HOME

TheInfoList



OR:

In
linguistics Linguistics is the scientific study of human language. It is called a scientific study because it entails a comprehensive, systematic, objective, and precise analysis of all aspects of language, particularly its nature and structure. Ling ...
, control is a construction in which the understood subject of a given
predicate Predicate or predication may refer to: * Predicate (grammar), in linguistics * Predication (philosophy) * several closely related uses in mathematics and formal logic: **Predicate (mathematical logic) **Propositional function **Finitary relation, o ...
is determined by some expression in context. Stereotypical instances of control involve verbs. A superordinate verb "controls" the arguments of a subordinate,
nonfinite verb A nonfinite verb is a derivative form of a verb unlike finite verbs. Accordingly, nonfinite verb forms are inflected for neither number nor person, and they cannot perform action as the root of an independent clause. In English, nonfinite verb ...
. Control was intensively studied in the
government and binding A government is the system or group of people governing an organized community, generally a state. In the case of its broad associative definition, government normally consists of legislature, executive, and judiciary. Government ...
framework in the 1980s, and much of the terminology from that era is still used today. In the days of Transformational Grammar, control phenomena were discussed in terms of ''Equi-NP deletion''. Control is often analyzed in terms of a null pronoun called ''
PRO Pro is an abbreviation meaning " professional". Pro, PRO or variants thereof may also refer to: People * Miguel Pro (1891–1927), Mexican priest * Pro Hart (1928–2006), Australian painter * Mlungisi Mdluli (born 1980), South African retire ...
''. Control is also related to raising, although there are important differences between control and raising. Most if not all languages have control constructions and these constructions tend to occur frequently.


Examples

Standard instances of (obligatory) control are present in the following sentences: ::Susan promised to help us. - Subject control with the obligatory control predicate ''promise'' ::Fred stopped laughing. - Subject control with the obligatory control predicate ''stop'' ::We tried to leave. - Subject control with the obligatory control predicate ''try'' ::Sue asked Bill to stop. - Object control with the obligatory control predicate ''ask'' ::They told you to support the effort. - Object control with the obligatory control predicate ''tell'' ::Someone forced him to do it. - Object control with the obligatory control predicate ''force'' Each of these sentences contains two verbal predicates. Each time the control verb is on the left, and the verb whose arguments are controlled is on the right. The control verb determines which expression is interpreted as the subject of the verb on the right. The first three sentences are examples of subject control, since the subject of the control verb is also the understood subject of the subordinate verb. The second three examples are instances of object control, because the
object Object may refer to: General meanings * Object (philosophy), a thing, being, or concept ** Object (abstract), an object which does not exist at any particular time or place ** Physical object, an identifiable collection of matter * Goal, an ...
of the control verb is understood as the subject of the subordinate verb. The argument of the matrix predicate that functions as the subject of the embedded predicate is the ''controller''. The controllers are in bold in the examples.


Control verbs vs. auxiliary verbs

Control verbs have semantic content; they semantically select their
argument An argument is a statement or group of statements called premises intended to determine the degree of truth or acceptability of another statement called conclusion. Arguments can be studied from three main perspectives: the logical, the dialecti ...
s, that is, their appearance strongly influences the nature of the arguments they take. In this regard, they are very different from
auxiliary verb An auxiliary verb ( abbreviated ) is a verb that adds functional or grammatical meaning to the clause in which it occurs, so as to express tense, aspect, modality, voice, emphasis, etc. Auxiliary verbs usually accompany an infinitive verb or a ...
s, which lack semantic content and do not semantically select arguments. Compare the following pairs of sentences: ::a. Sam will go. - ''will'' is an auxiliary verb. ::b. Sam yearns to go. - ''yearns'' is a subject control verb. ::a. Jim has to do it. - ''has to'' is a modal auxiliary verb. ::b. Jim refuses to do it. - ''refuses'' is a subject control verb. ::a. Jill would lie and cheat. - ''would'' is a modal auxiliary. ::b. Jill attempted to lie and cheat. - ''attempted'' is a subject control verb. The a-sentences contain auxiliary verbs that do not select the subject argument. What this means is that the embedded verbs ''go'', ''do'', and ''lie'' and ''cheat'' are responsible for semantically selecting the subject argument. The point is that while control verbs may have the same outward appearance as auxiliary verbs, the two verb types are quite different.


Non-obligatory or optional control

Control verbs (such as ''promise'', ''stop'', ''try'', ''ask'', ''tell'', ''force'', ''yearn'', ''refuse'', ''attempt'') obligatorily induce a control construction. That is, when control verbs appear, they inherently determine which of their arguments controls the embedded predicate. Control is hence obligatorily present with these verbs. In contrast, the arguments of many verbs can be controlled even when a superordinate control verb is absent, e.g. ::He left, singing all the way. - Non-obligatory control of the present participle ''singing'' :: Understanding nothing, the class protested. - Non-obligatory control of the present participle ''understanding'' :: Holding his breath too long, Fred passed out. - Non-obligatory control of the present participle ''holding'' In one sense, control is obligatory in these sentences because the arguments of the present participles ''singing'', ''understanding'', and ''holding'' are clearly controlled by the matrix subjects. In another sense, however, control is non-obligatory (or optional) because there is no control predicate present that necessitates that control occur. General contextual factors are determining which expression is understood as the controller. The controller is the subject in these sentences because the subject establishes point of view.


Arbitrary control

Arbitrary control occurs when the controller is understood to be anybody in general, e.g. ::Reading the Dead Sea Scrolls is fun. - Arbitrary control of the gerund ''reading''. ::Seeing is believing. - Arbitrary control of the gerunds ''seeing'' and ''believing'' ::Having to do something repeatedly is boring. - Arbitrary control of the gerund ''having'' The understood subject of the gerunds in these sentence is non-discriminate; any generic person will do. In such cases, control is said to be "arbitrary". Any time the understood subject of a given predicate is not present in the linguistic or situational context, a generic subject (e.g. 'one') is understood.


Representing control

Theoretical linguistics posits the existence of the null pronoun
PRO Pro is an abbreviation meaning " professional". Pro, PRO or variants thereof may also refer to: People * Miguel Pro (1891–1927), Mexican priest * Pro Hart (1928–2006), Australian painter * Mlungisi Mdluli (born 1980), South African retire ...
as the theoretical basis for the analysis of control structures. The null pronoun PRO is an element that impacts a sentence in a similar manner to how a normal pronoun impacts a sentence, but the null pronoun is inaudible. The null PRO is added to the predicate, where it occupies the position that one would typically associate with an overt subject (if one were present). The following trees illustrate PRO in both constituency-based structures of
phrase structure grammar The term phrase structure grammar was originally introduced by Noam Chomsky as the term for grammar studied previously by Emil Post and Axel Thue (Post canonical systems). Some authors, however, reserve the term for more restricted grammars in th ...
s and dependency-based structures of
dependency grammar Dependency grammar (DG) is a class of modern grammatical theories that are all based on the dependency relation (as opposed to the ''constituency relation'' of phrase structure) and that can be traced back primarily to the work of Lucien Tesni� ...
s: :: :: The constituency-based trees are the a-trees on the left, and the dependency-based trees the b-trees on the right. Certainly aspects of these trees - especially of the constituency trees - can be disputed. In the current context, the trees are intended merely to suggest by way of illustration how control and PRO are conceived of. The indices are a common means of identifying PRO and with its antecedent in the control predicate, and the orange arrows indicate further the control relation. In a sense, the controller assigns its index to PRO, which identifies the argument that is understood as the subject of the subordinate predicate. A (constituency-based) X-bar theoretic tree that is consistent with the standard GB-type analysis is given next: :: The details of this tree are, again, not so important. What is important is that by positing the existence of the null subject PRO, the theoretical analysis of control constructions gains a useful tool that can help uncover important traits of control constructions.


Control vs. raising

Control must be distinguished from raising, though the two can be outwardly similar. Control predicates semantically select their arguments, as stated above. Raising predicates, in contrast, do not semantically select (at least) one of their dependents. The contrast is evident with the so-called ''raising-to-object'' verbs (= ECM-verbs) such as ''believe'', ''expect'', ''want'', and ''prove''. Compare the following a- and b-sentences: ::a. Fred asked you to read it. - ''asked'' is an object control verb. ::b. Fred expects you to read it. - ''expects'' is a raising-to-object verb. ::a. Jim forced her to say it. - ''forced'' is an object control verb. ::b. Jim believed her to have said it. - ''believes'' is a raising-to-object verb. The control predicates ''ask'' and ''force'' semantically select their object arguments, whereas the raising-to-object verbs do not. Instead, the object of the raising verb appears to have "risen" from the subject position of the embedded predicate, in this case from the embedded predicates ''to read'' and ''to have said''. In other words, the embedded predicate is semantically selecting the argument of the matrix predicate. What this means is that while a raising-to-object verb takes an object dependent, that dependent is not a semantic argument of that raising verb. The distinction becomes apparent when one considers that a control predicate like ''ask'' requires its object to be an animate entity, whereas a raising-to-object predicate like ''expects'' places no semantic limitations on its object dependent.


Diagnostic Tests


Expletives

The different predicate types can be identified using expletive ''there''. Expletive ''there'' can appear as the "object" of a raising-to-object predicate, but not of a control verb, e.g. ::a. *Fred asked there to be a party. - Expletive ''there'' cannot appear as the object of a control predicate. ::b. Fred expects there to be a party. - Expletive ''there'' can appear as the object of a raising-to-object predicate. ::a. *Jim forced there to be a party. - Expletive ''there'' cannot appear as the object of a control predicate. ::b. Jim believes there to have been a party. - Expletive ''there'' can appear as the object of a raising-to-object predicate. The control predicates cannot take expletive ''there'' because ''there'' does not fulfill the semantic requirements of the control predicates. Since the raising-to-object predicates do not select their objects, they can easily take expletive ''there''.


Idioms

Control and raising also differ in how they behave with idiomatic expressions.Many syntax books discuss the way idioms are used to diagnose control and raising constructions. See Carnie (2007), Davies & Dubinsky (2008). Idiomatic expressions retain their meaning in a raising construction, but they lose it when they are arguments of a control verb. See the examples below featuring the idiom "The cat is out of the bag", which has the meaning that facts that were previously hidden are now revealed. ::a. The cat wants to be out of the bag. - There is no possible idiomatic interpretation in the control construction. ::b. The cat seems to be out of the bag. - The idiomatic interpretation is retained in the raising construction. The explanation for this fact is that raising predicates do not semantically select their arguments, and therefore their arguments are not interpreted compositionally, as the subject or object of the raising predicate. Arguments of the control predicate, on the other hand, have to fulfill their semantic requirements, and interpreted as the argument of the predicate compositionally. This test works for object control and
ECM ECM may refer to: Economics and commerce * Engineering change management * Equity capital markets * Error correction model, an econometric model * European Common Market Mathematics * Elliptic curve method * European Congress of Mathemat ...
too. :a. I asked the cat to be out of the bag. - There is no possible idiomatic interpretation in the control construction. :b. I believe the cat to be out of the bag. - The idiomatic interpretation is retained in the raising construction.


Notes


See also

*
Dependency grammar Dependency grammar (DG) is a class of modern grammatical theories that are all based on the dependency relation (as opposed to the ''constituency relation'' of phrase structure) and that can be traced back primarily to the work of Lucien Tesni� ...
*
Phrase structure grammar The term phrase structure grammar was originally introduced by Noam Chomsky as the term for grammar studied previously by Emil Post and Axel Thue (Post canonical systems). Some authors, however, reserve the term for more restricted grammars in th ...
*
Predicate Predicate or predication may refer to: * Predicate (grammar), in linguistics * Predication (philosophy) * several closely related uses in mathematics and formal logic: **Predicate (mathematical logic) **Propositional function **Finitary relation, o ...
*
Argument An argument is a statement or group of statements called premises intended to determine the degree of truth or acceptability of another statement called conclusion. Arguments can be studied from three main perspectives: the logical, the dialecti ...
* Raising *
Catenative verb In English and other languages, catenative verbs are verbs which can be followed within the same clause by another verb. This second subordinated verb can be in either the infinitive (both full and bare) or gerund forms. An example appears i ...


References

*Bach, E. 1974. Syntactic theory. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc. *Borsley, R. 1996. Modern phrase structure grammar. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishers. *Carnie, A. 2007. Syntax: A generative introduction, 2nd edition. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing. *Cowper, E. 2009
A concise introduction to syntactic theory: The government-binding approach
Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. *Culicover, P. 1982. Syntax, 2nd edition. New York: Academic Press. *Culicover, P. 1997. Principles and Parameters: An introduction to syntactic theory. Oxford University Press. *Davies, William D., and Stanley Dubinsky. 2008
The grammar of raising and control: A course in syntactic argumentation
John Wiley & Sons. *Emonds, J. 1976. A transformational approach to English syntax: Root, structure-preserving, and local transformations. New York: Academic Press. *Grinder, J. and S. Elgin. 1973. Guide to transformational grammar: History, theory, and practice. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, Inc. *Haegeman, L. 1994. Introduction to government and binding theory, 2nd edition. Oxford, UK: Blackwell. *Lasnik, H. and M. Saito. 1999. On the subject of infinitives. In H. Lasnik, Minimalist analysis, 7-24. Malden, MA: Blackwell. *McCawley, T. 1988. The syntactic phenomena of English, Vol. 1. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. *Osborne, T. and T. Groß 2012. Constructions are catenae: Construction Grammar meets Dependency Grammar. Cognitive Linguistics 23, 1, 163-214. *van Riemsdijk, H. and E. Williams. 1986. Introduction to the theory of grammar. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. *Rosenbaum, Peter. 1967.
The grammar of English predicate complement constructions
'. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.


External links

* List of English control verbs at Wiktionary {{DEFAULTSORT:Control (Linguistics) Verb types