Cover not available
Part of
Studies at the Grammar-Discourse Interface: Discourse markers and discourse-related grammatical phenomena
Edited by Alexander Haselow and Sylvie Hancil
[Studies in Language Companion Series 219] 2021
► pp. 299–312

Chapter 11
On how the distinction between reciprocal and collective verbs affects (anti-)control

| State University of Applied SciencesWłocławek
The phenomenon of Partial Control (henceforth PC), allegedly generating a non-exhaustive referential relation between a matrix argument and a silent subject, has enjoyed the status of a fully-fledged type of control since Landau (2000). The present paper aims to question its existence. Drawing upon the data from both English and Polish, I show how important it is for the theory of PC to properly distinguish between collective predicates and reciprocal verbs. I argue that both types of verbs invariably exhibit Exhaustive Control and the ostensible ‘PC-effect’ stems from the fact that the reciprocal verbs may co-occur with non-lexical ‘with NP’ phrase (discontinuous phrase). The data concerning Polish anti-control constructions supports the proposed analysis.
Keywords: partial control, reciprocal verbs, collectivity
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Collective predicates as opposed to inherently reciprocal verbs
  • 3.The ‘PC-might-be-a-ghost’ approach
  • 4.The ‘more-than-one’ meaning of PRO in Polish anti-control constructions
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 3 June 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.219.11sna
References (26)
References
Barrie, Michael & Pittman, Christine M. 2004. Partial control and the movement towards movement. Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics 22: 75–92.Google Scholar
Boeckx, Cedric, Hornstein, Norbert & Nunes, Jairo. 2010. Control as Movement. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brandt, Patrick, Trawiński, Beata & Wollstein, Angelika. 2016. (Anti-)Control in German: Evidence from comparative, corpus- and psycholinguistic studies. In Co- and Subordination in German and Other Languages, Ingo Reich & Augustin Speyer (eds), 77–98. Hamburg: Helmut Buske.Google Scholar
Bondaruk, Anna. 2004. PRO and Control in English, Irish and Polish: A Minimalist Analysis. Lublin: KUL.Google Scholar
Bowers, John. 2008. On reducing obligatory control to movement. Syntax 11(2): 125–143. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Champollion, Lucas. 2015. Distributivity, collectivity and cumulativity. In Companion to Semantics, Lisa Matthewson, Cecile Meier, Hotze Rullmann & Thomas Ede Zimmermann (eds). Hoboken NJ: Wiley & Sons. <[URL]> (4 december 2020).
Chomsky, Noam. 1981. Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Corpus of Contemporary American English. <[URL]> (30 January 2018).
Dimitriadis, Alexis. 2004. Discontinuous reciprocals. Ms, Utrecht Institute of Linguistics.Google Scholar
. 2008. Irreducible symmetry in reciprocal constructions. In Reciprocals and Reflexives: Cross-linguistic and Theoretical Explorations, Ekkehard König & Volker Gast (eds), 375–410. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Dobrovie-Sorin, Carmen. 2001. Head-to-head merge in Balkan subjunctives and locality. In Comparative Syntax of Balkan Languages, Maria Luisa Rivero & Angela Ralli (eds), 44–73. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Dowty, Dawid R. 1987. Collective predicates, distributive predicates and “all”. In Proceedings of the 1986 Eastern States Conference on Linguistics (ESCOL), Fred Marshall (ed.), 97–116. Columbus OH: Ohio State University.Google Scholar
Dubinsky, Stanley. 2007. On the syntax of exhaustive control and the calculus of events. Ms, University of South Carolina.Google Scholar
Dubinsky, Stanley & Hamano, Shoko. 2007. A window into the syntax of control: Event opacity in Japanese and English. University of Maryland Working Papers in Linguistics 15: 74–79.Google Scholar
Farkas, Donka F. 1992. On obviation. In Lexical Matters, Ivan Sag & Anna Szabolcsi (eds), 85–109. Stanford CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
Hornstein, Norbert. 2003. On control. In Minimalist Syntax, Randall Hendrick (ed.), 6–81. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray & Culicover, Peter W. 2003. The semantic basis of control in English. Language 79(3): 517–556. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kruitwagen, Imke, Poortman, Eva B. & Winter, Yoad. 2017. Reciprocal verbs as collective predicate concepts. In Proceedings of the Forty-Seventh Annual Meeting of the North East Linguistic Society (NELS 47), Andrew Lamont & Katerina Tetzloff (eds), 201–210. Amherst MA: GLSA.Google Scholar
Landau, Idan. 2000. Elements of Control. Structure and Meaning in Infinitival Constructions. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
. 2008. Two routes of control: Evidence from case transmission in Russian. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 26: 877–924. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2016. Agreement at PF: An argument from partial control. Syntax 19: 79–109. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lawler, John. 1972. A Problem in Participatory Democracy. Bloomington IN: Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
National Corpus of Polish. <[URL]> (30 January 2018).
Rodrigues, Cilene. 2008. Agreement and flotation in partial and inverse partial control configurations. In New Horizons in the Analysis of Control and Raising, William D. Davies & Stanley Dubinsky (eds), 213–230. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
Siloni, Tal. 2012. Reciprocal verbs and symmetry. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 30: 261–320. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wurmbrand, Susanne. 2003. Infinitives: Restructuring and Clause Structure. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Landau, Idan
2024. Noncanonical Obligatory Control. Language and Linguistics Compass 18:3 DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 26 september 2024. 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.