Quarterly (winter, spring, summer, fall)
224 pp. per issue
6 3/4 x 9 1/4
2014 Impact factor:

Linguistic Inquiry

Winter 2010, Vol. 41, No. 1, Pages 111-130
(doi: 10.1162/ling.2010.41.1.111)
© 2010 by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Icelandic Control Really Is A-Movement: Reply to Bobaljik and Landau
Article PDF (126.59 KB)

This article discusses the challenges that Bobaljik and Landau (2009) pose to Boeckx and Hornstein's (2006) movement-based analysis of control in Icelandic. We show in detail that contrary to what Bobaljik and Landau claim, the movement theory of control (with a modification to accommodate quirky Case, a specialty of Icelandic) makes the right empirical cuts regarding the issues they raise, namely, (a) the differences in Case agreement between control and raising constructions, (b) the different patterns of Case transmission (un)available, and (c) the fact that allegedly Case-marked PROs are phonetically null. We argue that rather than being problematic, the data bearing on these issues actually provide independent support to the movement theory of control.