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

2.4.2. IOS with a Subject in Specifier of AGR
Let us start with AUX-to-COMP, and assume, following Rizzi (1982-b) and subsequent
work, that it involves a subject in Spec of INFL (= AGR).
AUX-to-COMP, as far as it is a NSL phenomenon, falls out of all the above proposals:
here we are dealing with a subject which is not an I-subject: unlike I-subjects (inverted subjects)
in Italian and Portuguese, subjects in AUX-to-COMP construction may appear right after the
auxiliary. There is another outstanding difference: while all other cases of IOS are colloquial
(often substandard), AUX-to-COMP is a rather literary construction. Therefore we can take it to
be a non-core construction.
In fact, I want to suggest that, in the spirit of the present theory, AUX-to-COMP can be
treated as having much in common with IOS-INV. We tentatively will propose the following
account:
a) In AUX-to-COMP movement of the verb to C o is triggered because T o moves to C o ,
for some reason (see below).
b) In AUX-to-COMP, Case assignment to the I-subject is carried out by Chain-
government by T o (in combination with AGR o , see below):
(79) Ritengo...
[ C o avere+Ti ] [ AGRP [ AGR ti ] [ T o ti ] fatto questo Gianni/lui ]
to-have done this G. /he
'I believe Gianni/him to have done this'
c) As in finite clauses, once the I-subject is licenced, it can act as a resumptive element
licensing a DP in Spec of AGR:
1