Simple nouns as pre-verbal subjects

Abstract

Research on Bare Noun Phrases (BNs) is focused on English and have Carlson (1977) as its origin: the readings (generic or existential) of these nouns depend on the type of predicate they occur with (Kind-, Individual- or Stage-level). Most authors use the Determiner Phrase, including number information, as the key to the readings BNs may get. The D position contains non-checked features which, in European Portuguese (EP), are not checked by Noun-raising to D. According to Oliveira & Cunha (2003), Kind nouns in EP crucially depend on the presence of a definite determiner. Thus, BNs are not Kind Nouns and can never be assigned generic readings. Pre-verbal Subject BNs, though, may occur in EP with Kind- and Individual-level predicates and characterizing sentences – as categorical judgements – getting a non-existential reading by being marked topics. But they also occur, getting an existential reading, in sentences where they are discourse sub-topics in descriptive contexts, like ‘scripts’, in Fillmore’s (1985) sense. The survival of BNs in the pre-verbal position depends on the combination with both Aktionsart values and types of predicates with which they occur. The [+habitual] feature determines the possibility of movement of the subject BN to a pre-verbal (Spec, TP or, as I suggest, TopP) position. This position is non-argumental and thus escapes the government or asymmetric c-command by a verb or a preposition constraint, allowing for a non-existential reading of the noun. The non-checked features in the empty D position are legitimated by a feature in TopP, namely the ‘aboutness’ feature (Reinhart 1981). They are a part of ‘common ground management’ (Bianchi & Frascarelli 2010). They are ‘aboutness topics’ or ‘contrast topics’ (Büring 1999), and they occur in root-sentences or epistemic subordinates. The availability of a non-existential reading of pre-verbal Subject BNs of activity predicates also depends on a parallelism effect: BNs as Objects facilitate a non-existential reading of a Subject BN when occurring with a [+habitual] feature predicate. The topicalization construction, as described by Duarte (1987, 1996), corresponds to the syntactic behavior of BNs in pre-verbal position getting a non-existential reading. In descriptive contexts, BNs occur as sub-topics of a ‘script’ (Fillmore 1985), i.e., they are information resulting from a stereotype situation. According to Abbot et al. (1985), ‘scripts’ are structured in a hierarchy. Lower levels are in a partonomy relation with higher levels. Thus, an explicit or implicit situation allows for the inclusion of low-level explicit information which may not be inferred. They get existential readings and are reconstructed in a post-verbal position. The sentences are thetic judgements. The pre-verbal position makes them prominent and their position in Spec, TP is allowed by an accumulation of events or states or by a logical connection in which there is no lexical connector. The paratactic connection follows from the meaning hierarchic created by the ‘script’. In these cases, when BNs co-occur with the Indicative Present, it does not have a [+gnomic]/ [+habitual] feature.