As shown in (4), PRO can function as an antecedent for reflexives: in (4a) PRO is the antecedent for the reflexive pronoun ' myself', and in (4b) PRO functions as the antecedent for the impersonal reflexive oneself. Reflexive pronouns such as myself and oneself require a local antecedent. The claim that non-finite clauses have a phonologically null PRO subject is in part motivated by Binding Theory - in particular, the idea that an anaphor requires a local antecedent to be present. Tree Diagram for (4b) Note that for simplicity the adverb properly is omitted. The tree diagram (3) represents how PRO satisfies the theta criterion of examine by being the DP agent in the non-finite clause. However, the presence of the null PRO subject, as shown (3b), satisfies the Theta Criterion by having PRO as the DP agent in the sentence and the patient as the DP theme. ![]() However, in (3a), since no overt DP functions as the agent of examine, this should be a violation of the Theta Criterion. In example (3), the verb examine is associated with the following lexical entry:Īccordingly, the verb examine must have a DP ( determiner phrase) as an agent and a DP as a theme. (adapted from: Koopman, Sportiche and Stabler 2014: 247 (31)) John promised Mary to examine the patient.ī. Therefore, in the absence of an overt subject, the null category PRO helps to satisfy the Theta Criterion. Tree Diagram for (3) Theta criterion Įvery verb has theta roles and under the Theta Criterion every theta role must be present in the structure of the sentence this means that theta roles must be associated with a syntactic position even when there is no overt argument. The following tree diagrams of examples (1) and (2) show how PRO occupies the subject position of non-finite clauses. While (1a) and (2a) show the surface sentences, (1b) and (2b) show the more abstract structure where PRO serves as the subject of the non-finite clauses, thereby satisfying the EPP-feature of T (realized by infinitival 'to'). In the context of the EPP, the existence of subject and object control follows naturally from the fact that the null pronominal subject PRO can be co-indexed with different DP arguments. Since the argument that controls PRO in (1a) is the subject, this is called subject control, and PRO is co-indexed with its antecedent John, As shown in (2a), it is also possible to have object control, where the argument that controls PRO is the object of the main clause, and PRO is co-indexed with its antecedent Bill. John promised Bill to control the situation.ī. This is annotated in(2b) by co-indexing Bill with PRO, which indicates that the PRO subject of co-refers with Bill. In (2a), the subject of sleep is understood to be the same person that was convinced, namely Bill. This is annotated in (1b) by co-indexing John with PRO, which indicates that the PRO subject of co-refers with John. In (1a), the subject of control is understood to be the same person that issued the promise, namely John. Motivation for a PRO subject comes from the grammaticality of sentences such as (1) and (2), where the subject of the infinitival to-clause, though not overtly expressed, is understood to be controlled by an argument of the main clause. A consequence of the EPP is that clauses that lack an overt subject must necessarily have an "invisible" or "covert" subject with non-finite clauses this covert subject is PRO. ![]() The Extended Projection Principle (EPP) requires that all clauses have a subject. There are several independent pieces of linguistic theory which motivate the existence of PRO. 4.3 Romance PRO controlled by Dative experiencer.3.1 PRO as subject of non-finite clause.Instead, PRO is taken to be in complementary distribution with overt subjects because it is the only item that is able to carry null case which is checked for by non-finite Tense Markers (T), for example the English to in control infinitives. More recent analyses have abandoned the PRO Theorem. Within Government and Binding theory, the existence and distribution of PRO followed from the PRO Theorem, which states that PRO may not be governed. The presence of PRO in non-finite clauses lacking overt subjects allows a principled solution for problems relating to Binding Theory. One property of PRO is that, when it occurs in a non-finite complement clause, it can be bound by the main clause subject ("subject control") or the main clause object ("object control"). The null pronoun PRO is postulated in the subject position of non-finite clauses. As such, it is part of the set of empty categories. ![]() In generative linguistics, PRO (called "big PRO", distinct from pro, "small pro" or " little pro") is a pronominal determiner phrase (DP) without phonological content.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |