Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-6grmk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-05T22:21:26.632Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Predication and Pro

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2026

Norbert Hornstein  and
David Lightfoot
Norbert Hornstein
Affiliation:
University of Maryland
David Lightfoot
Affiliation:
University of Maryland
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The comprehensive theory of predication developed by Williams (1980, 1982, 1983) subsumes a wide range of phenomena, but contains some internal problems. An alternative account is presented here which does not postulate a distinct level of Predicate Structure, but assumes that pro may be governed. This entails new analyses of small clauses and control phenomena, and leads to a revision of the conditions under which empty elements may occur.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Language , Volume 63 , Issue 1 , March 1987 , pp. 23 - 52
Copyright
Copyright © 1987 Linguistic Society of America

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

*

We are grateful to Joseph Aoun, Peter Coopmans, Lori Davis, Luigi Rizzi, Tim Stowell, and Amy Weinberg for helpful discussions on an earlier version of this paper, as well as to audiences at MIT, the universities of British Columbia, Washington, and Utrecht.

References

Anderson, Mona. 1984. Prenominai genitive NP's. Linguistic Review 3.1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andrews, Avery. 1982. A note on the constituent structure of adverbials and auxiliaries. LI 13.313–17.Google Scholar
Aoun, Joseph. 1985. A grammar of anaphora. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Aoun, Joseph. 1986. Generalized binding. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Aoun, Joseph, and Lightfoot, David. 1984. Government and contraction. LI 15.465–73.Google Scholar
Aoun, Joseph, and Hornstein, Norbert. 1985. Quantifier types. LI 16.623–37.Google Scholar
Aoun, Joseph, and Sportiche, Dominique. 1981. On the formal theory of government. Linguistic Review 2.211–36.Google Scholar
Baltin, Mark. 1982. A landing site theory of movement rules. LI 13.1–38.Google Scholar
Bouchard, Denis. 1982. On the content of empty categories. MIT dissertation.Google Scholar
Burge, T. 1973. Reference and proper names. Journal of Philosophy 70.425–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burzio, Luigi. 1981. Intransitive verbs and Italian auxiliaries. Harvard dissertation.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1972. Studies in semantics in generative grammar. The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1973. Conditions on transformations. A Festschrift for Morris Halle, ed. by Anderson, Stephen R. & Kiparsky, Paul, 232–86. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1975. Reflections on language. New York: Pantheon.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1980. On binding. LI 11.1–46.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1981. Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1986. Knowledge of language: Its nature, origin, and use. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo. 1980. On extraction from NP in Italian. Journal of Italian Linguistics 5.47–99.Google Scholar
Dresher, B. Elan, and Hornstein, Norbert. 1979. Trace theory and NP movement rules. LI 19.65–82.Google Scholar
Goodall, Grant. 1984. Parallel structure in syntax. San Diego: University of California dissertation.Google Scholar
Higginbotham, James. 1985. On semantics. LI 16.547–94.Google Scholar
Hornstein, Norbert. 1977. S and the X' convention. Linguistic Analysis 3.137–76.Google Scholar
Hyams, Nina. 1983. The acquisition of parameterized grammars. CUNY dissertation.Google Scholar
Kayne, Richard. 1981. On certain differences between French and English. LI 12.349–71.Google Scholar
Koopman, Hilda. 1984. The syntax of verbs: From verb movement rules in the Kru languages to Universal Grammar. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Koster, Jan. 1978. Why subject sentences don't exist. Recent transformational studies in European languages, ed. by Keyser, Samuel Jay (LI monograph 3), 53–64. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Koster, Jan. 1984. On binding and control. LI 15.417–60.Google Scholar
Lasnik, Howard. 1982. On certain substitutes for negative data, ms, University of Connecticut.Google Scholar
Lightfoot, David. 1974. Indeterminacy in syntax. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 19.150–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manzini, Maria-Rita. 1983. On control and control theory. LI 14.421–46.Google Scholar
May, Robert. 1986. Logical form. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Nishigauchi, Taisuke. 1984. Control and the thematic domain. Lg. 60.215–50.Google Scholar
Postal, Paul. M. 1974. On Raising: One rule of English grammar and its theoretical implications. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Quine, Willard V. O. 1960. Word and object. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Reinhart, Tanya. 1981. Definite NP anaphora and c-command domains. LI 12.605–35.Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 1982. Issues in Italian syntax. Dordrecht: Foris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenbaum, Peter S. 1967. The grammar of English predicate complement constructions. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Safir, Kenneth. 1983. On small clauses as constituents, ms, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Saito, Mamoru. 1983. On the definition of c-command and government. Paper read at the 1983 NELS meeting, Amherst.Google Scholar
Sportiche, Dominique. 1983. Structural invariance and symmetry in syntax. MIT dissertation.Google Scholar
Stockwell, Robert, Schachter, Paul; and Partee, Barbara. 1973. The major syntactic structures of English. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Stowell, Tim. 1981. Origins of phrase structure. MIT dissertation.Google Scholar
Stowell, Tim. 1983. Subjects across categories. Linguistic Review 2.285–312.Google Scholar
Suñer, Margarita. 1982. Big pro and little pro. ms, Cornell University.Google Scholar
Thompson, Sandra. 1971. The deep structure of relative clauses. Studies in linguistic semantics, ed. by Fillmore, Charles J. & Langendoen, D. Terence, 79–96. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Weinberg, Amy, Aoun, Joseph, Hornstein, Norbert; and Lightfoot, David. 1987. Two types of locality. To appear in LI.Google Scholar
Williams, Edwin. 1978. The across-the-board mode of rule application. LI 9.31–44.Google Scholar
Williams, Edwin. 1980. Predication. LI 11.203–38.Google Scholar
Williams, Edwin. 1982. The NP cycle. LI 13.277–95.Google Scholar
Williams, Edwin. 1983. Against small clauses. LI 14.278–308.Google Scholar