This paper claims that case is vP-internally interpretable and that high NP-movement is driven by (minimally) two other ‘forces’: Person checking in a position higher than Tense, and EPP (Fin) checking in a still higher position, ‘Spec,IP’. This is evidenced by ‘low’ nominatives, quirky agreement, Stylistic Fronting and expletivedistribution. Another central claim of the paper is that grammar interprets event features in relation to speech features. In particular, Person drives NP-movement because it computes event participants (cased ?-roles) in relation to speech participants, much as Tense links event time to speech time. As evidenced by both tense interpretation and pronoun interpretation, the finite clause is a Speech Phrase, SP, containing syntactic speech features.
2023. Agreement Shift in Embedded Reports. Linguistic Inquiry 54:3 ► pp. 547 ff.
Sigurðsson, Halldór Ármann
2008. The case of PRO. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 26:2 ► pp. 403 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 6 november 2023. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.