earticle

영어

Arano (2014) presents different syntactic analyses to Locaive Inversion (LI) and Quotative Inversion (QI) constructions on the basis of three empirical facts. They are about how pronouns are realized in tag questions, whether post-nominal alone can modify post-verbal DPs, and how sensitive LI and QI are to experiencer arguments selected by raising verbs. Although this paper agrees to Arao’s position that the syntactic disparities between LI and QI can be accounted for by focusing on the syntactic status of post-verbal DPs in these constructions, it is argued that Arano’s (2014) proposal of covert DP-movement in QI should be abandoned. Instead, on the basis of a few empirical facts, this paper argues that post-verbal DPs in QI have subject properties and move overtly to [Spec, TP]. With this revision, the three empirical facts in question, which reveal the syntactic disparities between LI and QI, are successfully accounted for under the modified feature inheritance mechanism. The empirical data showing that QI is unacceptable with quantifier floating do not counterexemplify this paper’s proposal of overt subject-raising in QI because they are independently accounted for under Takami’s (1998) analysis, in which floated quantifiers are considered as secondary subjects.