CAS LX 522Syntax IWeek 11b.Raising, etc.(8.2.6-8.4)Sentences inside sentences•Last time we began looking at embedded sentences.•Embedded sentences can be finite:1) Shannon claimed [that she could catch a fish].•Or nonfinite:2) Michael wants [PRO to leave].3) Jin wants [Michael to return the watch].4) Sun arranged [for him to return the watch].Embedded clauses•Embedded finite clauses are CPs, with a complementizer (that or Ø).1) Shannon claimed [CP that she could catch a fish].2) Shannon claimed [CP Ø she could catch a fish].•Embedded nonfinite clauses have to as T, and can be CPs or bare TPs— the distinction is determined by case properties of the verb.3) Michael wants [CP ØNULL PRONULL to leave]4) Jin wantsACC [TP MichaelACC to return the watch].5) Sun arranged [CP forACC himACC to return the watch].•Nonfinite T does not assign case, so the subject must get case (have its [case] feature checked) in some other way.Seems•Now, we’ll turn to another kind of embedded nonfinite clause.•Charlie seems [to dislike bees].•This looks a little bit like:•Charlie tried [to sneak away].•Which is really:•Charlie tried [PRO to sneak away].•Charlie is the Agent of try.•PRO (=Charlie) is the Agent of sneak.•So, what about Charlie seems to dislike bees? What !-roles go to Charlie?Charlie seems to receive(just) one !-role•Seems can also embed a finite clause, so consider the pair:1) Charlie seems to dislike bees.2) It seems that Charlie dislikes bees.•The it in the second sentence is the same it we find in It rained. It does not get a !-role, because rain doesn’t have any !-roles. We only have it there because sentences need subjects (EPP: T has a [uD*] feature).•So what !-roles does seem assign?Seem seems to assign(just) one !-role.•What seem (and appear) mean when paired with an embedded sentence is that the proposition expressed by the embedded sentence appears true.•There’s only one participant in a seeming, the Proposition.1) It seems [that seem assigns one !-role].•So, seem assigns a Proposition !-role (structurally, to its sister, the CP daughter of V"), and nothing else (hence, it is needed to check the EPP feature).Back to Charlie1) It seems [that Charlie dislikes bees].2) Charlie seems [to dislike bees].•These two sentences mean basically the same thing.•Dislike assigns two !-roles, we might say Experiencer and Theme.•It’s the same verb dislike in both sentences. So, we presume that the bottom of both trees will look the same…Disliking bees•Starting with It seems that Charlie dislikes bees, we would build a vP that looks like this:•V (dislike) assigns a Theme !-role to the DP bees.•vExperiencer assigns an Experiencer !-role to the DP Charlie.Disliking bees•The [case] feature of Charlie is valued and checked by the [nom] feature of T.•The [uInfl:] feature of v is valued and checked by T: [uInfl:pres3sg].•The [uclause-type:] feature of T is valued and checked by the [clause-type:Decl] feature of C.•And then we add T and C to get that Charlie dislikes bees…Disliking bees•And then we add the main clause (seem, v, T, it, C)Disliking bees•Does Charlie get a !-role from seem?•Well, no. Seem only assigns the one !-role.•So, unlike in Charlie tried [PRO to elude the bees], we have as many DPs as we have !-roles.Disliking bees•So, what !-role does Charlie get?•Still seems to be the Experiencer of dislike.•So, suppose that Charlie starts out in the same place, SpecvP. •But now, after building vP, we add a nonfinite T…Disliking bees•The [uInfl:] feature of v is valued and checked by T: [uInfl:none].•Nonfinite T has no [uclause-type:] feature.•The [case] feature of Charlie is still unchecked, since nonfinite T has no case feature.Disliking bees•Can we add a C to this?•Let’s assume not, by the following reasoning:•The only C that is compatible with a nonfinite T is ØNULL, that assigns null case to PRO. Charlie is not PRO, so it can’t get null case. So, this is just a TP, not a CP.Disliking bees•So, we add seem, taking our TP (Charlie to dislike bees) as its Proposition complement.Disliking •We add T…•Charlie has [case] to check.•Checked ([nom]) by T•T has [nom], [uD*], and [u#:] features to check.•[nom] checked valuing case on Charlie. [u#:3sg] matches [#:3sg] feature on Charlie. [uD*] remains.•seem (v) has [uInfl:] to check•[uInfl:pres3sg], valued by [tense:pres] and [u#:3sg] on T.Disliking beesFinally, we move Charlie up to check the EPP ([uD*]) feature of T: (Subject (-to-subject)) RaisingIdioms•Recall our idea about idioms: For something to have an idiomatic interpretation (an interpretation not literally derivable from its component words), the pieces need to be very close together when initially Merged.1) Ortega took a dive.•Now, we have idiomatic interpretations here:2) It seems that the jig is up.3) It seems that the cat is out of the bag.4) It seems that the cat has your tongue.Idioms•If pieces of the idiom move away after the original Merge, we can still get the idiomatic interpretation:1) [The cat]i seems ti to have your tongue.2) [The cat]i seems ti to be out of the bag.3) [The jig]i seems ti to be up.•The important thing is that they be originally Merged together (the !-role needs to be assigned by the predicate to the noun). Compare:4) [The cat] tried to have your tongue.5) [The cat] arranged to be out of the bag.•(What’s different? Why no idiomatic meaning?)Other raising verbs•So far, we’ve only talked about seem, but there are a couple of other raising verbs as well.•[The cat]i is likely [TP ti to be out of the bag].•[The cat]i appears [TP ti to have his tongue].•[The jig]i proved [TP ti to be up].•[The cat]i began [TP ti to get his tongue].•What these verbs (in this use, anyway) have in common is that they have no external !-role and an internal Proposition !-role.There seems…•We also find seem with there.1) Vincent seems to be lost.2) It seems that Vincent is lost.3) There seems to be a dog in the woods.•It is an expletive subject that checks both the EPP and case features of T. There checks only the EPP feature of T (a dog checks T’s case feature).*There seems a man to bein the garden.1) There seems to be a man in the garden.•There appears in SpecTP, satisfying the EPP feature.•There are two TPs here, and each TP has/had an EPP feature.•[TP There seems [TP to be a man in…]]•So, there must have first Merged
View Full Document
![Nom from finite T no case from nonfinite T (T [inf], M to)](https://media.gradebuddy.com/documents/386389/7a3e15e0-7507-4825-a32d-f3e6fb67d2eb.png)
Unlocking...