La cliticización y la condición del último recurso
In this paper, we present an alternative proposal to the cliticization process assumed in Chomsky (1994), taking into account the Last Resort Condition (Chomsky, 1995). Chosmky (1994) supposes that an item can be both X° and an XP in terms of a bare phrase structure theory: clitics. Under Determinant hypothesis, Chomsky assumes that a clitic raises from its theta position and attaches to an inflectional head. In its theta position, the clitic is an XP, and the attachement to a head requires that it be an X°. In this way, Chomsky supposes that a clitic raises by XP-adjuntion until the final step of X°-adjunction, indicating that the movement of clitic does not violate the Head Movement Constraint (HMC). Accepting the DP hypothesis of clitics, we assume that direct object clitics in Spanish, merged with verb in the base, appear to share XP and X° properties in the line of Chomsky (1994). But, we propose that, instead of raising by XP-adjunction, the clitics attach directly to the complex head V +T as CL min/max in the overt syntax because of their affix property. In this derivation, the clitic can check the formal features (Case feature, D feature, specificiy feature and phi-features) of verb, adjoined to T, in the checking domain of V. (We have affirmed that the adjunct position to an XP is not included in the checking domain of a functional head; cf. Chomsky, 1995). In this way, we think that the cliticization does not violate the Last Resort Condition: a step in a derivation is legitimate only if it is necessary for convergence, that is, for the morphological requirement. With respect to the problem of HMC (clitic raises to T°, crossing V°, the closest c-commanding head), we have proposed, in the line of Chomsky (1995), that a trace is immobile, hence, cannot bar raising: only the head of a chain CH enters into the operation Attract/Move. Under this assumption, the trace of a verb does not prevent the attraction of the DO clitic that it c-comma