat Incorporationhas appliedto forma syntactic
complex dominated by a common X?. Thus (30b) is fine, but (30c) is
ungrammatical.As predicted,participle+ conditionalsequences are also
possible in subordinateclauses, providingmore supportfor Incorporation
as opposed to LHM:
(30)a. Bym
to zrobil.
Cond + 1SG it done
I would do it.
b.
Zrobil-bymto.
c. *Zrobilto bym.
There are alternativeanalysesfor conditionalsthat might be proposed,
but they all have seriousdefects. One possibilityis a versionof the analysis
proposedin Rivero (1991) for the Slovak conditionalin (31):
(31)
Ja by som
napisallist.
I Cond Pres + 1SG writtenletter
(Slovak)
I would write a letter.
Rivero proposesthat such examplesinvolve the structurein (32). Namely,
the conditionalmarkerby is the Specifierof the AuxP headed by som:
(32)
[A'
by
[Au'
Aux [vP V 111
If this analysiswere extended to Polish, the conditional auxiliarywould
result from the combining of the perfect auxiliaryand its specifier by.
Something like this analysis is proposed for Polish in Dogil (1987) and
Booij and Rubach (1987). However, it has two defects. Firstly, it would
not, generate the grammatical(33a), while excluding the ungrammatical
(33c). We analyze (33a) as in (33b): the verb must incorporateto the
(inflected)auxiliary,as in the case of the perfect chia1-ef'you have liked',
which excludes (33c). Secondly, (33d) would involve Incorporationof the
auxiliary to its specifier, something which is not allowed on standard
assumptions(Baker 1988). In our view, (33d) does not involve Incorporation and shows the inflected auxiliaryfollowed by its VP-complement:
CLITIC
(33) a.
AUXILIARIES
AND
INCORPORATION
IN POLISH
389
Chcial- bys.
liked- Cond + 2SG
You would like.
b.
[Auxo Vi [AUxO
Cond]] tj
c. *By chcial-es.
d. Bys chcial.
You would like.
A second possibility,suggestedby an anonymousreferee, treats by as
the head of a Modal Phrase with the maximalprojectionof the perfect
auxiliaryas its complement.This is similarto the analysisof the Bulgarian
futureperfect Ste sum pro6el'I will have read' proposedin Rivero (1991).
On this analysis,we would have structureslike the following:
(34)
[MP [Mo by][AuxP [Auxo 'I [VP
[vochial]]]
However, in this approach, as in the previous one, it is not clear how
(33c) could be excluded. Moreover,(33a) would involve a ratherdubious
non-localIncorporationprocess.
A third possibility would be to treat the perfect auxiliaryas a head
taking a complementheaded by by as auxiliaryor verb. By in turnwould
take the main verb as complement, as in (35a). This analysis must be
rejected because it requiresthat by always raise to the perfect auxiliary
as in (35b), to prevent the ungrammatical(35c) from being generated.
Under this approach,(28) would require raisingthe main verb cheial to
by, with the complex subsequentlyraisingto the perfect auxiliary:
(35)a. Basic structure:AuxP[Auxo[-s] vpt vo[by-]vp[chcial]]]
b.
By-Inc (oblig.):
AUxp[Auxo[byi-sI
vp[
vo[t,]
vp[chcial]]]
c. *Czyj artykul-es by chial przeczytac?
whicharticle-2SGCond liked read?
Our analysis,in which the conditionalauxiliaryis a lexical entry different fromthe perfectauxiliary,avoidsthe problemsthat face the alternative
approaches.In addition, under this treatmentit follows naturallythat by
390
ROBERT
D.
BORSLEY
AND
MARfA
LUISA
RIVERO
should be the item with person markingwhen it precedes the participle,
as in (33a), since this conditionalitem is an inflectedauxiliary.4
2.5. Incorporation and LHM: a General Perspective
We have arguedthat Polish perfectconstructionssharethe basic structure
of perfectconstructionsin other Slaviclanguages:the clitic auxiliaryheads
a phrase and takes a VP-complementheaded by a participle.However,
Slavic languages differ in the type of Head-movementthat may affect
participles:Incorporationfor Polish and LHM for the other languages.In
root clauses, these two movements may result in apparentlyidentical
invertedperfects (or conditionals).However, when Incorporationapplies
in Polish, the resultingsequences form a complex dominatedby a unique
X? in syntax because the participleadjoins to the auxiliaryand forms a
syntactic unit with it. In contrast, when LHM applies in the other languages, the two items are separateconstituentsand do not forma syntactic
X?. As a consequence,the incorporatedPolishpast or conditionalformed
by participle and auxiliaryoccupies the same X?-position as a present
tense verb. By contrast,the participle+ auxiliarysequencein other Slavic
languages does not behave like a present tense verb because it is not a
syntacticX? resultingfrom Incorporation.
Incorporationis unique to Polish within Slavic but has counterpartsin
other language families. In Old Romance, futures and conditionalsare
formed by the syntacticmovement of an X? to another X? (Lema and
Rivero 1991), just like Polish perfectsand conditionals.For example, Old
Spanish ver-emos '(we) will see' and ver-iamos '(we) would see' result
from Incorporationof the infinitivever 'see' to the futureand conditional
auxiliariesemosliamos '(we) will/would'. Like their Polish counterparts,
Old Romance verb + auxiliarysequences resulting from Incorporation
occur in root and non-root environments.
In the light of the proposed analysis, three types of languagescan be
distinguishedwith respect to non-finiteV?-raisingin the presenceof clitic
auxiliaries.The first type is representedby South and West Slavic, which
offers two options as to the position of the non4lnite V. In languagessuch
as Czech, Bulgarian,Serbo-Croatian,and Slovak, the non-finiteV? either
In rejectingthe alternativeapproaches,we are not denyingthat the conditionalauxiliary
is plurimorphemic.However,we would suggestthat the perfectauxiliaryis plurimorphemic
in just the same way. Perfect and conditionalconstituteseparatelexical entries and carry
agreementmarkersfor person.Wedo not discussthese markers,but it could be that they
correspondto an AgrP that takes the maximalprojectionheaded by the conditionaland
perfectauxiliariesas complement:AgrP[Agr?AuxP[Auxovp[V?]]].
4
CLITIC
AUXILIARIES
AND
INCORPORATION
IN POLISH
391
moves by LHM to C0 or remainsin situ and follows the auxiliary,as we
will show in section 3. The second type of language is exemplifiedby
medievaland 'conservative'Romance. Here, languagessuch as Old Spanish and 19thcenturyEuropeanPortugueseshow either LHM of V0 to C0
(parallelto Slavic) or Incorporationof Vo to Auxo (like Polish), with the
two patterns in almost perfect complementarydistribution(Lema and
Rivero 1991). Polish representsa thirdtype of languagewith either Incorporationof V0 to Auxo, as discussedin this section in detail, or the nonfinite V0 in situ in patterns which do not involve Incorporation.Polish
Incorporationis optional, so constructionswith V0 incorporatedto Auxo
and those with V0 in situ are in free variation in almost all cases. In
addition, Polish differs from Slavic and medieval and conservativeRomance in that it lacks Long Head Movement, i.e., the movement of V0
to C0 acrossAuxo.
3.
AUXILIARIES
IN
SENTENCES
WITH
NO
INCORPORATION
Let us now turn to sentences without Incorporation,as in (lb) repeated
here as (36):
(36)
Ty-s widzial tq ksi#ikq.
You've seen this book.
Polish sentences where the participleand the auxiliaryare not fused are
importantin that they provide motivationfor the hypothesisthat, despite
its relativefree word order, Polish is configurational(in the sense of Hale
1983). We will argue that the apparentflexibilityin the position of the
auxiliariesis the effect of phrasalmovement rules which apply within a
hierarchicalclause structure, in the spirit of recent work on other free
word orderlanguagessuch as Japaneseand German(Saito and Hoji 1983,
Webelhuth 1985). We also demonstratethat the proposed movements,
i.e., Wh-movementand Scrambling,alwaysrespect syntacticconstituency
and do not operate on the basis of phonologicalstructure.We will show
that Polish movements, which are varieties of Move a, obey the same
constraintsas do well-documentedsyntacticprocessesin languageswhere
word order is more restricted.
3.1. The Structureof Past SentenceswithoutIncorporationin Slavic
Let us begin by showinghow Polish auxiliarystructureswithoutIncorporation resemble those of-other Slavic languages. We propose that Polish
392
ROBERT
D.
BORSLEY
AND
MARfA
LUISA
RIVERO
(36) is structurallyparallelto the Bulgarian,Czech, and Slovak examples
in (37):
(37)a. Nie sme
proceli knigata.
we Pres + 1PL read book + the
(Bulgarian)
We read the book.
b.
Tehdyjsem
koupil knihy.
then Pres + 1SG boughtbooks
(Czech)
Then I bought books.
c. Ja som
napisallist.
+
I Pres 1SG writtenletter
(Slovak)
I wrote a letter.
In our view, the auxiliariesin (36) and (37) head their own Xmaxand take
a VP complement headed by the participle, as schematicallyshown in
(38):
(38)
AuxP
Aux
VP
V0
Polish:
Bulgarian:
Czech:
Slovak:
sme
jsem
som
widzial
pro6eli
koupil
napisal
In these languages, the auxiliariestraditionallylabelled 'clitics' cannot
stand in initial position and must be supportedby any precedingconstituent, regardlessof its category.As shown by the deviance of the examples
in (39), the Polishperfect auxiliaryis like the perfect auxiliaryof the other
Slaviclanguagesin this respect:
CLITIC
(39) a. *9
AUXILIARIES
AND
INCORPORATION
widzial tq ksi#ikeq.
2SG seen
IN POLISH
393
(Polish)
this book
b. *Sme
proceli knigata.
Pres + 1PL read book + the
(Bulgarian)
c. *Jsem
koupil knihy.
+
Pres 1SG boughtbooks
(Czech)
d. *Som
napisallist.
Pres + 1SG writtenletter
(Slovak)
In view of the parallelismbetween Polish and other Slaviclanguages,we
proposethat a similarPF-processof cliticizationfuses the auxiliaryenclitic
and the precedingconstituentin all these languages,licensingthe auxiliary. When no constituentprecedes the auxiliary,as in (39), the structure
is ungrammaticalbecause the auxiliaryis not licensed.5
The Polishconditionalin (40a) shows auxiliary+ participleordersimilar
to exampleswith the perfect auxiliary.However, the conditionalauxiliary
is not a PF enclitic. That is, the conditional auxiliarydoes not undergo
the PF-processwhichfuses perfectauxiliaryand the precedingconstituent,
and as a result it may stand in absoluteinitial position, as shown in (40b):
(40)a.
Gdzie bys
chciali'd?
where COND + 2SG liked go
Where would you like to go?
5 The type of cliticizationwe proposecannotbe a word-formation
operationin modelssuch
as LexicalMorphology,whereword-formation
appliesin the lexiconbeforeitemsareinserted
in the syntactictree. This is because the process attachingthe auxiliaryto the pronounin
(36) operatesacross syntacticboundaries.Thus, in our analysispersonalpronounssuch as
ty 'you' are not inflectedfor person and tense in the lexicon and insertedin the syntactic
tree with such markers;rather,clitic auxiliariesbearingpersonand tense attachto personal
pronounsin PF. See Booij and Rubach(1987) for the lexical approachwe reject and Dogil
(1987)and Aguado andDogil (1989)for criticism.Dogil (1987)treatsthe auxiliaryas a clitic
in Agreementwhichis copied on its differenthosts. Our analysisdoes not requireany such
rule. Toman (1981b: 306) reportsthat in colloquialCzech, the 2SG auxiliarymay be optionallyreduced,as in (i):
(i)
Ty jsi
pfisel.-* Tyspfisel.
(Czech)
you Pres + 2SG come
You have come.
Withinour approach,the contractionin (i) is the result of the PF processof encliticization
that Czech shareswith Polish.
394
ROBERT
D.
BORSLEY
AND
MARfA
LUISA
RIVERO
chcial isc.
(40)b. Bys
COND + 2SG liked go
You would like to go.
A second characteristicthat the Polish perfect auxiliaryshareswith the
perfect auxiliariesof the other Slavic languagesis that it does not license
VP-Preposing.Considerthe contrastin grammaticalitybetween (41a) and
(41b), noted by Kipka (1989):
(41)a. Lustro-smy kupili.
Mirror-1PL bought
We bought a mirror.
b. *Kupili lustro- smy.
Boughtmirror-1PL
The ungrammaticalityof (41b) seems unexpectedbecause Polish word
order is flexible, and clitic auxiliariesneed not be in second position in
the clause. This example has a fronted VP similarto the English VP of
Bought a mirror, I have, and shows that the Polish perfect auxiliary
disallows VP-Preposing. The same restrictionis shared by the perfect
auxiliaryin all the Slaviclanguageswe have mentioned(Lema and Rivero
1989, Rivero 1991). From this perspective Bulgarian (42a) and SerboCroatian(42b) are parallelto Polish (41b):
(42)a. *Procelknigata sum.
read book + the Pres + 1SG
b. *6itao knijguje.
read book Pres + 3SG
(Bulgarian)
(Serbo-Croatian)
Example (41a) is unproblematicin a 'free word order' language such as
Polish. It has an initialNP-object,andthis constituentprovidesthe support
requiredin PF by the clitic auxiliary.
Polish VP-preposingis, however, licensed by the future auxiliary, as
shown in (43), which should be contrastedwith (41b) (note that the VP
may be headed by a participleor an infinitive):
(43)a. Kupowalilustro bTd.
bought mirrorwill + 3PL
Buy a mirror,they will.
CLITIC
AUXILIARIES
AND
INCORPORATION
IN POLISH
395
(43)b. Czytac
ksi4zkq bd.
read + INF book will + 3PL
Read a book, they will.
(43) has a counterpartin Czech. In Czech, VP-Preposingis impossible
with the perfect auxiliarybut possible with the future auxiliary(Rivero
1991): [Kupovatknihy]budu 'Buy books, I will.' vs. *[Koupilknihy]jsem
'*Boughtbooks, I have.'.
3.2. The Position of the Auxiliary
In the following discussion,we attempt to determinethe position of the
Polish auxiliaryin auxiliary + participle sequences. We argue that in
structureswithout Incorporation,the Polish perfect auxiliaryis a clitic
under I and does not float to another position in syntax, except in one
well-definedcase discussed at the end of this section. We will show that
Polish is not a languagewith Wackernageleffects for clitic auxiliariesand
in this specificsense differs from Czech, Slovak, and Serbo-Croatianbut
resemblesBulgarian.
Identifyingthe position of the auxiliaryin some structuresthat do not
involve Incorporationis straightforward.For example, sentence (36),
(Ty-s widzial tq ksiqzkq. 'You've seen this book.'), is like an English
sentence containinga contractedauxiliary:the auxiliaryis transparently
in I?. The analysisis also quite straightforward
where we have null subject
sentences in which a variety of constituentsprecede the auxiliary:
(44)
Kiedy-s widzialkrolika?
when-2SG seen rabbit
When did you see the rabbit?
(45)
Jego-s widzial.
him- 2SG seen
You saw him.
(46)
Jerzego-s
lubila.
Jerzy- 2SG liked
You liked Jerzy.
396
ROBERT
(47)
D.
BORSLEY
AND
MARfA
LUISA
RIVERO
Daleko- m poszla.
far1SG gone
I went far.
This order is the result of two processeswhich have well-knowncounterparts in many languages:movement to the CP-specifierposition in cases
like (44), i.e., Wh-movement,and movementto a position adjoinedto IP
by Scramblingin the following examples. In both cases, cliticizationof
the auxiliary to the preceding item applies across the empty subject,
parallel to English examples such as Who do you think's been here?
(Schachter1984).
There are other examplesthat are less straightforward,althoughthere
is no reasonto thinkthat they involve movementof the auxiliary.Consider
for example (2c) repeated as (48), which has an the NP-object between
subjectand auxiliary:
(48)
widzial.
Ty jego- s
you him 2SG seen
You saw him.
This shows that Polish clitic auxiliariesneed not be in the Wackernagel
position (secondin the clause). In (48), in syntactictermsthe auxiliaryis in
the thirdpositionaftersubjectand objectconstituentsand, in phonological
terms, after two different accented words. We suggest that the position
of the object NP in (48) is the result of Scrambling.As shown in (49), the
object jego has adjoinedto IP, and the subject ty has adjoinedto IP, or
Spec-of-CP:
(4)
Tyj lIPjegoi [IP tj [Io S] [VPti widzialtif]]
If this is correct, there is no reason to assume that the auxiliaryis in a
position other than I? in (49).
Where the auxiliaryappears to be inside a phrase, a non-movement
analysisis not so obvious. (3b), repeated now as (50), and (51)-(55) are
typicalexamples of this situation:
(50)
Ewy- s
ksi#2kqczytal.
Ewa's- 25G book read
You read Ewa's book.
CLITIC
(51)
AUXILIARIES
AND
INCORPORATION
IN POLISH
397
tych problemowbyl.
gwiadomy-s
2SG theseproblems been
awareYou were awareof these problems.
(52)
Ktorego- s
mqzczyznewidzial?
seen
which- 2SG man
Whichman did you see?.
(53)
kwiaty kupil.
Ladne-s
nice- 2SG flowers bought
You bought nice flowers.
(54)
Bardzo-s
ladnie wygl#dalwczoraj.
very- 2SG nice looked yesterday
You looked very nice yesterday.
(55)
o
Polsce napisal.
Ksizkq- s
book- 2SG about Poland written
You wrote a book about Poland.
In (50) we appear to have a pre-nominalmodifieras specifierseparated
from its head by an auxiliary,while in (51) we seem to have an auxiliary
separatinga head from its complement. If Polish determinerssuch as
kt6rego'which'are heads of DP's in the sense of Abney (1987) and take
an NP complement,then (52) is parallelto (51). If determinersare specifiers of NP, (52) will be analogousto (50). In (53) and (54), the auxiliary
separatesa premodifierfrom the associatedhead, as in (50). In (55), the
auxiliaryseparatesa head from its complement,as in (51).
It may be temptingto think that examples(50)-(55) involve movement
of clitic auxiliaries.However, there are parallelcases in whichthe present
tense verb appearsin the position of the auxiliary.The following correspond to (50)-(55):
(56)
Ewy czytasz
ksi?zkq.
Ewa's read + Pres + 2SG book
You are readingEwa's book.
(57)
tych problem6w.
Swiadomyjestes
aware
be + Pres + 2SG theseproblems
You are awareof these problems.
398
(58)
ROBERT
D.
BORSLEY
AND
MARf A LUISA
RIVERO
Ktorego widzisz
mqzczyznq?
which see + Pres + 2SG man
Whichman are you seeing?
(59)
kwiaty.
Ladne kupujesz
nice buy + Pres + 2SG flowers
You are buyingnice flowers.
(60)
ladnie dzisiaj.
Bardzo wygl#dasz
much look + Pres + 2SG nice today
You are looking very nice today.
(61)
Polsce.
o
Ksi4ikq piszesz
book write+ Pres + 2SG about Poland
You are writinga book about Poland.
There are also parallel cases involvingIncorporationof the participleto
the perfect auxiliary,as in (62)-(67):
(62)
Ewy czytal-es ksi#zkq.
Ewa's read- 2SG book
(63)
gwiadomybyl- es tych problemow.
aware
been- 2SG theseproblems
(64)
Ktorego widzial-es mqzczyzne?
which seen- 2SG man
(65)
Ladne kupil- es kwiaty.
nice bought-2SGflowers
(66)
Barzdo wygl#dal-es ladnie wczoraj.
much looked- 2SG nice yesterday
(67)
Polsce.
Ksi#2kqnapisal-es o
book written-2SGabout Poland
The above parallelismsfollow from our assumptionthat a clitic auxiliary
is either in I alone, resultingin (50)-(55), or forms an X?-complexwith
the participlewhich optionally incorporatesto it, resultingin (62)-(67).
In addition, the verb in simple or one-word tenses such as the present
moves to I, resultingin (56)-(61). Thus it follows that inflected auxiliar-
CLITIC
AUXILIARIES
AND
INCORPORATION
IN POLISH
399
ies, inflectedparticiple+ auxiliarycomplexes, and inflectedordinaryverbs
have the same distribution.
It is clear, then, that rather than being a peculiarityof clitics, the
generalizationuniting (50)-(67) involves the syntacticprocesses allowing
certaintypes of constituentsto precede the lo-position,namely Wh-movement and Scrambling.
3.3. Scrambling
Before we consider how Scramblingaccounts for the propertiesof sentences with auxiliariesand no Incorporation,we need to flesh out its
properties.We proposethat in Polish, Scramblingis adjunctionto an Xmax
such as AuxP or VP and subsumes topicalization,which we regard as
adjunctionto IP. The process resembles Wh-movementin that it licenses
parasiticgaps. Considerhere the following relevantdata:
(68)a. Jan skrytykowalten film [przed obejrzeniem*(go)]
Jan criticized thisfilm beforeseeing
it
Jan criticizedthis film before seeing it.
b.
Ktory film Jan skrytykowal[przed obejrzeniem]
Whichfilm Jan criticized beforeseeing
Which film did Jan criticizebefore seeing?
c.
Ten film Jan skrytykowal[przed obejrzeniem]
Thisfilm Jan criticized beforeseeing
This film Jan criticizedbefore seeing.
d. Jan ten film skrytykowal[przed obejrzeniem]
Jan thisfilm criticized beforeseeing
This film Jan criticizedbefore seeing.
Example (68a) shows that the verbal noun obejrzeniem'seeing' requires
an overt object undernormalcircumstances.(68b-d) show that Wh-movement, Scramblingto IP, and Scramblingto VP respectivelylicense parasitic gaps. It follows therefore that Scramblingis movement to an A-bar
position. .
Another piece of evidence that Polish Scramblingmust be movement
to an A-bar position is that it neither decreases nor increases anaphora
possibilities, unlike movements to A-positions, which do (see the dis-
400
ROBERT D. BORSLEY AND MARIA LUISA RIVERO
cussion in D6prez 1989, Mahajan1990). In this connection consider the
following data:
(69)a. Jan spotkalswojego brata.
Jan met REFL brother
Johnimet hisi own brother.
b.
Swojegobrata Jan spotkal.
REFL brotherJan met
(70)a. *Sw6j brat spotka Jana.
REFL brothermet Jan
*Hisiown brothermet Johni.
b. *Janasw6j brat spotkal.
Jan REFL brothermet
(69b) shows that topicalizing,or in our terms Scrambling,the object NP
to IP does not decrease binding possibilitiesfor anaphors. (70b) shows
that Scramblingdoes not increasebindingpossibilities:the objectprecedes
and c-commandsthe subject, but bindingof the anaphorremainsimpossible. Similarly,the following data show that Scramblingto VP does not
affect bindingpossibilities:
(71)a. Jan kazal swojemubratu spotkacJerzego.
Jan told REFL brothermeet Jerzy
Janitold hisi own brotherto meet Jerzy.
b.
Jan Jerzego kazal swojemubratuspotkac.
Jan, told hisi own brotherto meet Jerzy.
(72)a. Jan kaza Mariiumydsw6j samoch6d.
Jan told Mary wash REFL car
Janitold Maryjto wash hisi/herjcar.
b.
Jan sw6j samoch6dkazal Mariiumyd.
Janitold Maryjto wash hisi/herjcar.
In (71b) and (72b), object NPs have been scrambled, but the binding
possibilitiesfor the possessive anaphorremainunchanged.We feel that it
is safe to conclude then that Scrambling in Polish adjoins a phrase to a
CLITIC
AUXILIARIES
AND
INCORPORATION
IN POLISH
401
Xmaxin the clause and createsa chainwith the characteristicsof Wh-chains
(and see Witkog1993 for additionalparallelismsand discussion).
3.4. Scrambling and the Position of Auxiliaries
We returnnow to the position that auxiliariesoccupyin sentenceswithout
Incorporation.First, as example (50) (repeated below as (73)) shows, a
specifiermay be separatedfrom the associatedhead ((56) and (62) illustrate the same phenomenon).6Not obeying the Left BranchConditionis
a commonSlavicfeature (for discussionof Polish see Borsley (1981, 1984)
and Corver(1992), which appearedafter this paper was written):
(73)
Ewy- s
ksi#kq czytal.
Ewa's- 2SG book
read
You read Ewa's book.
Given the assumptionthat Polish is underlyinglyVO, (73) and similar
6
Exampleswhere the clitic auxiliarystands between the constituentsof a quantificational
Wh-expressionmay belong to the type with determinerseparatedfrom the associatedhead.
Considerthe followingfrom (Dogil 1987):
(i)
?Jako-m
-s
mu pomogL.
how-lSG Indefhim helped
I helped him somehow.
Here the auxiliarystandsbetween the Wh-wordand its indefinitemarker.Accordingto our
consultants,this example is marginal,and the patternis restrictedto certain grammatical
persons.For example, (ii), a pluralcounterpartof (i), is ungrammatical:
(ii)
*Jako-9mymu pomogli.
s
how- 1PL-Indefhim helped
Similarcommentsapply to patternswith the clitic-auxiliarystandingbetween a Wh-phrase
and its genericmarker.Thus, while both (iii. a) and (iii. b) seem fine, only the (a) example
in (iv) is grammatical:
(iii)a.
b.
(iv)a.
b.
Co- kolwiekzrobil-es.
what-ever done- 2SG
Whateveryou (SG) did
Co-g-kolwiekzrobit.
Co- kolwiekzrobili-scie.
what-ever done- 2PL
Whateveryou (PL) did
*Co-scie-kolwiekzrobili.
Given such restrictions,it is perhapsthe case that examples(i) and (iii.b) are the product
of more idiosyncraticprocessesthan the patternsdiscussedin the text.
402
ROBERT
BORSLEY
D.
AND
RIVERO
LUISA
MARIA
cases involve adjunctionof a verbal complementto VP and adjunctionof
the specifierof this complementto IP, as in (74):
IP
b.
IP
(74)a.
10
VP
I0
9 czytal
VP
VP
NPi
NP
N'
NP
N'
NP
Ewy
Ewy
ksi#zkq
ksi#?kq
czytal
TOVP
b. SCRAMBLING
a. BASE
IP
c.
Ewy
IO
VP
VP
NPi
tk
N' czytal
t
ksi#zkq
TOIP
c. SCRAMBLING
We conclude that the second process is adjunctionto IP, rather than to
the CP-Specifierbecause this same word order is found in subordinate
clauses (Witkos 1993), as the followingillustrates:
CLITIC
(75)
AUXILIARIES
AND
INCORPORATION
IN POLISH
403
Wie,
ze Ewy- s
ksi4tkv czytal.
He + knows that Ewa's-2SG book read
He knows that you read Ewa's book.
Examples such as (75), in which in embedded clauses the auxiliaryneed
not immediatelyfollow the complementizer,providefurtherevidence that
Polish clitic auxiliariesare not in the Wackernagelposition. Here we find
a contrast with Czech, Serbo-Croatian,and Slovak. Serbo-Croatianis a
typical Wackernagellanguagein this respect:
(76)a. Jovan tvrdi da je Marijadosla.
John claims thathas Mary come
(Serbo-Croatian)
John claims that Mary came.
b. *Jovantvrdi da Marijaje dosla.
The idea that Scramblingis the two-step process illustrated in (74)
is supported by the fact that Polish allows Scramblingjust to VP. So
correspondingto (50), (53), and (54) we have the following:
(77)
Ty- s
Ewy ksi#k& czytal.
you-2SG Ewa's book read
(78)
Ty- s
ladne kwiaty kupil.
you-2SG nice flowers bought
(79)
Ty- s
bardzoladnie wygl4daIwczoraj.
you-2SG much nice looked yesterday
Analogously, Scramblingto IP alone is also attested. We find this in
sentences in which a present tense verb separates a specifier from the
related head, as in (56), and in those in which a participleand auxiliary
combinationseparatesthe two, as in (62).
Let us now consider examples in which the clitic auxiliaryseparates a
head from its complement, as in (51), Swiadomystych problemow byl
'You were aware of these problems', and parallel cases. Such sentences
are not instancesof Long Head Movement, which, as we have noted, is
not possible in Polish. Ratherthan being an X? that has undergoneLHM
to Co, swiadomyis the head of a phrase that has moved as a Xmax. This
becomes clear in examples where this head and its premodifierprecede
the auxiliary,as shown by (80). Since both the modifierand the auxiliary,
that is bardzoswiadomy,have been fronted, we concludethat the process
404
ROBERT
D.
BORSLEY
AND
MARfA
LUISA
RIVERO
in (80) is phrasalmovementand not X0-movement,whichaffectsthe head
of the phrasein isolation:
(80)
Bardzo gwiadomy-s tych problem6wbyl.
much aware- 2SG theseproblems been
Examplessuch as (51) involve the scramblingof a complementout of
the verbal complementto a pre-verbalposition and the scramblingof the
remainderof the verbal complementto a pre-auxiliaryposition. We have
adjunctionto the AuxP headed by byl followed by adjunctionto IP, as in
(81).7 Notice that byl is the head of the complement of the perfect
auxiliary,explaininghow it is able to undergoIncorporationto the perfect
auxiliary,as illustratedby byl-es in (63):
7 The analysisin (81) is partlybased on treatmentsproposedfor Germanexamplessuch as
(i) (Webelhuth1985, 1992, Koster 1987, den Besten and Webelhuth1990):
(i)
Gelesen hat Hans das Buch nicht.
read
had Hans the book not
John did not read the book.
(German)
For the sentence in (i), which den Besten and Webelhuthconsider a case of 'remnant
topicalization',the hypothesisis that the VP containinggelesenfronts, while das Buch as
complementof V remains behind because it has been scrambledout of the VP. Van
Riemsdijk(1989) proposesthat in (i) a non-maximalverbalprojectionis fronted,whichthe
Barriersframework(Chomsky1986)does not contemplateas a possibility.
8 The derivationin (81) raises interestingproblemswhich are beyond the scope of this
paper, and severalof them are mentionedin the cited referencesfor the parallelDutch and
German Scramblings;however, as far as we can tell, none of these problemswould be
particularto Polish, given our proposals.
R. Huybregtshas pointed out to us that the preposedphrase in cases like (81c) has an
unboundtrace, a situationwhichwill also arisein ordinaryVP-Preposingin manylanguages,
if subjectsare consideredVP-internal,and with preposedPassiveVPs, howeversubjectsare
analyzed(They said he was believedto be mad and believedto be mad he was). For the
parallelDutch and Germanscrambledpatterns,den Besten and Webelhuth(1990) propose
a reconstructiondevice.
D. Adger has pointed out to us that in (81c) the phrasescrambledto AuxP intervenes
between the phrase scrambledto IP and its trace, in apparentviolation of Relativized
Minimality(Rizzi 1989)if the two phrasesare of the A-bartype, as we assume.One solution
wouldbe to considerthat some scramblingshave mixedproperties- withinour terminology,
that they are A and A-bar at the same time (see Webelhuth(1992) and Ddprez (1989) for
differentapproachesto this issue). One way to implementthis idea wouldbe to assumethat
the movement in (81b) is to the Spec-of-AuxPinstead and counts as A-movement for
RelativizedMinimalitybut has A-bar propertiesfor BindingTheory. On the basis of some
WeakCrossOverphenonema,Witkos(1993:Chapter7) also concludesthatotherscrambling
patternsshow mixed properties.
AND INCORPORATION
CLITIC AUXILIARIES
IP
(81)a.
9
10
AuxP
s
AP
byl
405
IP
b.
AuxP
Io
IN POLISH
NPi
AuxP
tychproblem6w
gwiadomytychproblemow
byl
AP
Owiadomyt,
b. SCRAMBLINGTO AUXP
a. BASE
IP
C.
IP
APk
swiadomyti
AuxP
\
NPi
tychproblemow
\
AuxP
~~byl
AP
tk
c. SCRAMBLINGTO IP
The second frontingin (81) is adjunctionto IP, not movement to SpecCP, because the same word order is found in subordinateclauses, as in
(82):
406
ROBERT
(82)
D.
BORSLEY
AND
MARfA
LUISA
RIVERO
Wie,
ze swiadomy-s tych problemowbyl.
He + knows that aware- 2SG theseproblems been
He knows that you were aware of these problems.
As one would expect, examples involvingjust the first of these movement processes, Scramblingto AuxP in (81b), are possible, as in (83)(84), thereby supportingthe idea that the derivationinvolves a two-step
procedure:
(83)
Ty- s
tych problemowbyl gwiadomy.
you-2SG theseproblems been aware
(84)
Polsce napisal ksi4kA.
Ty- ?
o
you-2SG about Poland written book
Thus, examples in which a head and its complement are separated by
verbalforms, includingclitic auxiliaries,can be analyzedin essentiallythe
same way: they involve the scramblingof a phraseto a positionpreceding
the inflected auxiliaryor verb which is in 10.
If sentencesin which a clitic-auxiliaryseparatesa head from its complement arise through movement of the complement, such patternsshould
occur only when it is in fact possible to move the complement. This
seems to be the case, providingadditionalmotivationfor our analysis.For
example, an auxiliarycannot be attached to a transitivepreposition, as
(85) illustrates:
(85)
*Do-s' Poznaniapojechal.
to- 2SG Poznan' gone
You went to Poznan'.
This is an automaticconsequence of the fact that Polish does not allow
prepositionstranding,as (86b) illustrates:
(86)a. 0
czym Jan rozmawia?
about what Jan talks
What is Jan talking about?
b. *CzymJan rozmawiao?
Thus we need no special stipulationto account for the ungrammaticality
of examples like (85). This account also predicts correctlythat it should
CLITIC
AUXILIARIES
AND
INCORPORATION
IN POLISH
407
be possibleto attacha clitic-auxiliaryto a frontedor scrambledintransitive
preposition:
(87)
Dookola-smy przeszukali.
around- 1PL searched
We searchedaround.
Finally,Polish has a restructuringprocesswhichcombinesa preposition
with the first constituent of its complement (see Borsley and Jaworska
1988, 1989). As a result of this and the lack of Left Branch Condition
effects, we have examples like the following, where prepositionand Whword have been fronted together:
(88)
Z ktorym Jan rozmawiamq?czyznq?
with which Jan talks
man
Which man is John talkingto?
As Henk van Riemsdijk has pointed out to us, it should therefore be
possible for a clitic auxiliaryto apparentlybe inside the complementof a
preposition.This is indeed the case, as the followingillustrates:9
9 In the light of examplessuch as (i.b) it has been claimed that the position of clitics in
Serbo-Croatianis not defined syntacticallybut phonologically.In this view, which differs
from our syntactictreatmentof Polish clitic auxiliaries,cliticsappearafterthe firstaccented
wordin the clauseand may breakup a syntacticphrase(see the discussionin Spencer1991:
355ff.):
(i)a.
b.
Taj piesnikmu je dao autogram
Thispoet him has given autogram
This poet has given him an autogram.
Taj mu je piesnikdao autogram.
The sentencesin (i) resemblethe Polish exampleswhere the clitic auxiliaryappearsto be
inside a phrase, which we have proposedinvolve the frontingof xm, ratherthan a clitic
placementprocess sensitive to phonology. For Serbo-Croatian,(:avar and Wilder (1992)
have independentlycome to a conclusionthat resemblesour proposalfor Polish.They point
out thatSerbo-Croatian
is not sensitiveto the Left-Branchcondition,so (i.b) can be analyzed
as involvingthe frontingof taj. In their view, the clitic cluster can interrupta phraseonly
whenthe portionof the phrasewhichprecedescan be extractedindependently.For instance,
PPs can be fronted,but Ps in isolationcannot,so a cliticcannotinterrupta PP in cases such
as (ii), pointed to us by LjiljanaProgovac:
(ii)a.
b.
c.
Petarje krenuo[ppprema njemu].
Peter has moved
towardshim
[pp Premanjemu]je Petar krenuo.
*Premaje njemuPetar krenuo.
408
ROBERT
(89)
D.
BORSLEY
AND
MARIA
LUISA
RIVERO
Z tym-? mqzczyzn4rozmawial.
talked
with this-2SG man
You talked with this man.
We have argued in the foregoing that there is no need to assume that
the clitic-auxiliaryis moved in examplesin which it appearsto be inside
of a phrase. Rather, such sentences can be analyzed as the result of
Wh-movementor Scrambling,with the auxiliaryremainingin I.
3.5. A SpecialPositionfor Auxiliaries
There are, however, certainsentence types which do involve a movement
restricted to auxiliariesof various types, including non-clitics. Consider
first (90a-c), which have the inflected auxiliary after two fronted
Wh-phrasesand before the main verb:
(90)a.
dal?
Co komus
whatto + whom-2SGgiven
What did you give to whom?
b.
poszedl?
Gdzie kto by
+
where who Cond 3SG gone
Who would go where?
In connection with the phonologicalapproachto clitic position, an anonymousreviewer
calls attentionto examplessuch as (iii), which our consultantD. Kudrafinds literarybut
grammatical:
(iii)
U novomje hotelu ziveo.
In new has hotel lived
He has lived in a new hotel.
This sentence, which resemblesPolish (89) in that the clitic auxiliaryfollows a preposition
and an adjective, could be open to the syntactictreatmentwe propose for Polish if the
prepositionrestructureswith an adjectiveas head of X"'a. However, unlike the situation
discussedfor the Polish auxiliary,je in (iii) occupies a position in which ordinaryinflected
verbs cannot appear.The same reviewermentionsthat when an adverbmodifiesthe adjective, the auxiliarymay follow the adjective,as in (iv.a), but not the adverb,as in (iv.b):
(iv)a.
b.
U vrlo novomje hotelu ziveo.
In verynew has hotel lived
He has lived in a very new hotel
*U vrlo je novom hotelu ziveo.
This situationappearscompatiblewith syntacticapproachessuch as the one we advocate,
but is problematicfor phonologicalapproaches.
CLITIC
c.
AUXILIARIES
AND
INCORPORATION
IN POLISH
409
Co komu
bldziesz rozdawal?
whatto+ whom will+2SG given + away
What will you give away to whom?
In cases like (90), it can be maintainedthat the auxiliaryis in Io if we
accept Rudin's analysisfor multiple Wh-movementin Polish. Under this
analysis,the first Wh-phrasefills the CP-specifierposition, and other Whphrasesare adjoinedto IP and precede the I position.
(90a-c) have variants(91a-c), in which the two Wh-elementsare separated by the auxiliary,suggestingthat auxiliariescan also be adjoinedto
IP:
komu
dal?
(91)a. Co- s
what-2SGto + whom given
b.
Gdzie by
kto poszedl?
where Cond + 3SG who gone?
c.
Co bedziesz komu
rozdawal?
whatwill+2SG to+whom given+away
(Toman1981a)
Motivationfor this auxiliaryadjunctioncomes from the fact that when we
have three Wh-elements,the auxiliarycan intervenebetween the firstand
the second, or the second and the third, as in (92):
(92)a
Co by
komu
kiedy Jan dal?
what Cond+3SG to+whom when Jan given
What would Jan give to whom when?
b.
Co komu
by
kiedy Jan dal?
whatto+whom Cond+3SG when Jan given
The sentences in (91) and (92) lead to two independentconclusions, the
first of which has been already established on other grounds. First, the
orderingof Polish auxiliariesabove is not a second position phenonemon,
so the auxiliaries are not in a special Wackernagelslot. Second, the
auxiliary raising in (92) cannot be movement to C, since the second
Wh-phrasein (92b) is adjoinedto IP. Thus Polish contrastsnot only with
Wackernagellanguages but with GermanicV2 languages, in which the
auxiliaryfills Co in cases like Whathave you given to Mary?
The combinationof participleand auxiliarywhichresultsfrom Incorpor-
410
ROBERT
D.
BORSLEY
AND
MARfA
LUISA
RIVERO
ation cannot separatea pair of Wh-elements.Thus, in contrastwith (90a)
and (91a), the followingis impossible,except as an echo-question:
(93)
*Co dal- es komu?
whatgiven-2SGto+ whom
Hence, it mustbe concludedthat there is a processapplyingto the various
finite auxiliariesin Io to optionally adjoin them to IP but that finite Vs
containingV cannot be raised further
and finite Incorporation-complexes
than I. This process could be adjunctionof an X? to IP, which has been
postulated by Kayne (1991) for Romance infinitives, and is compatible
As far as we can see, however,
with the tenets of the Barriersframework.10
this does not challenge our central conclusion, namely that the cliticauxiliaryis in I0 in examples (48) through(55).
3.6. Summary
We have arguedthat auxiliarystructureswithout Incorporationin Polish
share the general characteristicsof the auxiliary+ participlestructuresof
West and SouthSlavic.We have also arguedthat Polishis a configurational
language,ratherthan one with flat structures.From this point of view, its
freedom in word order is due to the effect of syntacticrules such as Whmovementand Scrambling,whichare sensitiveto structuraland hierarchical relationsin the phrase-marker,ratherthanPF arrangementsof phonologically defined groupings. We have also argued that Polish auxiliaries
are generally in I, the exception being where they move to a higher
positionin the clause. This positionis neitherthe Wackernagelslot associated with Czech, Slovak, or Serbo-Croatian,nor the C0 associated with
10
The contrastin movementpropertiesbetweenPolishauxiliariesand verbspartiallyparallels English. Pollock (1989) arguesthat Englishauxiliariessuch as have can raise to T/Agr
while verbscannotbecause a Theta-criterionviolationensues in the second case, as a result
of the propertiesof EnglishAgr. When V raisesto Agr, it formsa chainwhichpreventsthe
transmissionof the Theta roles this item assignsto its arguments;since auxiliariesdo not
assign Theta-roles,their movementis unproblematic.In contrast,in French, transmission
of Theta-rolesis possibleafterV-raising,so both verbsand auxiliariescan raise. If we accept
this analysis,it could be suggestedthat Polish shares some propertiesof both Frenchand
English.On the one hand, Polish seems parallelto Frenchin that auxiliariesand verbscan
appearunderthe node we have labelledP; thus, raisingV to I is not detrimentalto Thetarole assignmentin Polish. On the other hand, Polish resemblesEnglishin that movement
to a positionhigherthan 1 is possibleonly for auxiliariesbut not for verbs. Thus, it can be
suggestedthat in Polishthis secondraisingprocesscreatesa movementchainwhichprevents
the transmissionof Theta-rolesto the argumentsof V andthatit is viableonly withauxiliaries
since those have no Theta-rolesto assign.
CLITIC AUXILIARIES
AND INCORPORATION
IN POLISH
411
GermanicV2 phenomena;in this respect, Polish contrastswith these two
types of languages. This process of raising from I applies to clitic and
non-clitic auxiliaries alike, but does not apply to participle+ auxiliary
combinations.
4.
NEGATION
In this section we examinethe distributionof negativeparticlesin auxiliary
structureswith and withoutIncorporation.The determinationof the position of negation in Polish is importantfrom two points of view. The first
is contrastive.It has been suggestedby Rivero (1991) that there are two
types of Slavic languages with respect to the position of Neg: (a) those
such as Bulgarianand Serbo-Croatianwhere Neg takes T(ense)P(hrase)
as complement; (b) those such as Czech and Slovak where Neg is the
complementof T. We arguebelow that Polish belongs to the second type.
Second, Incorporationis unique to Polish within Slavic and, as we will
see, is at the root of what makes the distributionof negation in this
languagedifferentfrom that of other Slavic languages.
We can begin by illustratingthat the negativeparticlenie cannotprecede
the perfect or conditionalauxiliary.As shownin (94), nie can precede the
participle+ auxiliarysequence but not the auxiliaryalone:
(94)a. Nie widzial-em Marii.
not seen- 1SG Mary
I did not see Mary.
b. *Nie-m widzial Marii.
c.
Nie widzialbymMarii.
I would not see Mary.
d. *Nie bym widzial Marii.
Thus, Incorporationof the participleto the auxiliarymay appearobligatory in this context, while in other environmentsbasic and incorporated
variantsalternate. We will show that the contrastsin (94) do not reflect
restrictionsimposed on the rule of Incorporationbut can be attributedto
the structuralposition of NegP in the clause, which groups Polish with
Czech and Slovak.
412
ROBERT
D.
BORSLEY
AND
MARfA
LUISA
RIVERO
4.1. The Position of Negation
As we have noted above, there are two types of Slavic languages as far
as the position of Neg is concerned. The first group includes languages
such as Bulgarianand Serbo-Croatian,in which negation must precede
the perfect auxiliary:
(95)
(Az) ne sufmprocel knigata.
(1) not have read book+the
(Bulgarian)
I have not read the book.
For this first group Rivero argues that Neg heads a NegP complementof
CP and takes the highest functionalprojectionwithin IP as complement.
That is, Neg c-commandsTense and Agreement(s), whether these categories head differentprojectionsor are conflatedunder Io as in our discussion, and the perfect auxiliary.
The second group includes Czech and Slovak, with negation following
the perfect auxiliary:
(96)a. Tehdyjsem nekoupil
knihy.
then have not + bought books
(Czech)
I did not buy books then.
b. Ja som nenapisal list.
I have not+ writtenletter
(Slovak)
I did not write a letter.
For this type, Rivero arguesthat Neg heads a NegP and is c-commanded
by the perfect auxiliaryinsteadof c-commandingit. More precisely,AuxP
takes NegP as complement.
Adopting this analysis, let us consider negation in Polish, beginning
with the perfect auxiliary.Examplessuch as (97) where Incorporationhas
not applied indicate that Polish belongs to the second type of Slavic
language:
(97)
My-smy nie czytali tej ksi#zki.
we- 1PL not read this book
We did not read this book.
In Polish, then, Neg is c-commandedby 10 and therefore (97) has the
structurein (98):
CLITIC
AND
AUXILIARIES
INCORPORATION
IN POLISH
413
IP
(98)
NP
My
I'
NegP
10
smy Neg0
VP
nie czytalitej ksi#?ki
As for the conditionalauxiliary,(99a) showsthat it is parallelto the Czech
conditionalin (99b) and must be located in the same structuralposition
as smy in (98), with Nego lower than I in the basic representation:
(99)a. My bysmy
nie czytali te ksi#2k9.
we Cond + 1PL not read
this book
We would not read this book.
b.
Pan by
nekoupil.
(Czech)
man Cond + 3SG not + bought
A man would not buy.
In brief, in Polish the AuxP headed by the perfect or the conditional
auxiliarytakes NegP as complement, as in Czech and Slovak.
4.2. Negation and Incorporation
We can now returnto (94a), Nie widzial-emMarii 'I did not see Mary',
and negative sentences in which Incorporationhas applied. Given that
Neg in Polish heads the complement of AuxP (Aux - Neg - V), the
order in (94b), *Nie-mwidzial Marii, could arise only if nie fronted to a
position preceding the auxiliary-m if Incorporationhas not applied. If
such a processis somehowdisallowed,(94b) will be excluded, as required.
As for (94a), it will be derived if Neg raises with the participle when
Incorporationapplies. Clearly,then, we mustconsiderwhy it is impossible
for Neg to front in isolation in cases like (94b) and how it is possible for
Neg to raise together with the participlein cases like (94a). Similarcomments apply to the conditionalsentences in (94c) and (94d): nie cannot
414
ROBERT
D.
BORSLEY
AND
MARfA
LUISA
RIVERO
precede bym unless Incorporationof the participle to the auxiliaryhas
applied.
We suggestthat these featuresof Polish are a consequenceof a process
adjoiningNeg to the following V, similarto that discussedin Section 3,
combininga prepositionwith the firstitem of its complement.Given this
process, Neg and V will become a complexunit. As a result, they will raise
togetherif Incorporationapplies;Neg cannotraise alone. Why shouldNeg
and P behave in the same way? We suggest that both are functional
categories forming an extended projectionwith their complements(van
Riemsdijk1990, Grimshaw1990). It seems, then, that certainPolish functional categories undergo a restructuringprocess, which combines them
with the first item of their complement. Since lexical categories will not
undergo this process, the scramblingdiscussedin the last section will not
be affected.
An alternativeapproachmight be to combine the participlewith Neg
through Incorporation,raising the participleto nie. As Riny Huybregts
has pointed out to us, on this approach, (94a) and (94c) would involve
Incorporationof a complexNeg into the auxiliary,necessitatingthe raising
of Neg but only if it forms a complex with the participle,excluding(94b)
and (94d). This last stipulationseems undesirable.In brief, we propose
that the negation and the participle incorporate as a complex to the
auxiliary,which gives the Neg + participle+ auxiliaryorder of (94a) and
(94c).
4.3. The Effect of Negationin LHM
Let us now turn to a majorcontrastbetween Polish on the one hand and
Czech and Slovak on the other, which results from the effect of Long
Head Movementin the latter two languages.
Recall that we assume that the Czech or Slovak participlewhich precedes the auxiliaryin sequenceslike Nap'sal som 'I wrote' has undergone
Long Head Movementto C0 ratherthan Incorporationto the finite auxiliary in I?, as is the case in Polish. As a result of this difference, a Slovak
negatedsequencesuchas Nenapi'salsom'I did not write'is linearlyidentical
to Polish Nie widzial-em'I did not see', but the
morpheme-per-morpheme
similaritybreaks down at the structurallevel: the SlovakNeg + participle
complexnenap'saloccupiesCo, while the completePolishsequenceincluding the auxiliaryis a unique X? in 10. As a consequenceof their different
syntacticstructures,SlovakNeg + participle+ auxiliarysequences are restricted to root clauses, while analogous Polish sequences appear in all
types of clauses including subordinatestructures, since they fill I and
CLITIC
AUXILIARIES
AND
INCORPORATION
415
IN POLISH
leave Co unaffected. This explains both the similarityand the contrast
between the sentences in (100) and (101). In Slovak (lOOa)and Polish
(lOla), the negatedmainparticipleis below Io, so they are both grammatical. Slovak (lOOb)is ungrammaticalbecause if the negated participle
raises, it cannot incorporateto the auxiliaryand has no landingsite since
C0 is filled. Polish (lOlb) is grammaticalbecause the negated participle
incorporatesto the auxiliaryin Io ratherthan movingto CO:
(100)a. Spytalsa
Zisom
list.
nenapisal
(Slovak)
asked Refl if Pres + 1SG not + written letter
He asked if I did not write the letter.
b. *Spytalsa ci nenapisalsom list.
(101)a. Janekpowiedzial, ze- s
Janek said
nie pojechal do Warszawy.
that-2SG not gone
to Warsaw
b. Janekpowiedzial, ze nie pojechal- es
Janek said
that not gone-
do Warszawy.
2SG to Warsaw
4.4. Negation and the two types of Slavic auxiliaries
There is a furthersimilaritybetween Czech/Slovakand Polishwith respect
to the position of Neg in a differenttype of auxiliarystructure.In all three
languages,the futureauxiliaryfollows the negativeparticle,in contrastto
the conditional and perfect auxiliariesin sentences like (96), (97), and
(99):
(102)a. Nie bqdq
czytal ksi#ki.
not will + 1SG read book
I will not read the book.
b. Nebudu
kupovatknihy.
not + will + 1SG but
(Czech)
books
I will not buy books.
Such differencesare presumablydue to the lexical propertiesof the two
types of auxiliariesand the differentstructuralpositionsin which they are
generated. The Czech and Polish future auxiliaryselects VPs headed by
imperfective Vs and thus imposes selectional constraintson its complement. This contrastswith the conditionaland perfect auxiliary,which can
take any type of VP as complement. The selectional properties of the
416
ROBERT
D.
BORSLEY
AND
MARIA
LUISA
RIVERO
future auxiliarysuggest that it has a more complex lexical structurethan
the other auxiliaries.Perhapsthe futurecounts as a lexical auxiliarygenerated in the V-slot, a position c-commandedby both I? and Nego. If so,
(102a) has the structurein (103), which should be contrasted with that
proposedfor past sentences in (98):
IP
(103)
NeP
10
Neg0
nie
VP
V0
bqde
VP
czytal tq ksiaz'kq
Neg combines with the future auxiliaryand the resultingcomplex raises
to I0, just like ordinaryV's with argumentstructure,giving the order in
(102).
As noted above, the perfect and conditionalauxiliarieslack selectional
properties,so they are functionalratherthan lexical categories. The syntactic consequenceof this is that they are generated in a higher position
than the future auxiliary, c-commandingNeg. We have not discussed
recent proposals where I? is split into several functionalheads (Pollock
1989), so we simplysuggestthat the perfect and the conditionalauxiliaries
occupy a functionalposition in the clause, and we label this position Io,
as shown in (98). In other Slaviclanguagessuch as Serbo-Croatian,where
the future auxiliarylacks selectionalpropertiesand is used with all types
of verbs, this auxiliarybehaves syntacticallylike the perfect and the conditional auxiliariesin every respect and in our terms is a functionalcategory."
" For distinctionsbetweenfunctionaland lexicalauxiliariesin Slavicand Old Romancesee
(Lema and Rivero 1989, 1991, 1992). Another contrast,pointed out in section 3, is that
lexical auxiliariessuch as the future license VP-Preposingwhile functionalauxiliariessuch
as the conditionaldo not.
CLITIC
AUXILIARIES
AND
INCORPORATION
IN POLISH
417
4.5. Summary
In Polish, Neg heads a NegP complement of the functionalcategory Io
containingthe perfect and conditionalauxiliariesand takes a VP headed
by lexical categoriessuch as the futureauxiliaryor the verb as its complement. Neg is a bound morpheme which obligatorilycombines with the
head of its complement, i.e., with the future auxiliaryor the main verb.
In this sense, Polish is similar to Czech and Slovak, in which Neg is a
bound morpheme in a position below Io in the syntacticphrase-marker.
However, Polish differsfrom these languagesin that it has Incorporation
of participlesto the perfect and conditionalauxiliaries.As a consequence
of the basic position of Neg and the effect of Incorporation,two syntactic
patternsalternatein negativesentencesin Polish. Neg + participle+ auxiliary sequences result from Incorporation,of the Neg + participle-complex
to Aux, and auxiliary+ Neg + participlesequencesresult when Incorporation does not apply. Neg + auxiliary+ participle sequences are impossible.
5.
INCORPORATION
IS
SYNTACTIC
This section motivates the claim that Incorporationin Polish is syntactic
ratherthanlexical, on the basisof the fact that it is 'bled'by the application
of syntacticmovements.The behaviorof the conditionalauxiliaryin subjunctive complementsand counterfactualconditionalclausesprovidesthe
primaryevidence for our conclusion.
5.1. Conditional Contexts with and without Incorporation
Conditionalsshow both incorporatedand basic forms in three syntactic
environments:root clauses (104), relativeclauses (105), and complements
of Vs of knowledge, traditionallylabelled 'Indicatives'(106):
(104)a. Ja to zrobil-bym.
b. Ja to bym zrobit.
I would do it.
(105)a. Mqzczyzna,ktorego odwiedzil-bys,
man
who
bratem Marii.
brother Mary
visited-
jest
Cond + 2SG is
418
ROBERT
D.
BORSLEY
AND
MARiA
LUISA
RIVERO
b. Mq?czyzna,kt6rego byg,
odwiedziljest
man
who
Cond + 2SG visited is
bratem Marii.
brotherMary
The man you would visit is Mary'sbrother.
(106)a. Wie,
ze lustro bysmy
kupili.
he + knows thatmirrorCond + 1PL bought
b. Wie, ze lustro kupili-bysmy.
He knows that we would buy a mirror.
However, in three other syntacticcontexts, Incorporationof the participle
fails to apply, and the auxiliaryforms an inseparableunit with the complementizer: Subjunctivecomplements of Vs of volition, as in (107), the
protasis of the counterfactualconditional construction,as in (108), and
certainpurposeclauses, which we do not discussfor lack of space:
(107)a. Chcq, zebyg
widzialkrolika.
I + want COMP-COND+ 2SG seen rabbit
I want you to see the rabbit.
b. *Chc9,ze widzial-byskrolika.
mial czas, poszedl-bym
(108)a. Gdy- bym
COMP-COND+ 1SG had time, gone + COND + 1SG
do kina.
to cinema
If I had the time I would go to the cinema.
b. *Gdy mial-bymczas, poszedl-bymdo kina.
(108a) manifestsboth syntacticcontexts. On the one hand, the counterfactual clause shows the necessarily unincorporatedparticiple, while the
apodosis as root clause shows (optional) Incorporationof the participle
to the conditional. In complement clauses such as (107a), the complementizerze can be omitted, but Incorporationremainsimpossible.
CLITIC
AUXILIARIES
AND
INCORPORATION
IN POLISH
419
5.2. Incorporation in syntax
Assuminga model insertingalreadyinflecteditems in a syntactictree, the
above patternsshow that Incorporationof the participleto the auxiliary
cannotbe a morphologicalor exclusivelylexicaloperation.This is because
the environmentswhere Incorporationcannot operate must be defined
syntacticallyratherthan morphologically,and they involve the notion of
clausaltype. For instance, Incorporationcannot apply in the complement
clause selected by a verb of volition.
The detailed investigationof these patternsis beyond the scope of this
paper, but we suggest that the conditionalmoves to the complementizer
in the syntax, in a way which precludesIncorporationof the participleto
the auxiliary.12 For instance, it could be that the conditionalincorporates
to Co, which functions as prefix, or that the auxiliarycliticizes onto C0
obligatorilyin syntax, so as to be adjacent,and that Incorporationof the
participleto the auxiliarydestroys the necessary adjacency. Motivation
for the idea that the complementizerand the auxiliarycombineis provided
by the fact that in (107a) and (108a), they cannot be separated.NPs and
other constituentscannot stand between the two, as illustratedin (109):
(109)a. *Chcq,
ze
ty bys
widzialkrolika.
I + want COMP you COND + 2SG seen
b. Chc9,
ze-
bys
rabbit
ty widzialkrolika.
I + want COMP- COND + 2SG you seen
rabbit
I want you to see the rabbit.
By contrast,in indicativecomplementscontainingconditionalauxiliaries,
a complementizerand an auxiliaryare two separateconstituents,so NPs
and other constituentscan intervene between the two, as demonstrated
by (106a).
In this sense, Polish is parallelto Czech, where the conditionalis cliticized to clause-initiala in subjunctives(Comrie 1991):
(110)
Ucitel mi rekl, a- bych
mluvil hlasite.
(Czech)
teacher me told, that-Cond + 2SG spoken loudly
The teacher told me to speak loudly.
If the approachwe have outlinedis correct,the absenceof Incorporation
in subjunctiveand counterfactualclausesrequiresa common explanation,
12
Dogil (1987) proposes to generate one
by in
COMS
and another one in INFL. The first
is selected by the mainV, the second is independentfrom it.
420
ROBERT
D.
BORSLEY
AND
MARfA
LUISA
RIVERO
so we offer one furthersuggestionto unify these two syntacticstructures
and to answer the question why the conditional auxiliaryraises to the
complementizerin the two cases. First, consider the complements in
(107a), which are clauses selected by a main V. In this case, raisingof
the conditional to C could be triggeredif the selection requirementsof
the verb can be satisfiedby conditionalby and not by the complementizer
ze, because it is inert. Now considercounterfactualclauses which contain
the complementizergdy, as in (108a). If this complementizeris also inert,
clausal operator propertiescould be activatedby raising the conditional
auxiliaryto C. This could providea common accountfor the two syntactic
structureswhere the auxiliaryforms a complex with the complementizer.
To conclude, we have identifiedsyntacticcontextswhichdisallowIncorporationin Polish and concludedthat the process is syntacticratherthan
lexical, given its sensitivityto the type of clause structure.
6.
SUMMARY
In this paper we have discussedtwo syntacticpatternsin Polish past and
conditionalsentences. One type consistsof an inflectedauxiliarypreceding
a VP complement headed by a participle, with general characteristics
found in other Slavic languagesand similarto English exampleslike rve
seen a book. This analysiscontrastswith earlier treatments,which view
the auxiliaryas a unique-to-Polishmovingaffix. Withinour approach,the
auxiliaryhas the usual distributionof items which occupy the I? position,
includingfinite non-auxiliaryverbs. It can be precededby constituentsof
many types because Polish is a configurationallanguage and has several
types of syntacticfrontingprocesses.
The second type of past and conditionalsentence containsthe complement participleforminga complex X? with the inflectedauxiliary,as the
result of syntacticIncorporation.This second pattern is unique to Polish
withinSlavicbecauseother languagesin this familylack Incorporation,but
it has close counterpartsin medievaland conservativeRomancelanguages,
which form futures and conditionalsby a similarsyntacticprocess.
REFERENCES
Abney, Stephen:1987, TheEnglishNoun Phrasein its SententialAspects,unpublishedPh.D.
dissertation,MIT.
Aguado,ManuelandGrzegorzDogil: 1989,'Cliticsin LexicalPhonology:Alleged Counterevidence', LinguistischeBerichte120, 99-116.
Andersen,Hennig: 1987, 'FromAuxiliaryto Desinence',in M. Harrisand P. Ramat(eds.),
HistoricalDevelopmentof Auxiliaries,Moutonde Gruyter,Berlin, pp. 21-51.
CLITIC AUXILIARIES
AND INCORPORATION
IN POLISH
421
Baker, MarkC.: 1988,Incorporation:
A Theoryof Grammatical
FunctionChanging,University of ChicagoPress, Chicago.
Besten, Hansden and GertWebelhuth:1990, 'Stranding',in G. Grewendorfand W. Sternefeld (eds.), Scramblingand Barriers,Benjamins,Amsterdam,pp. 77-92.
Booij, GeertandJerzyRubach:1987,'PostcyclicversusPostlexicalRulesin LexicalPhonology', LinguisticInquiry18, 1-44.
Borsley, Robert D.: 1981, 'Wh-Movementand UnboundedDeletion in Polish Equatives',
Journalof Linguistics17, 271-288.
Borsley, RobertD.: 1984, 'Free Relativesin PolishandEnglish',in J. Fisiak(ed.), Contrastive Linguistics:Prospectsand Problems,Moutonde Gruyter,Berlin, pp. 1-18.
Borsley, Robert D. and Ewa Jaworska:1988, 'A Note on Prepositionsand Case Marking
in Polish', LinguisticInquiry19, 685-691.
Borsley, Robert D. and Ewa Jaworska:1989, 'On PolishPPs', Linguistics27, 245-256.
Damirand ChrisWilder:1992,'LongHead Movement?VerbMovementandCliticizC(iavar,
ation in Croatian',ArbeitspapierNr. 7, Institutftir deutsche Spracheund LiteraturII,
JohannWolfgangGoethe-Universitat,Frankfurtam Main.
Chomsky,Noam: 1986, Barriers,MIT Press, Cambridge.
Chomsky,Noam and HowardLasnik:1977, 'Filtersand Control',LinguisticInquiry8, 425504.
Comrie, Bernard:1991, 'Complementationin SlavonicLanguages:An Overview',in ComplementStructuresin the Languagesof Europe,N. Vincentand K. Borjars(eds.) Eurotyp
WorkingPaper III, 2, EuropeanScience Foundation,pp. 3-16.
Corver, Norbert:1992, 'On DerivingLeft BranchExtractionAsymmetries:A Case Study
in ParametricSyntax',NELS 22, 67-84.
Dogil, Grzegorz:1987, 'LexicalPhonologyand FloatingAffixationin Polish', Phonologica
1984. CambridgeUniversityPress, London, pp. 39-47.
Deprez, Viviane: 1989, On the Typologyof SyntacticPositionsand the Natureof Chains,
unpublishedPh.D. dissertation,MIT.
Grimshaw,Jane: 1990, 'ExtendedProjection',unpublishedms. BrandeisUniversity.
Gussman,Edmund:1980, Studiesin AbstractPhonology,MIT Press, Cambridge.
Hale, Kenneth:1983,'Warlpiriandthe Grammarof Non-configurational
Languages',NLLT
1, 5-48.
Kayne,RichardS.: 1989,'Facetsof PastParticipleAgreement',in P. Beninca(ed.), Dialectal
Variationand the Theoryof Grammar,Foris, Dordrecht,pp. 85-103.
Kayne, RichardS.: 1991, 'RomanceClitics, Verb Movement,and PRO', LinguisticInquiry
22, 647-686.
Kipka, Peter F.: 1989, 'Impersonalsand Inflection in Polish', MIT WorkingPapers in
Linguistics10, 135-150.
Koster, Jan: 1987, Domainsand Dynasties,Foris, Dordrecht.
Lema, Jos6 and MariaLuisaRivero: 1989, 'LongHead Movement:ECP vs. HMC', NELS
20, 333-347.
Lema, Jose and MariaLuisa Rivero: 1991, 'Types of Verbal Movementin Old Spanish:
Modals, Futures,and Perfects',Probus3.3, 237-278.
Lema, Jos6 and MariaLuisa Rivero: 1992, 'InvertedConjugationsand V-secondEffects in
Romance', in C. Laeufer and T. Morgan(eds.), TheoreticalAnalysesin Contemporary
RomanceLinguistics:SelectedPapersfrom theNineteenthSymposiumon RomanceLinguistics (LSRLXIX), 21-23 April 1989, pp. 311-328, Benjamins,Amsterdam.
Mahajan,Anoop: 1990, TheA/A-bar Distinctionin MovementTheory,unpublishedPh.D.
dissertation,MIT.
Pollock, Jean Yves: 1989, 'Verb Movement,UniversalGrammar,and the Structureof IP',
LinguisticInquiry20, 365-424.
Riemsdijk,Henk van: 1983 'Movementand Regeneration',in P. BenincA(ed.) Dialectal
Variationand the Theoryof Grammar,Foris, Dordrecht,pp. 105-136.
422
ROBERT
D.
BORSLEY
AND
MARIA
LUISA
RIVERO
Riemsdijk,Henk van: 1990, 'FunctionalPrepositions',in H. Pinksterand I. Genee, (eds.),
Unityin Diversity.PapersPresentedto Simon C. Dik on his 50th Birthday,Foris, Dordrecht.
Rivero,MarfaLuisa:1991,'LongHead MovementandNegation:Serbo-Croatianvs. Slovak
and Czech', LinguisticReview8, 319-351.
Rivero, Maria Luisa: 1994, 'Clause Structureand V-movementin the Languagesof the
Balkans',NLLT 12, 63-120.
Rizzi, Luigi:1989, RelativizedMinimality,MIT Press, Cambridge.
Rudin, Catherine:1988, 'On MultipleQuestionsand MultipleWh-fronting',NLLT 6, 445501.
Saito, Mamuroand Hajime Hoji: 1983, 'Weak Crossoverand Move Alpha in Japanese',
NLLT 1, 245-259.
Schachter,Paul: 1984, 'AuxiliaryReduction:An Argumentfor GPSG', LinguisticInquiry
15, 514-523.
Spencer,Andrew:1991, MorphologicalTheory:An Introductionto WordStructurein GenerativeGrammar,Basil Blackwell,Oxford.
Sussex,Roland:1980,'On Agreement,Suffixation,and Enclisisin Polish',in C. V. Chavany
(ed.), Morphosyntaxin Slavic, Slavica,Columbus,Ohio.
Toman, Jindrich:1981a, 'Aspects of Multiple Wh-movementin Polish and Czech', in R.
Foris, Dordrecht,pp. 305May and J. Koster (eds.), Levels of SyntacticRepresentation,
310.
Toman, Jindrich:1981b, 'Weak and Strong:Notes on be in Czech', in G. Brettschneider
Beitrage
and C. Lehman(eds.), Wegezur universalienForschung.Sprachwissenschaftliche
zum 60 Geburtstagvon HansjakobSeiler,.GunterNaar Verlag, Tubingem,pp. 293-302.
Webelhuth,Gert: 1985, 'Germanis Configurational',LinguisticReview4, 203-246.
Weblhuth,Gert: 1992, Principlesand Parametersof SyntacticSaturation,OxfordUniversity
Press, New York.
Witkog,Jacek:1993,SomeAspectsof PhrasalMovementin Polish, Ph.D. dissertation,Adam
MickiewiczUniversity,Poznan.
Received 11 March1992
Revised 20 August 1993
Robert D. Borsley,
School of Englishand Linguistics,LinguisticsSection,
UniversityCollege of North Wales,
Bangor, GwyneddLL572DG. U.K.
[email protected]
MariaLuisaRivero,
Departmentof Linguistics,
Universityof Ottawa,
Ottawa, OntarioKlN 6N5. Canada.