The CP and split CP cross-linguistically: The layer parameter
TL;DRAbstract
In this article, I argue that languages differ as to whether their clausal complements constitute Complementizer Phrases (CPs) or split CPs in the sense of Rizzi (1997). I also show that Modern English finite complements are always split but that the specification of mood in these complements accounts for phenomena such as negative raising, the presence of certain complementizers and embedded topicalizations. Older varieties of English do not provide evidence for a split CP.
Chat with Paper
AI Agents for this Paper
In this article, I argue that languages differ as to whether their clausal complements constitute Complementizer Phrases (CPs) or split CPs in the sense of Rizzi (1997). I also show that Modern English finite complements are always split but that the specification of mood in these complements accounts for phenomena such as negative raising, the presence of certain complementizers and embedded topicalizations. Older varieties of English do not provide evidence for a split CP.
Keywords
Chat
Click to start Chat