The object of the paper are the so-called "control" structures, as "volo esse bonus". In the terminology of generative grammar, the null subject of the infinitival clause is called PRO, and its semantic reference in the main clause (“ego”, in the example) is called "controller". Latin presents a challenge to the theory according to which PRO would receive a null Case. On the contray, in “volo [PRO esse bonus]”, PRO agrees with “bonus”, which is Nominative, while in the “iubeo te [PRO esse bonum], PRO agrees with “bonum”, which is Accusative. This Case-sharing pattern is an interesting linguistic property that any general theory of PRO should try to explain. Our hypothesis is that PRO inherits the Case, as other syntactic features, like Gender and Number, from its controller.
A Challenge to Null Case Theory
ONIGA, Renato;
2004-01-01
Abstract
The object of the paper are the so-called "control" structures, as "volo esse bonus". In the terminology of generative grammar, the null subject of the infinitival clause is called PRO, and its semantic reference in the main clause (“ego”, in the example) is called "controller". Latin presents a challenge to the theory according to which PRO would receive a null Case. On the contray, in “volo [PRO esse bonus]”, PRO agrees with “bonus”, which is Nominative, while in the “iubeo te [PRO esse bonum], PRO agrees with “bonum”, which is Accusative. This Case-sharing pattern is an interesting linguistic property that any general theory of PRO should try to explain. Our hypothesis is that PRO inherits the Case, as other syntactic features, like Gender and Number, from its controller.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
cecchetto and oniga.pdf
non disponibili
Tipologia:
Altro materiale allegato
Licenza:
Non pubblico
Dimensione
57.2 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
57.2 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri Richiedi una copia |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.