Duality of control in gerundive complements of P

Abstract

Sentences like They tricked him into believing them and They charged him with abandoning them raise interesting issues for selection and control. We show that these two sentences exemplify two distinct classes, subsuming P-gerund constructions that are formed with seven distinct prepositions: implicative vs. nonimplicative constructions. The first class displays a cluster of restrictions, both syntactic and semantic, which are absent from the second class: It resists partial control or embedded lexical subjects, and it bans object drop and movement of the P-gerund phrase. The existence of these two classes, as well as their empirical profiles, follow from Landau’s (2015) theory of control and challenge alternative approaches.

On the resilience of obligatory control in inflected infinitives under object control verbs

“…As for non-implicative verbs, more research would be needed to determine to what extent this type of coercion mechanism is possible. Landau (2021), investigating gerund complements of prepositions, also more clearly insists on the relevance of the implicative/non-implicative contrast: namely, implicative gerund complements of P resist lexical subjects or partial control, whereas non-implicative do not. In that case, Landau (2021) considers that the implicative entailment, the ban on partial control and on lexical subjects result from the fact that in these implicative gerund complements control corresponds to direct predication.…”

“…Landau (2021), investigating gerund complements of prepositions, also more clearly insists on the relevance of the implicative/non-implicative contrast: namely, implicative gerund complements of P resist lexical subjects or partial control, whereas non-implicative do not. In that case, Landau (2021) considers that the implicative entailment, the ban on partial control and on lexical subjects result from the fact that in these implicative gerund complements control corresponds to direct predication. In the present paper, I am suggesting that the implicative meaning itself correlates with the impossibility of the semantic operation that would justify the occurrence of a non-controlled inflected infinitive.…”