Control and extraposition_the case of Super-Equi.pdfVIP

IDAN LANDAU CONTROL AND EXTRAPOSITION: THE CASE OF SUPER-EQUI ABSTRACT. Previous analyses of control in Super-Equi have failed to account for the entire paradigm of relevant cases. A new generalization is stated: Obligatory Control (OC) obtains in extraposition only under psychological predicates. It is argued that extraposition is driven by the requirement that VP-internal clauses be peripheral at PF. This is satisfied by a CAUSER infinitive which is projected below an EXPERIENCER DP, but not by one projected above a THEME/GOAL DP. Thus extraposition is blocked in the former case and licensed in the latter. Crucially, only when the infinitive is extraposed to an adjunct position (or intraposed to a subject position) can it give rise to Non-Obligatory Control (NOC); this is supported by a correlation between NOC and failure of extraction from the infinitive. It is claimed that in OC an Agree relation is established between the matrix functional head that licenses the controller and an anaphoric infinitival Agr, which raises to the embedded C as a ‘free-rider’ on T. Since Agree is sensitive to islands, the distributional distinction between OC and NOC reduces to the CED. Failing syntactic identification, the infinitival Agr is licensed as a logophor, explaining some well-known properties of NOC in Super- Equi. The proposed account unifies a wide range of phenomena unrelated under alternative analyses of control and Super-Equi. INTRODUCTION Among the various problems that syntacticians study, some have longer standing than others. Among those, a few have been around since the very inception of generative grammar; and among those, yet fewer remained un- solved. I think it would not be an overstatement to say that the phenomenon of control belongs to this last category of very old and very recalcitrant problems. Despite the wealth of research into this topic,