摘要：Historical linguistic studies consider that the use of enclitics in Early Modern Romanian is due to the presence of Wackernagel's law. This characterization fits in the tradition of Indo-European and Romance historical linguistics, where the presence of Wackernagel's law is determined on the basis of phonological criteria. This paper argues that, when we approach the same data from the perspective of diachronic syntax, there is no support for this claim. We draw a distinction between encliticisation and the second position requirement for clitics, and show that the tendency for encliticisation in Early Modern Romanian is the result of syntactic operations that front the verb or/and the phrasal constituents for reasons that are unrelated to the phonological properties of clitics. We identify the triggers for such movements in discourse driven syntax
