2026-05-17T18:45:10Zhttps://www.bilketa.eus/in/rest/oai

oai:www.bilketa.eus:ark:/27020/ASJU-4352ALL2025-10-25T06:23:30Z

https://www.bilketa.eus/ark:/27020/ASJU-4352Raviv, SofieASJU, 43522005-04-10In Danish there is a surprising asymmetry between pronouns and full DPs: pronouns can always be fronted, whereas full DPs are subjugated to more restrictions. This puzzle has not been addressed in the literature, and I argue that the split-CP analysis as presented by Rizzi (1997) cannot distinguish between pronouns and full DPs when they are marked with a topic feature. The analysis I propose is based on the claim that in Danish the purpose of fronting a constituent is to mark it as the main topic, rather than the need or necessity to check a certain feature. It is furthermore based on the observation that the presence of an overt case marked pronoun, an adverb or a modal/auxiliary enables topicalization. In order to account for the data I propose a (PF) processing constraint on dislocation, which ensures that the derivation has an unambiguous interpretation.In Danish there is a surprising asymmetry between pronouns and full DPs: pronouns can always be fronted, whereas full DPs are subjugated to more restrictions. This puzzle has not been addressed in the literature, and I argue that the split-CP analysis as presented by Rizzi (1997) cannot distinguish between pronouns and full DPs when they are marked with a topic feature. The analysis I propose is based on the claim that in Danish the purpose of fronting a constituent is to mark it as the main topic, rather than the need or necessity to check a certain feature. It is furthermore based on the observation that the presence of an overt case marked pronoun, an adverb or a modal/auxiliary enables topicalization. In order to account for the data I propose a (PF) processing constraint on dislocation, which ensures that the derivation has an unambiguous interpretation.In Danish there is a surprising asymmetry between pronouns and full DPs: pronouns can always be fronted, whereas full DPs are subjugated to more restrictions. This puzzle has not been addressed in the literature, and I argue that the split-CP analysis as presented by Rizzi (1997) cannot distinguish between pronouns and full DPs when they are marked with a topic feature. The analysis I propose is based on the claim that in Danish the purpose of fronting a constituent is to mark it as the main topic, rather than the need or necessity to check a certain feature. It is furthermore based on the observation that the presence of an overt case marked pronoun, an adverb or a modal/auxiliary enables topicalization. In order to account for the data I propose a (PF) processing constraint on dislocation, which ensures that the derivation has an unambiguous interpretation.https://ojs.ehu.eus/index.php/ASJU/article/view/4352/9178https://ojs.ehu.eus/index.php/ASJU/article/view/4352vignette : https://www.bilketa.eus/in/rest/Thumb/image?id=ark:/27020/ASJU-4352&mat=articleNumengCopyright (c) 2015 Anuario del Seminario de Filología Vasca "Julio de Urquijo"Identifying and processing topicalization in Danish