168 Gréte Dalmi
(8) Pekkai väittää [että häni/proi puhu englantia hyvin].
Pekka claims that he/ he speak.pres 3 sg English well
‘Pekkai claims that hei speaks English well.’
(Finnish, Roberts & Holmberg 2010: 11)Type 3 Consistent NSLs allow 3sg referential subjects in finite clauses to be null with-
out any further requirement:
(9) ____ Ha telefonato.
(s/he) perf 3 sg telephone.ptcp
‘S/he has telephoned.’ (Italian, Rizzi 1982)Holmberg (2005, 2010 ) establishes the following correlation between 3sg generic
inclusive^2 vs. 3sg referential null subjects in Type 2 Partial NSLs and Type 3 Consis-
tent NSLs:
Holmberg’s correlation
(10) Type 2 Partial NSLs
3 sg generic subjects must always be null, (6);
3 sg referential subjects must not be null in main clauses, (7);
(11) Type 3 Consistent NSLs
3 sg referential subjects can be freely dropped, (12);
3 sg generic subjects must not be null, (13).
(12) pro Ha telefonato.
(s/he) perf telephone.ptcp
‘S/he has telephoned.’
(Italian, Rizzi 1982)
(13) Se si /*proGN è morti, non ci si/*proGN muove piu.
if one cop dead not rfl one move any more
‘If one is dead, one does not move any more.’
(Italian, D’Alessandro & Alexiadou 2003: 35)
Finally, Type 4 Radical NSLs allow any argument of the verb to be null in active finite
clauses:(14) ___ kanjian ta le.
(he) see he asp
‘He sees him’- Generic inclusive DPs include the speech act participants, while generic exclusive DPs
exclude them (see Moltmann 2006, 2012 for the interpretive differences between the two).