Jaume Solà i Pujols - Departament de Filologia Catalana ...

(93) At D-structure, AGR must be coindexed with the most prominent non-(inherently-)Case-
marked DP or CP in its c-command domain.
(94) a. AGR must have an AGR-identifier.
b. X can be an AGR-identifier iff X is rich in phi-features (number and person).
c. AGR o /Spec of AGR is the AGR-identifier of AGR.
(95) AGR o can optionally assign Nominative Case to Spec of AGR by agreement or to some
other position under government.
(96) The I-subject must receive Case from its AGR-identifier.
Within the framework of Principles and Parameters, the obvious question is whether we
should postulate any such specific rules at all. This theoretical framework should optimally
consist of principles and parameters of a very general nature, and rules affecting one single
category as AGR looks at odds with such a desideratum.
Two considerations, however, can be put forward in defense of these rules. One is that,
even if category specific, they are not by any means language specific: they seem to hold in a
pervasive way across a good deal of languages. So they cannot be considered mere ad hoc
theoretical devices to account for highly idiosyncratic facts. If not genuine principles of UG, they
are at least good candidates to be theorems of the grammar.
I think the above set of rules can be interpreted as a specific case of a set of the general
constraints that Chomsky (1986-b) dubs Licensing and Full Interpretation. In Chomsky's view,
Licensing is a condition usually holding of two items that somehow need each other in order to
be fully interpreted: Operator and variable, predicate and Argument, etc.; not only do the two
elements have to cooccur, they also must stand in a proper relation.
1
In the same spirit, we could conceive that AGR and I-subject are two elements that need