The Derivation of Clausal Gerunds

Abstract

Abstract. This paper investigates the syntax of clausal gerunds—a class of gerunds that can have either a null subject or an overt DP Case‐marked with accusative or nominative. First, it addresses the difficulty of accounting for gerunds that allow both null and overt subjects in principles and parameters/minimalist approaches to Case and control. Second, the paper explores the existence of a common structure for the two clausal gerunds, supported by the absence of empirical distinctions in their feature specification, especially regarding tense. Third, the paper introduces new observations about the distribution of clausal gerunds and argues that the complex alternations and restrictions on their distribution results from the interaction between Case and Agreement valuation, the limited possibility of A‐movement out of a clausal gerund, and convergence considerations resulting from the existence of distinct numerations.

Factivity and Complement‐Types

“…That means that here, unlike with that ‐clauses vs. infinitival clauses, the theory which assumes that factive verbs trigger presuppositions does not need to resort to a syntactic contrast between, say, Poss‐Ing and Acc‐Ing in determining which can be mapped to the restrictor. (This is good news, since on the one hand, Abney () argues that both are of category DP, while Reuland () (updating) and Pires () argue that Acc‐Ing is TP while Poss‐Ing is DP, which is the opposite of what one would want if Acc‐Ing could be mapped more easily into the restrictor, given that DPs generally move more readily than TPs.) However, this doesn't solve the central problem of the account, which is that factivity of the verb does not suffice to predict where context is needed and where it is not.…”

Basque nominalizations and the role of structural Case in the licensing of null arguments

“…For instance, Pires (2007) argues that the structure of the clausal gerunds in the English examples in (37) and (38) Many Romance languages also allow overt subjects in non-finite constructions (cf. Mensching 2000), and the coexistence of OC PRO and overt subjects is also known to exist in languages like Irish (McCloskey 1985), Greek (Sitaridou 2002), or West Flemish (Haegeman 1985).…”

Construindo um domínio não-finito: a sintaxe de orações de gerúndio em português brasileiro

“…Em resumo, creio que os argumentos empíricos de Pires (2007) não são condições necessárias nem suficientes para excluir a possibilidade de OGs serem CPs. Essa classificação tripartite abre espaço para capturar o comportamento "misto" de OGs proposicionais.…”

“…Assim, somente a leitura reflexiva, que não requer um antecedente plural, está disponível em (53-a). Esquematicamente: 21 Essa propostaé comparável a uma já feita anteriormente por Reuland (1983) e, seguindo ele, por Pires (2001Pires ( , 2006Pires ( , 2007 para algumas orações de gerúndio em inglês. No entanto, a motivação empíricaé bem diferente.…”

“…13 A idéia central da proposta feita aqui lembra a análise em Pires (2007). Nas duas análises, a alternância PRO-DP manifesto resulta de diferentes numerações, em conjunção com diferentes caminhos derivacionais que são emúltima instância convergentes, tanto no caso do sujeito da OG se mover para fora da OG (resultando em controle) e no caso em que ele permanece dentro da OG (resultando numa OG com sujeito manifesto).…”