Movement under Control
- 1 July 2004
- journal article
- Published by MIT Press in Linguistic Inquiry
- Vol. 35 (3), 431-452
- https://doi.org/10.1162/0024389041402625
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.This publication has 16 references indexed in Scilit:
- Some Interface Properties of the PhaseLinguistic Inquiry, 2003
- Movement Out of ControlLinguistic Inquiry, 2003
- Reply to “Control Is Not Movement”Linguistic Inquiry, 2003
- Control Is Not MovementLinguistic Inquiry, 2001
- A minimalist theory of A-movement and controlLingua, 2000
- A Note on ContractionLinguistic Inquiry, 2000
- Movement and ControlLinguistic Inquiry, 1999
- Scrambling and Last ResortLinguistic Inquiry, 1998
- CASE PROPERTIES OF CLAUSES AND THE GREED PRINCIPLE*Studia Linguistica, 1995
- Subjects and the θ-criterionNatural Language & Linguistic Theory, 1988