2. Review of Arguments and Findings

The monograph consists of seven chapters, which, excluding the introduction (chapter 1) and the conclusion (chapter 7), focus primarily on the principal empirical points discussed throughout the book: the verb-second (V2) phenomenon (chapter 2), the syntax of subject pronouns (chapter 3), satisfaction of EPP and realization of subjects (chapter 4), the status of null (pro) subjects in Mòcheno (chapter 5), and the effects of asymmetric pro-drop on the left periphery (CP layer) of the clausal structure in Mòcheno syntax (chapter 6). Cognola provides an analysis of these data within a mainstream variant of the Minimalist Program (Chomsky Reference Chomsky1995 and subsequent work). Much to her credit, both theoretical linguists and those working in other areas will find the treatment of these data accessible and relatively easy to follow. Rather than engaging in a detailed chapter-by-chapter summary of the scope and content of the individual chapters in this monograph, in what follows, I offer a general overview of the key findings of Mòcheno syntax with respect to the finite verb.

First, concerning the V2-status of Mòcheno, Cognola ascertains that this dialect should (still) be classified as a V2 language, despite the fact that the V2 phenomenon “manifests itself only through correlated properties” (p. 74), such as the type of unit (XP) that occupies the first position. According to Cognola, Mòcheno exhibits a V2 pattern similar to one observed in Old Romance V2 languages, with an articulated left periphery (CP layer) that allows for multiple topicalized items.

Second, the status of subject pronouns in Mòcheno (see table 3.14, p. 110) can be classified along the lines of a tripartite distinction, namely, as strong, weak, and clitic forms. Two points are in order here: First, the assertion that these forms are novel is disputable (see Kolmer Reference Kolmer2012). Furthermore, the maintenance of this tripartite classification of subject pronouns has a profound effect on Cognola's theoretical treatment of the clausal structure from a Minimalist perspective (see chapter 4 for a detailed exposition of this topic).

Third, Cognola discusses the parameters that license pro-drop in Mòcheno and their effect on the overall clausal structure in chapters 5 and 6. She provides strong arguments that Mòcheno is most appropriately classified as a partial pro-drop language, with the conditions governing the licensing of pro being: “(i) an EPP-feature checked by a fronted XP, (ii) the finite verb is in CP, and/or (iii) the finite verb bears second person singular morphology” (p. 163). In addition to the licensing of this null referential pro-subject, Cognola points out that this pro-subject must be licensed by a subject clitic and its relation to the syntactic position of the finite verb.

In addition to full-fledged pro-subjects, Cognola discusses instances of quasi-argumental pro where “a co-indexed subject can be either a subject clitic or an overt NP/strong pronoun” (p. 163). The theoretical/structural consequences of this analysis are taken up in chapter 6. Cognola shows that this relaxed V2 analysis of Mòcheno also allows for integrating the pro-drop traits of the grammar. Following previous work by Benincà (for example, Benincà Reference Benincà, Zanuttini, Campos, Herburger and Portner2006), Cognola shows that these properties observed in the Mòcheno grammar are similar, if not in many respects identical, to the properties of Old Romance (see also Abraham Reference Abraham and Putnam2011 for similar arguments).

3. Critical Evaluation

The empirical data obtained from the Mòcheno community and analyzed in this monograph will become an important source of reference for scholars working on heritage varieties of German, German in contact, and bilingual variants of German. For example, Putnam & Lipski's (Reference Putnam and Lipski2016) preliminary field research deals with the Volga German dialect spoken in the Misiones province of Northeastern Argentina. Putnam & Lipski examine the dialect in light of Cognola's discussion of null (pro) subjects in Mòcheno and conclude that the two languages exhibit contrastive behavior with respect to this aspect of their respective grammar systems.

In addition to the empirical data, the monograph offers valuable theoretical insight. Linguists of various backgrounds, especially those well versed in the main tenets of the Minimalist Program, will find her analyses and proposals easy to follow. What remains inconclusive is whether or not the arguments put forth in this manuscript against the dual activation hypothesis can be substantiated on a larger scale. It is true that Cognola successfully shows that the structural conditions governing the syntax of finite verbs in Mòcheno can be analyzed as an instance of language-internal shift. However, psycholinguistic research over the past two decades provides overwhelming evidence that bilinguals exercise inhibition and executive control of both grammars in real-time production and comprehension (see, for example, Kroll & Gollan Reference Kroll, Gollan, Goldrick, Ferreira and Miozzo2014 and references therein for an overview of relevant literature). The strict reliance on off-line tasks, such as grammatical acceptability tasks and transformation/production tasks, leads to a hypothesis that cannot be fully supported by the empirical evidence obtained in this study.

In summary, the empirical evidence analyzed within a Minimalist framework should be celebrated as an achievement. However, the claims against simultaneously competing grammars can neither be supported nor refuted due to the issues I outlined above.