Edited by Lori Repetti and Francisco Ordóñez
[Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 14] 2018
► pp. 279–292
Chapter 16Against control by implicit passive agents
Landau (2010, 2013) and van Urk (2011, 2013) argue that the understood agent of a passive verb is syntactically projected as a weak implicit argument. As such, it participates actively in Agree and predication, the mechanisms they assume are responsible for antecedent determination in control structures. This article examines French data involving control and passivization and proposes an alternative explanation for the facts, one that makes the diametrically opposed assumptions that the implicit agent of a passive verb is syntactically unprojected and that the reference of PRO is determined post-syntactically.
- 2.Landau (2000, 2010, 2013), van Urk (2011, 2013) and Reed (2014) : Some points of agreement and contention
- 3.Further examining the interaction of control with passivization
- 3.1Reconsidering Visser’s effects
- 3.2A syntactic constraint on impersonal passivization
- 3.3On an unexpected parallel between OC PRO and overt bound pronouns
- 3.4On unexpected WIA control in indirect questions
- 4.Against control by weak implicit passive agents
Cited by 2 other publications
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 31 march 2022. 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.