Re: THEORY: CP-V2 vs. IP-V2

Matt Pearson wrote:

> (There's also Kashmiri, spoken in northern India and Pakistan,
> and a handful of other V2 languages here and there, but when people
> say "verb second" they're almost always talking about Germanic...)
Old French and Rumantsch, also (no accident).  There is a theory,
the current standing of which I don't know, that non-pro-drop
(silly name, really; most languages are pro-drop) languages are either
V2 or have V2 ancestors....

> To account for the fact that V2 only occurs in main clauses, certain
> linguists have suggested that the V2 position is the same as the
> position occupied by the complementizer "that" (this position is
> called C).
So in this syntax model, the complementizer belongs to the
embedded clause?  That seems to go against the historical evidence,
at least for English,
which is that that "that" is the same "that" that is used
as a demonstrative, and that "I know that.  John read the book
yesterday" was the original form, with the "that" referring to
the whole of the next sentence.  (Yes, there is self-parody here.)

> Languages which have the German/Dutch/Swedish pattern are called "CP-V2=
"
> languages, reflecting the fact that the verb-second position is C, whil=
e
> languages which have the Icelandic/Yiddish pattern are called "IP-V2",
> reflecting the fact that in these languages the verb only moves up to I=
=2E

What about infinitives?  In German we have:

        Es ist schwer, ein J=FCde zu sein.

but in Yiddish (proverbially)

        Es ist shver tsu zayn a Yid.

Looks like the same basic pattern, but does the same theory account
for it?

> Whew!  Does all that make any sense?
Very much so (even if I did have to read it four times :-)).
Thanks, O King.

-- =

John Cowan      http://www.ccil.org/~cowan              cowan@ccil.org
        You tollerday donsk?  N.  You tolkatiff scowegian?  Nn.
        You spigotty anglease?  Nnn.  You phonio saxo?  Nnnn.
                Clear all so!  'Tis a Jute.... (Finnegans Wake 16.5)