Clauses Without 'that': The Case For Bare Sentential Complementation In English (outstanding Dissertations In Linguistics)
by Cathal Doherty /
2000 / English / PDF
5.7 MB Download
From the preface:
This book is a slightly revised version of my Ph.D. dissertation which was submitted on 10 December 1993 at the University of California, Santa Cruz. The committee members were Jim McCloskey (chair), Sandra Chung, Donka Farkas and Bill Ladusaw. In preparing this version for publication, I have left the text of the original more or less untouched, apart from the addition of this preface, an index and some occasional footnotes discussing more recent literature.
The central argument of this work is that the syntax of finite subordinate clauses without that differs from corresponding clauses with an overt complementizer, such as the complement and relative clauses below:
I said [it was true.]
the chest [the key opened]
Evidence from embedded adjunction facts (adverbial adjunction and topicalization) is presented for the 'IP-hypothesis' of the structure of these clauses: i.e. that the bracketed constituents above are bare finite IPs, not CPs with a phonologically null head (the 'CP-hypothesis').
The outline of the work is as follows. Chapter 1 explores the theoretical background to the IP-hypothesis and its broader consequences. The empirical evidence for the proposal and its more specific empirical and theoretical consequences are then investigated in the following three major chapters of this work...
