Expletive there

(3)	a.		The cat has got X's tongue.
	b.		The cat is out of the bag.
	c.		The fur will fly.
	d.		The jig is up.
	e.		The pot is calling the kettle black.

What will be crucial for our purposes is that the subjects in (3) have whatever idiomatic force they have only in connection with the rest of the idiom, but not otherwise. For instance, neither cat in (3b) nor pot in (3e) have a metaphorical sense of secret or hypocrite, respectively, in other syntactic contexts. So although the sentences in (4), unlike those in (2), are not ungrammatical, they have only literal interpretations.

(5)		ok	It is { hailing, pouring, raining, sleeting, snowing. }
(6)		*	The { air, atmosphere, environment, precipitation, sky, weather } is { hailing, pouring, raining, sleeting, snowing. }

Data

(7)	a.	*	There seems to continue the same problem.
	b.	*	There seemed to ring the mail carrier.
(8)	a.	ok	There seems to be a problem.
	b.	ok	There seems to exist an antidote.

The ungrammaticality of (7) is not surprising, since seem does not belong to the class of verbs that license there; recall (2e), repeated here as (9).

(9)

*

There seems no solution.

By the same token, however, the grammaticality of (8) is unexpected.

A first clue to the answer to this puzzle lies in the fact that each of the examples in (7) and (8) contains two verbs, and hence two clauses, rather than just one. In the examples that follow, the lower clause, which is a complement of seem, is enclosed in square brackets. The higher, or matrix, clause contains the bracketed complement clause. Now notice that neither of the complement verbs in (7) licenses there, whereas both of the complement verbs in (8) do. Thus, instead of considering all four sentences in (7) and (8) as parallel to (9), it is more insightful to draw the parallels in (10)-(13). In this view, the fact that seem, the matrix verb in all of the sentences, doesn't license there turns out to be a red herring.

(10)	a.	*	There seems [ to continue the same problem. ]
	b.	*	There continued the same problem.
(11)	a.	*	There seemed [ to ring the mail carrier. ]
	b.	*	There rang the mail carrier.
(12)	a.	ok	There seems [ to be a problem. ]
	b.	ok	There is a problem.
(13)	a.	ok	There seems [ to exist an antidote. ]
	b.	ok	There exists an antidote.

Analogous examples can be constructed for the other two types of special subjects. For instance, the complex sentences in (14) have an idiomatic interpretation, even though the subject idiom chunk appears to be separated from the rest of the idiom.

(14)	a.		The cat seems [ to have got X's tongue. ]
	b.		The cat proved [ to be out of the bag. ]
	c.		The fur began [ to fly. ] ]
	d.		The jig proved [ to be up. ]
	e.		The pot seems [ to be calling the kettle black. ]

And finally, the contrast between (15) and (16) is parallel to that between (5) and (6).

The term 'raising verb' is potentially confusing. It is not the verb itself that undergoes movement. Rather, it is the complement subject that raises into the matrix clause, as we discuss in detail in a moment. A better term for the verb class in question might therefore be 'subject raising triggers.' However, we will continue to use the term 'raising verb' because it is standard in the literature.

Raising verbs are semantically deficient in not imposing selectional restrictions on the eventual matrix subject. As the contrasts in (17) show, verbs ordinarily select subjects with particular semantic properties. For instance, breathe, elapse, and write select subjects that are animate beings, periods of time, and literate humans, respectively.

(17)	a.		The { cat, #rock } is breathing.
	b.		More than a { week, #desk } has elapsed.
	c.		The { boy, #cockatoo } wrote an essay.

Raising verbs, on the other hand, impose no such selectional restrictions. In fact, there is no reason to think that they are associated with a subject of their own at all. We will represent this fact by associating raising verbs with elementary trees that have no specifier position, as illustrated for seems in (18).

(18)

We are now in a position to derive a sentence like (8a). The derivation of the complement clause is given in (19). Notice that in (19a), the eventual matrix subject, expletive there, is licensed by virtue of being the specifier of a VP headed by a licensing verb (in this case, be).

(19)	a.				b.
			Local (spec-head) licensing of there				Substitute (19a) as complement of to

Substituting the structure in (19b) as the complement of the raising verb yields (20a), which in turn becomes the complement of the matrix I element, yielding (20b).

(20)	a.				b.
			Substitute (19b) as complement of raising verb				Substitute (20a) as complement of matrix I

As it stands, (20b) is not well-formed, and the complement subject must move to the matrix subject position. This movement is motivated because the complement subject has a nominative case feature that cannot be checked in the lower clause. We know that the case feature in question is nominative from contrasts as in (21).

Data

(24)

Larry { attempted, decided, expected, hoped, tried } [ to travel to Bhutan. ]

Superficially, control verbs resemble raising verbs because both types of verbs take nonfinite complement clauses headed by to. However, the two verb classes differ in their syntactic behavior in two important respects. First, control verbs impose selectional restrictions on their subjects. For instance, hope selects a human subject, a requirement that is not met in (25).

(25)

#

The chrysalis hoped [ to become a butterfly. ]

Moreover, the restrictions imposed by the control verb are distinct from those imposed by the verb in the lower clause. This is illustrated by (26), where the matrix subject satisfies the selectional restrictions of hope, but not those of elapse.

(26)

#

Larry hoped [ to elapse. ]

Further evidence for the semantic independence of the matrix and the complement subjects comes from the subset of control verbs that also allow finite complements. In such cases, the matrix and complement subjects need not refer to the same discourse entity.

(27)			Larry { decided, expected, hoped } ...
	a.		... [ that he would travel to Bhutan. ]
	b.		... [ that { we, she } would travel to Bhutan. ]

It is true, however, that when the complement of a control verb is nonfinite, as it is in (24), the interpretation of the complement subject is constrained in a way that it isn't when the complement is finite, as in (27). Thus, the sentences in (24) with counterparts in (27) can only have the interpretation in (27a), never those in (27b). When the complement of a control verb is nonfinite, the matrix subject can be thought of as fixing or 'controlling' the referent of the complement subject; hence the name of the verb class.

Notice that the counterparts of (27) with raising verbs replacing the control verbs in the matrix clause are completely ungrammatical.

(28)	a.	*	Larry { appears, seems } [ that he has traveled to Bhutan. ]
	b.	*	Larry { appears, seems } [ that { we, she } have traveled to Bhutan. ]

The reason is that nonexpletive subjects like Larry need a semantic role like agent, patient, recipient, and so on. Such semantic roles are associated with verbs, but not with I, and they are assigned to the argument positions of the heads that they are associated with. But since raising verbs have no specifier, and since the complement position in (28) is filled by the that clause, the matrix subjects in (28) end up without a semantic role.

There is a second major difference between raising verbs and control verbs. Since control verbs require their own subject, but do not license any of the special subjects discussed earlier, these special subjects should be ruled out as the subjects of control verbs. This expectation is borne out; the sentences in (29) are either downright ungrammatical or do not allow the relevant idiomatic interpretation.

Notes

Exercises and problems

Exercise 9.1

For this exercise, be sure to provide the evidence (grammatical or ungrammatical sentences) on the basis of which you reach your conclusions. You don't need to include much in the way of discussion beyond that.

A. Using expletive there as your diagnostic, find five raising verbs and five control verbs other than the ones discussed in the last two sections of this chapter.