Superlatives and definiteness

Abstract

Previous research on superlatives in Romance languages has established three major types: (i) in Italian and Ibero-Romance, the definite article does not form part of the superlative, except for modal superlatives; (ii) in French, a definite article form functions as a superlative marker in some positions (DP-external, quantity and postnominal superlatives) but not in prenominal superlatives; (iii) in Romanian, the marker cel, historically identical to the strong definite article form, has been generalized as a superlative marker. I investigate the distributional and semantic correlates of this threefold distinction. I argue that in Romanian prenominal superlatives may sit in SpecDP, which explains the availability of relative readings, whereas in types (i) and (ii) they sit in a dedicated SpecSupP position, which is a scope position. Moreover, the existence of an overt marker allows Romanian prenominal superlatives to combine with determiners other than the definite D. The restrictions on the distribution of DP-external and quantity superlatives in type (i) are analyzed using a specific version of Heim’s (1999) raising analysis. Finally, I discuss the consequences of the data of Romance for the general debate concerning relative superlatives.

Keywords

• superlatives
• relative vs absolute
• definiteness
• Romance