Movement under Control

Abstract

We examine the three categories of empirical argument that Landau (2003) puts forward against a movement theory of control (MTC): overgeneration cases, alleged arguments in favor of an MTC, and raising/control contrasts. We show that the problems cited either have plausible alternative analyses that leave the MTC unscathed or, in fact, are not nearly as dire for the MTC as Landau supposes. We conclude that the ''standard'' theory enjoys no obvious empirical advantages over the MTC and that the MTC is superior on conceptual and methodological grounds.

The theory and syntactic representation of control structures: An analysis from Amharic

“…desiderative, modal and try (conative), all of which are compatible with irrealis intensionality. The observations of Amharic control support the PRO-analysis and argue against the Movement Theory of Control (MTC) (Hornstein 1999;Boeckx & Hornstein 2004, 2006bBoeckx, Hornstein & Nunes 2010;Hornstein & Polinsky 2010) as A-movement does not exist in Amharic hyper-raising constructions (Lumsden & Halefom 2011). In addition, Amharic control presents evidence against Landau's theory of control.…”

“…The MTC advocates the claim that the embedded subject undergoes A-movement to the matrix subject position and moreover checks the additional theta role (i.e. the trier) (Hornstein 1999(Hornstein , 2004(Hornstein , 2006bBoeckx, Hornstein & Nunes 2010 However, applying the MTC to Amharic control in one fell swoop is not fully supported by data. The crucial evidence lies in the fact that Amharic hyper-raising constructions do not involve A-movement.…”

Inflected infinitives in Brazilian Portuguese as an argument both contra and in favor of a movement analysis of control

“…Lately, then, a very lively debate has taken place between those who are against or in favor of analyzing Control as Movement (cf. Culicover and Jackendoff 2001, Boeckx and Hornstein 2003, Landau 2003, Boeckx and Hornstein 2004. In this work, I will present data mainly from Brazilian Portuguese, which shows clearly that Control cannot be derived by Movement in certain cases.…”

“…However, not few researchers pointed out that the view was reductionist and equivocated. Landau 2003, for instance, offers a comprehensive critique of the MTC, to which Boeckx and Hornstein 2004 replies, resolving some but not all the issues. I will then mention the problems that, I think, are not properly addressed in Boeckx and Hornstein 2004. Landau correctly notes that the MTC overgenerates nonexistent structures and interpretations in Control across passive structures.…”

Null and Lexical Subjects of Gerunds

“…OC has no such restriction. Landau (2003) cites (42) along with (40) in his argument against Hornstein's approach, but Boeckx and Hornstein (2004) argue that (42) is a case of NOC, because sideward movement cannot be involved in it. It is probably because the preference for Merge over Move would be violated, if such movement were to take place.…”