1 On tough-movement* Milan Rezac, University ... - Multimania.co.uk

. =No person is such that it seems like he is here.
c. ≠It seems that no one is here. (o.k. if there are no people present)
d. No one seems to be here. (o.k. on both readings) seem > no one, no one > seem
The evidence of these paradigms is very specific: the non-thematic DP in both toughmovement
and copy-raising λ-binds a pronoun, not a copy. Copy-raising wears this on its sleeve;
for tough-movement it follows if the OP/gap must be pronominal, as discussed.
The syntax of tough-movement proposed here predicts a related anti-reconstruction effect.
The TM subject is base-generated in [Spec, TP] of the TM trigger. There should therefore be no
reconstruction position within T' (not just one below the TM trigger), unlike what is expected on
Browning's (1989: chapter 2) proposal where the TM subject is base-generated sister to the
maximal projection of the TM trigger (e.g. AP/NP). This prediction can be confirmed. Heycock
(1994:262) observes that TM constructions seem like individual-level predication. This fits in
with Lasnik and Fiengo's (1974:544ff.) development of Postal's (1971) observation that TM
subjects must be generic rather than existential if indefinite, since this is characteristic of
individual-level predication. Copy-raising subjects behave thusly as well (Heycock 1994:293f.).
(36) TM indefinite subjects are only generic
a. Beavers are/a beaver is hard to kill. (Lasnik and Fiengo 1974:546; generic only)
b. It was a pleasure to each a bunch of bananas; there are their skins. (Lasnik and Fiengo
1974:546)
c. *A bunch of bananas was a pleasure to eat; there are their skins. (Lasnik and Fiengo
1974:546)
(37) Individual level predication subjects are only generic
a. *A building/someone was tall. (Lasnik and Fiengo 1974:545)
b. Beavers are fat (*they're over there). (Lasnik and Fiengo 1974:546)
(38) Copy-raising subjects are only generic
a. #Snow sounds/seems like it's falling on the mountain. [generic reading made salient]
b. Snow seems to be falling on the mountain. [existential reading possible]
c. Snow sounds like it must be a strange thing: hexagonal ice crystals falling out of the
sky? [generic reading made salient] (Heycock 1994:293f.)
Kratzer (1995) and Diesing (1992: chapter 2) argue that the availability of an existential
reading for such indefinites depends on binding by the existential closure operator of clausal
partition theories. This operator is located somewhere between T' and the VP. The absence of an
existential reading for individual level predicates is taken as evidence that their subjects, unlike
those of stage-level predicates, are base-generated in [Spec, TP]. The result transfers to toughmovement
and copy-raising: there is no copy of the matrix subject where it could be bound by
the generic operator, as there is in movement. Kratzer and Diesing also argue that basegenerating
the subject in [Spec, TP] rather than lower is what gives rise to the other properties of
individual level predication.
The individual-level nature of TM predication may help in accounting for some hitherto
rather mysterious restrictions on the interpretive relation between the TM subject and the OP
13