Comparative Syntax of the Balkan Languages (Oxford ... - Cryptm.org

CONTROL AND RAISING 99This might indicate that the indicative and the subjunctive that are homophonous,albeit different elements (Ian Roberts, personal communication). Note, though, thatthat deletion is not possible in other contexts, such as subject clauses:(iii) *(That) John passed liis exams surprised me.2. Inflected infinitivals in European Portuguese, however, provide a counterexampleto an analysis that associates finiteness with agreement (cf. Raposo 1987).3. Kempchinsky (1987) also relates the presence of PRO in subjunctive complementsin Romanian to the realization of C. See also Krapova (this volume) forBulgarian.4. Tsoulas (1995) argues that the ±finite distinction corresponds to a ±definitecharacterization of clauses. In particular, finite propositions are temporally definite,referring to temporally specified points, while -finite ones are indefinite, that is.they refer to unspecified temporal points. Clausal (in)definiteness can be realized eitheron C or on I (see the point about V2 in the text). If C is -definite (-finite), thatgives rise to inflected infinitives of the Balkan type with special Cs (what we see asthe subjunctive). If it is realized on I, then we see some special morphology, eitherbound, as in Romance, or not. as with the English to. See Giorgi and Pianesi (1997)and (Quer 1998) for further discussion.5. Note that the subjunctive V in (15) (and (16) ) is inflected for perfective aspect.Imperfective aspect is not possible in this context unless the matrix verb itselfis imperfective:(i)V O Janis prospadise nu fevji.the John tried-3SG PRT leave-IMP.3SG(ii) *O Janis katafere na fevji.the John managed-3SG PRT leave-IMP.3SG(iii) O Janis pro prospatii na nafevji/fiji.the John try-IMP.3SG PRT leave-IMP 3SG/PERF 3SG'John tries to leave (whenever possible).'(iv) O Janis kalaferni ina fevji.the John manage-IMP.3SG PRT leave-IMP.3SG'John manages to leave (whenever possible).'It is also interesting to note that while the imperfective form fevji corresponds to thepresent tense as well, the perfective fiji is never attested in isolation but always requiresthe support of a particle like na or tha (the future marker). The English infinitivethat corresponds to the above Greek subjunctives does not inflect for aspect.Exactly how grammatical aspect interacts with finiteness is left open at this point(but see Joseph 1983 for the discussion of infinitives in Classical Greek and the interactionbetween tense and aspect).6. Pesetsky (1991) also observes that control is in complementary distributionwith exceptional Case marking (ECM). In the latter case the matrix subject cannot bean agent. Infinitival complements to factive predicates are more problematic becausethe matrix subject is not an agent:(i) John hated to ride in the back seat (*yesterdu\).However, as Pesetsky notes, they disallow a punctual reading, hence the ungrammaticallyof (i) with the temporal adverb yesterday present. The same restriction holds inGreek when these predicates select a subjunctive clause: the matrix verb can be in thepast provided it is not inflected for perfective aspect. I leave this issue open here. Forfurther discussion see Pesetsky (1991).