Idan Landau – författare

This work offers an outlook on the derivation and interpretation of control constructions. From data and observations, it argues that obligatory control comes in two varieties: exhaustive or partial control, the latter obtaining when PRO properly includes the controller. This distinction, arguably universal, is tightly linked to the tense specification of the infinitive. Non-obligatory control, on the other hand, is structurally conditioned, obtaining only in VP-external infinitives. A detailed investigation of how control interacts with super-equi constructions and psychological predicates sheds new light on issues such as extraposition, argument structure, and semantic selection. This book clears up some common misconceptions about the nature of control, as well as sharpening the empirical challenges that face any comprehensive theory in this domain. Regardless of theoretical framework, scholars of syntax and semantics interested in these topics, should find this book a major contribution to the field.

This Elements presents the major findings and theoretical advances in the area of Control. We describe the different types of control (complement, adjunct, obligatory, nonobligatory) and illustrate their profiles in several languages. It is shown that while certain features of Obligatory Control (OC) are common - nullness of PRO, nonfinite complements - they are not universal, hence should not enter its core definition. Comparing approaches to the choice of controller based on lexical meaning postulates with those based on embedding of speech acts, we conclude that the latter provide deeper insights into the core properties of OC. The fundamental semantic distinction between clauses denoting a property and those denoting a proposition proves to be important: It affects both the possibility of Partial Control in complements and the possibility of Non Obligatory Control in adjuncts. These insights are integrated in the Two-Tiered Theory of Control, laid out in the final sections.

This Elements presents the major findings and theoretical advances in the area of Control. We describe the different types of control (complement, adjunct, obligatory, nonobligatory) and illustrate their profiles in several languages. It is shown that while certain features of Obligatory Control (OC) are common - nullness of PRO, nonfinite complements - they are not universal, hence should not enter its core definition. Comparing approaches to the choice of controller based on lexical meaning postulates with those based on embedding of speech acts, we conclude that the latter provide deeper insights into the core properties of OC. The fundamental semantic distinction between clauses denoting a property and those denoting a proposition proves to be important: It affects both the possibility of Partial Control in complements and the possibility of Non Obligatory Control in adjuncts. These insights are integrated in the Two-Tiered Theory of Control, laid out in the final sections.

The subject of nonfinite clauses is often missing, and yet is understood to refer to some linguistic or contextual referent (e.g. 'Bill preferred __ to remain silent' is understood as 'Bill preferred that he himself would remain silent'). This dependency is the subject matter of control theory. Extensive linguistic research into control constructions over the past five decades has unearthed a wealth of empirical findings in dozens of languages. Their proper classification and analysis, however, have been a matter of continuing debate within and across different theoretical schools. This comprehensive book pulls together, for the first time, all the important advances on the topic. Among the issues discussed are: the distinction between raising and control, obligatory and nonobligatory control, syntactic interactions with case, finiteness and nominalization, lexical determination of the controller, and phenomena like partial and implicit control. The critical discussions in this work will stimulate students and scholars to further explorations in this fascinating field.

The subject of nonfinite clauses is often missing, and yet is understood to refer to some linguistic or contextual referent (e.g. 'Bill preferred __ to remain silent' is understood as 'Bill preferred that he himself would remain silent'). This dependency is the subject matter of control theory. Extensive linguistic research into control constructions over the past five decades has unearthed a wealth of empirical findings in dozens of languages. Their proper classification and analysis, however, have been a matter of continuing debate within and across different theoretical schools. This comprehensive book pulls together, for the first time, all the important advances on the topic. Among the issues discussed are: the distinction between raising and control, obligatory and nonobligatory control, syntactic interactions with case, finiteness and nominalization, lexical determination of the controller, and phenomena like partial and implicit control. The critical discussions in this work will stimulate students and scholars to further explorations in this fascinating field.

1. THE FUNDAMENTAL QUESTIONS OF CONTROL Imagine you are a child faced with the daunting task of acquiring the grammar of control in your language. You toddle around buoyantly (you should be past 3 by now), occasionally bumping into acoustic signals that miraculously map to "linguistic input". Some of them sound like this: (1) a. Robin, do you want _ to play with Kittie together? b. Come on, let me show you how _ to feed her. c. No Robin, Kittie doesn't like _ to be smacked. d. Robin, look what you've done! Bad boy! Time _ to go to bed. From your shelter under the kitchen table, you may draw the following conclusions: i) Mommy is very mad now; ii) Kittens make rotten toys; iii) My name must be Robin. Apart from the lesson in parental control, you also ought to learn something about grammatical control. In each of the sentences above, an element is missing (from the underlined position) that is nonetheless "filled-in" by your target grammar. This is what linguists term the "understood subject" of the infinitive. In order to be able to understand such sentences and produce similar ones yourself, you have to figure out the reference of the understood subject in every case. Thus, unless you are after some big trouble with Mommy, you had better conclude that the understood subject is Robin and Mommy in (la), Robin in (Ib), Kittie in (Ic) and everyone (especially Robin!) in (ld).

1. THE FUNDAMENTAL QUESTIONS OF CONTROL Imagine you are a child faced with the daunting task of acquiring the grammar of control in your language. You toddle around buoyantly (you should be past 3 by now), occasionally bumping into acoustic signals that miraculously map to "linguistic input". Some of them sound like this: (1) a. Robin, do you want _ to play with Kittie together? b. Come on, let me show you how _ to feed her. c. No Robin, Kittie doesn''t like _ to be smacked. d. Robin, look what you''ve done! Bad boy! Time _ to go to bed. From your shelter under the kitchen table, you may draw the following conclusions: i) Mommy is very mad now; ii) Kittens make rotten toys; iii) My name must be Robin. Apart from the lesson in parental control, you also ought to learn something about grammatical control. In each of the sentences above, an element is missing (from the underlined position) that is nonetheless "filled-in" by your target grammar. This is what linguists term the "understood subject" of the infinitive. In order to be able to understand such sentences and produce similar ones yourself, you have to figure out the reference of the understood subject in every case. Thus, unless you are after some big trouble with Mommy, you had better conclude that the understood subject is Robin and Mommy in (la), Robin in (Ib), Kittie in (Ic) and everyone (especially Robin!) in (ld).