On object-shift in Icelandic and partial iconicity

This paper outlines and discusses three kinds of OT-approach to the partially iconic form/meaning map exhibited by Icelandic (indefinite) object-shift. One bidirectional and two OT-syntactic approaches are contrasted. The conclusion is that bidirectionality fares best in providing a “deeper” understanding of why iconic rather than non-iconic patterns should occur. OT-syntax is more successful in empirical coverage, being able to model partial iconicity in areas where purely syntactic constraints overrule interpretive preferences. Finally, I suggest that OT-syntactic approaches should be further distinguished in terms of the kind of input/output constraints they advocate. This concerns the degree of universality and independent motivation for classical scoping principles as opposed to “harmonic alignment” of the definiteness and the grammatical function scale.