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 Sciences

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
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