Lengua Inglesa Avanzada II 2015/16 Handout 1Bis
The following is a brief analysis of the various types of noun-complement or
appositive clauses in Handout 1.
Finite verb noun-complement clauses
(1a, b) These noun-complement clauses are non-interrogative or declarative CPs introduced
by the complementiser that (that the earth is…).
(2) This noun-complement clause is an interrogative CP introduced by the complementiser
whether (which is of course the canonical yes/no wh-element in English). In case the
preposition (on) is used after the noun antecedent, then there will be a PP in between the
cited N head and the CP.
(3) The noun-complement clause here is an interrogative CP introduced by an information wh-
element. Recall that the wh-element occupies a position within the VP of the subordinate
clause initially, that is at D-structure, and is later moved onto the Spec position of the cited CP
projection.
(4a, b) These are non-interrogative IPs where the I head is occupied by the inflectional element
to. A PRO element occupies the pertinent position within the VP and then is raised into
Spec,IP, thereby becoming the subject of the infinitival noun-complement clause.
Further, PRO is controlled in (4a) by the Determiner head their, and in (4b) by the
Determiner head his, both of which happen to be transitive determiners of the possessive
paradigm.
(4c) The noun-complement clause here is a CP introduced by the so-called prepositional
complementiser for. On this occasion there is no PRO since the Determiner Phrase us
(specifically, a pronoun, that is an intransitive D) is the actual subject of the IP where to
occupies the head position. More specifically, us is here initially the agent of join, that is it is
in the Spec of this VP, and then is moved into the Spec of IP.
(4d) The noun-complement clause here is, the same as (4a, b), an IP where the Spec position
is occupied by PRO, which is in turn controlled by John. That is, though a preposition occurs in
this construction, namely of, this of is not a complementiser but just a
preposition taking a complement (John).
1
The noun antecedent of the noun-complement or appositive clause is inclination or tendency,
and this head Noun happens to take two complements: one, which is
the noun-complement clause itself, which is a complement proper (that is, it
occupies the node sister to N), and another, which is the PP of John, which is an
adjunct (meaning possession). Of John is thus similar to the element their in (4a)
or his in (4b): however, of John is itself a PP occupying an adjunct position.
All in all then, the structure of the subordinate clause, that is of the noun-
complement clause is something like this:
[NPtendency [IPto[ VP PROi help the handicapped]IP][PP of John]i NP ]
Complement to tendency Adjunct to tendency
A fact that must be explained is for the adjunct to actually occur before the
complement at PF (tendency of John to help…) since complements typically precede
adjuncts (and not the other way round!). This is due to the fact that the complement
is on this occasion a clause, and therefore a much heavier constituent
than the PP adjunct. It is thus extraposed to final position. Other examples where this
is also the case, that is examples here an adjunct occurs at PF to the left of a complement are
the following:
He said [to me] [that he would take the second flight] vs. He said [that] [to me]
The teacher explains [to the children] [how to behave in public] vs. The teacher explains [the
situation] [to the children].
(5a) This is an interrogative to-infinitive noun-complement clause introduced by an
information wh-element, which means that the full structure is a CP. The same as in (3) above,
the wh-element occupies a position within VP at D-structure, and is later raised to Spec,CP.
Also, a PP is optional here.
(5b) The noun-complement clause here is similar to that in (5a), though the wh-element in
question is the complementiser whether, which occupies the C head already at D-structure.
2
(6) The noun-complement or appositive clauses in (6) feature an –ing verb instead
of a verb preceded by to. There are important differences between the two:
-a PP is obligatory in these –ing structures
- as observed in class, we will assume that a two-fold analysis is possible for the –ing element
itself: either it is the head of I (in a similar fashion to to) or it is generated in
the VP (already attached to V)
- very importantly, the root-ing form can take itself a subject other
than PRO: it can take either a PRO subject, as in the first
that is,
examples in (6a, b) (…no possibility of taking…; … objection to moving…), or it can take
an overt or explicit subject, as in …no possibility of us taking… / … no possibility
of our taking ; …his objection to you moving… / … his objection to your moving….
either
As can be noted, in case the subject of the –ing verb is overt, it can be
accusative (or the same, objective) or genitive (or the same, possessive).