Ranking the Linear Correspondence Axiom

The overarching question addressed here is how syntactic structures based on constituency (dominance, c-command) are to be mapped onto linear phonetic strings. I argue that both prosodic principles and narrow-syntactic principles play a role in the linearization of syntactic structures. I take Kayne's (1994) Linear Correspondence Axiom as a starting point: (asymmetric) c-command maps onto precedence relations. Two wide-ranging predictions of Kayne's theory are that specifiers precede their heads and that a head can only have one specifier or adjunct. Although abundant evidence supports these predictions, there is nonetheless a well-known class of apparent counterexamples: Romance languages allow both rightward and multiple dislocations. I take the LCA to be a soft constraint, overruled by a constraint of the WRAP family that seeks to combine a verb and its extended projection in one intonational phrase. Apparent rightward movement is the outcome of rightward linearization forced by WRAP . The possibility of multiple dislocations is compatible with the LCA within the assumptions made here.