Notes on Long Adverbial Fronting in English and the Left Periphery

The purpose of this squib is to show that in addition to the generally accepted distinction between fronted adjuncts and fronted arguments, we need to introduce a further distinction between fronted adjuncts resulting from long-distance movement and those resulting from short-distance movement (hereafter, short and long fronted adjuncts). It turns out that, distributionally, long fronted adjuncts are in many respects more like fronted arguments than like short fronted adjuncts. I will first show the need for making this distinction on the basis of English data and then provide some comparative data in support.

1 Adjunct Fronting versus Argument Fronting

In the literature on what is commonly referred to as the "left periphery of the clause," a principled distinction is usually made between fronted adjuncts¹ and topicalized arguments (see, e.g., Cinque 1990, Culicover 1993, Koizumi 1995, Browning 1996, Rizzi 1997). I refer to the works cited for specific implementations of the contrast. With respect to adjunct fronting, I will be particularly interested in the fronting of temporal adjuncts. Other, VP-related adjuncts may to some extent pattern differently (see, e.g., Cinque 1990:93-95) and should probably be subject to future research.

One contrast between fronted arguments and fronted adjuncts is that the former block subject extraction while the latter do not (see, e.g., Baltin 1982, Rizzi 1997).

(1)

1. a. *This is a man who liberty would never grant to us. (Rizzi 1997:307, (71b))

2. b. *I wonder who, this book, would buy around Christmas. (Rizzi 1997:307, (76a))

3. c. John Prescott is the person who in future t will be in charge of major negotiations.

In fact, not only do fronted temporal adjuncts not block subject extraction, in certain cases they actually may make it possible to extract a subject whose extraction would otherwise have been ungrammatical. Specifically, fronted temporal adjuncts give rise to the so-called adverb effect (Culicover 1993, Browning 1996, Rizzi 1997, Sobin 2002); namely, fronted adjuncts enable the that-trace effect to be overcome. Fronted arguments do not have this effect.

(2)

1. a. *This is the man who I think that t will buy your house next year.

2. b. This is the man who I think that, next year, t will buy your house.

3. c. *This is the man who I think that, your house, t will buy next year.

Obviously, the ungrammaticality of (2c) is not surprising, given that fronted arguments block subject extraction anyway as shown by (1). Various accounts have been offered (Culicover 1993, Browning 1996, Rizzi 1997) for the adverb effect (2b).

A related contrast between topics and preposed adjuncts is that topics determine some island effects on nonsubject extraction as well, while locally fronted adjuncts do not.²

(3)

1. a. ??The student to whom, your book, I will give tomorrow.

2. b. The student to whom, tomorrow, I will give your book.

A third property distinguishing adjunct fronting and argument fronting that has perhaps not so often been signaled in the current literature is that while English fronted arguments are typically restricted to root clauses or clauses with root behavior (Emonds 1970, 2000, Rutherford 1970, Hooper and Thompson 1973, Andersson 1975, Green 1976, Haegeman 1984a,b, 2001, 2002a,c, Maki, Kaiser, and Ochi 1999, Heycock 2002), fronted adjuncts do not have this restriction.

1. 4.

   1. a. *If these exams you don't pass, you won't get the degree.

   2. b. If next week you cannot get hold of me, try again later.

2. 5.

   1. a. *While her book Mary was writing this time last year, her children were staying with her mother.

   2. b. While around this time last year Mary was writing her book, her children were staying with her mother.

3. 6.

   1. a. *When her regular column she began to write for the Times, I thought she would be OK.

   2. b. When last month she began to write a regular column for the Times, I thought she would be OK.

Argument fronting becomes possible in adverbial clauses with rootlike properties. (7) provides an example from the literature with contrastive while.

(7) His face not many admired, while his character...