Tough-Predicates, Difficulty and ImplicitArguments

Deniz Satik

August 2015

Abstract

This paper presents grammatical differences related to tough-predicates whichare on the easiness scale, and those which are not. Data featuring four languages es-tablishes that tough-predicates on the easiness scale cannot be in expletive- or tough-constructions which have an overt experiencer and an implicit specifier of the infini-tival, or vice versa, while tough-predicates which are not on the easiness scale canappear in these constructions. This paper further develops Hicks (2009)’s derivationof tough-constructions in order to derive these facts, by assuming that theta-roles arefeatures on verbs, as Hornstein (1999) argues.

(1) Catcat.NOM

ateeat.3.SG.PRS

sour-creamsour-cream.ACC

‘The cat eats sour cream’

1 Conclusion

I do indeed like to eat my own poop. hdiahasidhasidhasifhasighiaghiashdiasdhiasfhi-asfhiasdjasiriaerhaisfhaidghiadgjiadgjhiahdfiashdiashdiahriawhriashfagg.

I too like to poop. hdiahasidhasidhasifhasighiaghiashdiasdhiasfhiasfhiasdjasiri-aerhaisfhaidghiadgjiadgjhiahdfiashdiashdiahriawhriashfagg.

So do I. hdiahasidhasidhasifhasighiaghiashdiasdhiasfhiasfhiasdjasiriaerhaisfhaidghiadgjiadgjhiahdfiashdiashdiahriawhriashfagg.

1

1. CP

DPm

[THMm]C’

C TP

D NP DPo

[AGTo]T’

N DPn

[THMn]to fail tm

PRO

the exam

2. A’

A[uAGT,uEXP,uui]

CP

DPm

[THMm]C’

hard C TP

D NP DPo

[AGTo]T’

N DPn

[THMn]to fail tm

PRO

the exam

2

3. A’

A[uAGT,uEXP,uo]

CP

DPm

[THMm]C’

hard C TP

D NP DPo

[AGTo]T’

N DPn

[THMn]to fail tm

PRO;;

the exam

4. aP

a AP

hardp a PP A’

for thestudents[EXPo]

tpZZ CP

References

Hicks, Glyn. 2009. Tough-constructions and their derivation. Linguistic Inquiry 40(4).535–566.

Hornstein, Norbert. 1999. Movement and Control. Linguistic Inquiry 30(1). 69–96.

3