The paper focuses on the difference between event‐conditionals and premise‐conditionals. An event‐conditional contributes to event structure: it modifies the main clause event; a premise‐conditional structures the discourse: it makes manifest a proposition that is the privileged context for the processing of the associated clause. The two types of conditional clauses will be shown to differ both in terms of their ‘external syntax’ and in terms of their ‘internal syntax’. The peripheral structure of event conditionals will be shown to lack the (...) functional head Force, which encodes illocutionary force. Event conditionals are merged inside the IP of the matrix clause. Premise‐conditionals contain the head Force and they are merged outside the associated CP. (shrink)

The goal of our paper is to provide a description of an apparent V3 pattern which is salient with some speakers of the Ghent dialect and is illustrated in (1), from Vanacker (1980). In such examples, what would be an initial adverbial constituent in the root clause vroeger (‘formerly’) is separated from the finite verb by what Vanacker (1980) labels a ‘pleonastic’ element, die, in effect leading to a superficial V3 order. At first sight, this element die is optional and (...) it has no impact on the truth conditions of the proposition that it introduces. (2) is also acceptable in the dialect. (1) Vroeger, die bakten wij vier soorten brood formerly die baked we four sorts bread ‘We used to bake four kinds of bread.’ (Gijzenzele 0.28) (Vanacker 1980: 76) (2) Vroeger bakten wij vier soorten brood. formerly baked we four sorts bread ‘We used to bake four kinds of bread.’ In the first part of the paper, we will provide a description of the distribution of die. We will also compare its distribution with that of the more widely distribution resumptive adverbs dan (‘then’) and daar (‘there), which are typical of the Germanic V2 languages (Salvesen 2016). Our account will be based both on authentic data drawn from corpora and from anecdotal observations as well as on the results of elicitations with 10 native speakers of the dialect. In the second part of the paper we provide an analysis in terms of Wolfe’s (2016) typology of the syntax of V2. Adopting the articulated structure of CP as elaborated in the cartographic framework, we will propose that die is an overt spell out of the head Force and as such a root complementiser. (shrink)