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

In both cases, both the main clause AGR and the embedded AGR (if there is one) are
coindexed with the DP in the embedded clause, since it is the first DP or CP in the c-command
domain of both. This means that the two AGR's end up coindexed.
For English and non-NSLs, both Spec's of AGR have to be filled by a DP to render both
specifiers AGR-identifiers. This is the unmarked option in 0 and, in fact, the only one for the
infinitival AGR o , given that the it is not rich to be an AGR-identifier itself.
The infinitival AGR o cannot assign Case to its specifier: we assumed that infinitival
AGR o can only assign Case to PRO, and PRO cannot occur in this position because it is
governed by the main verb, as standardly assumed. Since we are trying to derive Burzio's
Generalization, we assume that 'to seem' verbs can in principle assign Accusative. So, in
principle the Spec of the infinitival AGR could be assigned Accusative. However, since
principles 0 and 0 force the main AGR-identifier (Spec of AGR) to transmit its Case to the I-
subject, the result would be that the I-subject would end up obtaining both Accusative Case from
the verb 'seem' and (Nominative) Case from the main clause Spec of AGR.
Therefore, the only option for the infinitival Spec of AGR is to be a non-Case-marked
empty category and form a Chain with the Specifier of the main clause AGR, from which it will
obtain Case.
Given the definition of Binding Domain, the main clause will become the Binding
Domain for the I-subject in the infinitive, so that both the I-subject in the infinitive and the
infinitival Spec of AGR can only be [+anaphoric]:
(51) a. John seems [ AGRP to have done it [ DP e (himself) ]]
As for the Spec of AGR, its anaphoric behavior cannot be instantiated by the presence of
an overt anaphor or floating himself:
(52) John seems [ AGRP e/ * himself to have done it ]
1