Quarterly (winter, spring, summer, fall)
224 pp. per issue
6 3/4 x 9 1/4
2014 Impact factor:

Linguistic Inquiry

Fall 2007, Vol. 38, No. 4, Pages 737-748
(doi: 10.1162/ling.2007.38.4.737)
© 2007 Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Dutch 2nd Singular Prosodic Weakening: Two Rejoinders
Article PDF (139.11 KB)

This article examines the arguments for, and rejects, the proposal by Ackema and Neeleman (2003) that the behavior of the Dutch 2nd person singular pronoun jij in inverted structures should be explained as morphosyntactic allomorphy, conditioned by “initial” prosodic phrasing prior to Spell-Out. First, by neutralizing (under inversion) the distinction between 2sg. and 1sg. present tense verb forms, the proposal makes an incorrect prediction for a well-known class of “strong” verbs. Second, “initial” prosody does not appear to condition the process. Benmamoun and Lorimer's (2006) “overapplication” data for this phenomenon are shown to result from an incorrect interpretation of “d-weakening” verbs.