Final test

1. In Alboiu (2007), the example below is claimed to have as unique

interpretation the one suested b! the indices. "an this readin o# the example be
maintained$ Arue wh!%wh! not (b! relevant evidence and counter&examples)
(1) pro
i
'ncearc( )s( c*nte +ictor
i
la trombon,
pro tr!.pres.-s )./0 sin.-s +ictor at trombone
1 +ictor is tr!in to pla! the trombone.2
3andau2s scale o# verbs o# obliator! control 4
1.5odal4have,need, ma!,can,should,is able,must.
2.Aspectual4bein,start,continue,#inish,stop,resume.
-.Implicatives4dare,manane,ma6e sure ,bother,remember,et, see
#it,condescend,avoid,#oret,#ail,re#rain,decline,nelect,#orce,complete.
I thin6 all this three t!pes o# verbs accept the in#initive in 5odern 7omanian .
2. 8hat basic principle o# rammar (discussed at the course) does this
proposal%theor! disreard and wh!$
"ontrol and raisin are di##erent because the! do not respect the same principle o#
#ormation.
"ontrol is the result o# a process o# deletion4 97: in control constructions is a
base&enerated empt! cateor! which obtains via deletion under identit! and whose
antecedent is established under the control module. "ontrol does not involve movement.
7aisin are constructions which obtain via movement.
5ovement is the relevant process when it comes to derivin .&structure #rom ;&
structure and in which a certain relation must hold between the moved element and the
empty position left behind.
-. 8h! do !ou thin6 that amon the verbs o# (so&called) ob<ect control, 1a oblia2
seems to be the least permissive to evade control$ )8hat (do !ou thin6) is the (semantic)
di##erence between ob<ect 1control2 verbs such as 1a 'ncura<a2, 1a convine2, 1a ordona2 on
the one hand and 1a oblia2 on the other$,
(-) a. I&am 'ncura<at%convins (pe pro#esori) s( vin( to=i elevii 'n tab(r(.
b. I&am ordonat locotenentului s( #ie to=i solda=ii pre>en=i m*ine la apel.
b. ($) I&am obliat pe pro#esori s( vin( to=i elevii 'n tab(r(
c. l&am obliat pe locotenent s( #ie to=i solda=ii pre>en=i m*ine la apel.
?his t!pe o# verb (@a obliaA) seems to be the least permissive to evade
control because o# it2s semantic because is means to coerce, to compel (someone of
something); to impose.
/.
In a lanuae !ou2re stud!in and are (#airl!) #amiliar with4
& #ocus on control verbs4
a) sub<ect control verbs4 implicatives o# the 1tr!2 and 1manae2 classB aspectuals
(bein%start, cease, continue) C volitive verbs (the 1want2%2wish2 t!pe) and
b) ob<ect control verbs such as 1convince2, 1order2, 1oblie2
and investiate whether these verbs select in#initive or sub<unctive complement
clauses
1. ;o the! select onl! the in#initive$ I# so,
& o##er a description o# the construction in the lanuae under anal!sis (speci#ic
mar6ers$ ;istinctive morpholo!%in#lection$ "an the in#initive license Dominative
sub<ects on its own$ E here !ou can Fuote an! (respectable) rammar boo6 but be sure to
include it in the 7e#erences section.
& is there an! di##erence in the interpretation o# in#initive complements selected b!
a) implicative verbs vs. b) volitional verbs$ (i.e., do the complements o# implicative verbs
evince control properties
1
or can the! evade%escape control$ % do the complements o#
volitional verbs exhibit D:"%D"$
& 8hat about the complements o# ob<ect control verbs$ "an there be dis<oint
sub<ects, as we have seen it is possible in 7omanian$
2. ;o the! onl! select the sub<unctive$ I# so,
& o##er a description o# the construction in the lanuae under anal!sis (speci#ic
mar6ers$ distinctive morpholo!%in#lection$ E here !ou can Fuote an! (respectable)
rammar boo6 but be sure to include it in the 7e#erences section.
& is there an! di##erence in the interpretation o# sub<unctive complements selected
b! a) implicative verbs vs. b) volitional verbs$ (i.e., do the complements o# implicative
verbs evince control properties
2
or can the! evade%escape control$ % do the complements
o# volitional verbs exhibit D:"%D"$
& 8hat about the complements o# ob<ect control verbs$ "an there be dis<oint
sub<ects, as we have seen it is possible in 7omanian$
-. ;o the! select both the in#initive and the sub<unctive$ );o the! select some
other t!pe o# structure$$, I# so,
& o##er a description o# both constructions in the lanuae under anal!sis (speci#ic
mar6ers$ distinctive morpholo!%in#lection$
& is there an! di##erence in the interpretation o# in#initive complements vs.
sub<unctive complements$ (in the sense that the in#initive should be selected b! G"&t!pe
verbs (implicatives, aspectuals, modals) and evince :"%control, whereas the sub<unctive
should be selected b! 9"&t!pe verbs (i.e., volitionals) and evade control E is this the case$
"an the complements o# implicative verbs in this lanuae evade control, as we have
seen it is possible in 7omanian$
& 8hat about the complements o# ob<ect control verbs$ "an there be dis<oint
sub<ects, as we have seen it is possible in 7omanian$
?ipes o# control4
1
2
:bliator! control4 Tu
i
ncepi [ a mnca !"#
i
$, Tu
i
te apuci [de mncat
!"#
%
$.
Don obliator! control4 Tu
i
vrei [ a vorbi !"#
%&'
$ , (l
i
se teme [ a vorbi
!"#
%
$.
Gxhaustive control4 all the exemples
9artial control4 (l
i
a preferat !"#
%)
s* se ntoarc* acasa.
8ho controles$
?he sub<ect #rom the reent4 Tu
i
ncepi [a spune !"#
%
$.
?he direct ob<ect #rom the reent4 +*
i
convine )a m*nca 97:
I
,.
?he indirect ob<ect #rom the reent, -ti
i
vine [ a plnge !"#
%
$.
in particular cases4
A complement o# the name #rom the reent4 .peran a lui
i
este )a c* tia
97:
I
A rational ad<ectiv #rom the reent4 Hncercarea ruseasc(
i
)de a asalta 97:
I
Icraina,.