Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Acknowledgments
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Some historical background
- 3 Basic properties of the movement theory of control
- 4 Empirical advantages
- 5 Empirical challenges and solutions
- 6 On non-obligatory control
- 7 Some notes on semantic approaches to control
- 8 The movement theory of control and the minimalist program
- References
- Index
3 - Basic properties of the movement theory of control
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 September 2010
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Acknowledgments
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Some historical background
- 3 Basic properties of the movement theory of control
- 4 Empirical advantages
- 5 Empirical challenges and solutions
- 6 On non-obligatory control
- 7 Some notes on semantic approaches to control
- 8 The movement theory of control and the minimalist program
- References
- Index
Summary
Introduction
If we could start afresh, without our historical baggage and the preconceptions that often come with it, we would likely be struck by the similarities between sentences like (1a) and (1b) below. Both sentences involve a matrix predicate that embeds a non-finite sentential complement and, more interestingly, the unrealized subject of the embedded clause is interpreted as being “the same” as the subject of the matrix clause. That is, ‘John’ is the kisser in both (1a) and (1b).
(1) a. John seemed to kiss Mary
b. John tried to kiss Mary
In face of these structural and interpretive similarities, our fresh minds – unbiased but armed with Occam's razor – would undoubtedly attempt to capture them in a uniform way, with the same mechanisms, unless presented with strong independent reasons for not doing so. The seduction of this simple reasoning encapsulates the MTC. The MTC takes it that the null hypothesis for the derivation of raising and control constructions such as (1a) and (1b) should resort to the same grammatical devices. Thus, if (1a) is to be analyzed in terms of A-movement, (1b) should prima facie be analyzed as involving A-movement as well. Of course, null hypotheses can be, and frequently are, incorrect. But the incorrectness has to be demonstrated and this – in our view – has not been the case with the MTC, despite claims to the contrary, as we shall discuss.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Control as Movement , pp. 36 - 58Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2010