syntax, control, logophoricity
Previous research on adjunct control [4, 7, 12, 13] classifies it as Obligatory Control (OC) due to facts such as the following: the matrix subject can control PRO, but the object cannot (1), and only a sloppy interpretation is available under ellipsis (2). With examples such as (3), however, it has been demonstrated that this is not always the case [10, 18]. Here, PRO may refer to an entity not represented syntactically in the sentence, so these must be instances of Non-Obligatory Control (NOC). Landau  argues that NOC of right-adjoined adjuncts is only available under two conditions: the adjunct clause is in active voice, and subject control would lead to “semantic deviance.” We discuss counterexamples to these claims and suggest that NOC in temporal adjuncts is more available than previously thought. We agree with Landau, though, that non-subject control in these cases is an instance of logophoric control.
Original Publication Citation
Green, J.J.Non-subject control of temporal adjuncts. In E. Ronai, L. Stigliano, & Y. Sun (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fifty-Fourth Annual Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society (pp.137–148). Chicago: IL:CLS.
BYU ScholarsArchive Citation
Green, Jeffrey Jack, "Non-subject control of temporal adjuncts" (2018). Faculty Publications. 6148.
Chicago Linguistic Society
Copyright Use Information