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

(76) a. How is Nominative assigned to the I-subject in IOS-INV?
b. What makes referential pro possible in IOS-INV?
Let us start with 0.a). In the present theory, the most natural assumption is that
Nominative is assigned by government directly to the I-subject, in a way similar to Nominative
assignment in finite clauses. This is a desirable prospect if we want to account for the fact that
IOS's with an inverted subject are, as far as I know, restricted to NSLs, which have subject
inversion in finite clauses.
In Chapter 3 we contended that direct Case assignment to the I-subject is a consequence
of AGR o being rich and becoming thus the AGR-identifier, plus the proposal that it is the AGR-
identifier which has to provide the I-subject with Case: if the AGR-identifier is AGR o it has to
Case-mark the I-subject by head-governing it. In this Chapter we have contended that infinitival
AGR o can end up being the AGR-identifier if some configuration allows it to be rich: either
PRO o incorporation (in control structures) or, in raising structures, coindexation with the upper
AGR (possibly involving incorporation). In IOS's, however, there is no apparent non-ad-hoc
device by which the infinitival AGR o could end up being rich.
Let us first speculate on some theoretical basis for accounting for the facts which is
consistent with the present theory. Our account for finite AGR in Chapter 3 is based on the
assumptions that AGR is present and has to be licenced (by having an I-subject, providing Case
to it and being rich in features). In this chapter we have developed the idea that AGR is also
present in infinitives and, therefore, there must be some means to make the AGR satisfy the same
requirements, provided everything follows from control, raising or ECM legitimate structures.
Suppose, however, we assume that, since infinitives are morphologically silent in AGR
content, AGR is only optionally present. Then no infinitive has to have an AGR in principle.
What determines the presence of AGR when it is morphologically silent? Let us explore some
possibilities.
1
In the case of lexically determined control, infinitives would be forced to have AGR