{"id":{"repo_id":"mit","oai_identifier":"oai:dspace.mit.edu:1721.1/77800"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/mit/oai:dspace.mit.edu:1721.1/77800","repository":{"repo_id":"mit","name":"MIT","base_url":"https://dspace.mit.edu/oai/request"},"display":{"title":"Varieties of clausal complementation","abstract":"This thesis argues that clausal arguments of mental-state predicates divide into two main types: those that express the content, or \"subject matter\" of the mental state, and those that express the cause of the mental state. My central theoretical claim is that this dichotomy corresponds to a difference in syntactic structure. I propose that these different structures derive from an operation of promotion to subject position that is constrained by two factors. First, it is constrained by syntactic category: DPs, but crucially not CPs, are eligible for promotion, and I argue that clauses in subject position are in fact DPs. Second, it constrained by locality: even among DPs, only the highest DP is eligible for promotion. I explore a range of cases where this locality constraint is not met-i.e., cases of \"argument intervention\" in a variety of constructions. Finally, I discuss how these constraints interact to derive the realization of clausal arguments and the syntactic properties of the predicates that select them.","abstract_html":"This thesis argues that clausal arguments of mental-state predicates divide into two main types: those that express the content, or "subject matter" of the mental state, and those that express the cause of the mental state. My central theoretical claim is that this dichotomy corresponds to a difference in syntactic structure. I propose that these different structures derive from an operation of promotion to subject position that is constrained by two factors. First, it is constrained by syntactic category: DPs, but crucially not CPs, are eligible for promotion, and I argue that clauses in subject position are in fact DPs. Second, it constrained by locality: even among DPs, only the highest DP is eligible for promotion. I explore a range of cases where this locality constraint is not met-i.e., cases of "argument intervention" in a variety of constructions. Finally, I discuss how these constraints interact to derive the realization of clausal arguments and the syntactic properties of the predicates that select them.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Hartman, Jeremy"],"institution":"Massachusetts Institute of Technology","degree_name":null,"degree_level":null,"degree_discipline":null,"degree_department":"Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Dept. of Linguistics and Philosophy.","school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":["Sabine Iatridou. David Pesetsky and Danny Fox."],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2012,"date_issued":"2012","date_published":"2012","updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:20:59Z","subjects":["Linguistics and Philosophy."],"languages":["eng"],"rights":["M.I.T. theses are protected by copyright. They may be viewed from this source for any purpose, but reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission. See provided URL for inquiries about permission."],"rights_urls":["http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7582"],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/77800","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier.uri"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor.advisor","label":"Advisor","values":["Sabine Iatridou. David Pesetsky and Danny Fox."]},{"key":"dc:contributor.department","label":"Department","values":["Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Dept. of Linguistics and Philosophy."]},{"key":"dc:contributor.other","label":"Dc Contributor Other","values":["Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Dept. of Linguistics and Philosophy."]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Hartman, Jeremy"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.accessioned","label":"Dc Date Accessioned","values":["2013-03-13T15:48:35Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2013-03-13T15:48:35Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.issued","label":"Date","values":["2012"]},{"key":"dc:publisher","label":"Institution","values":["Massachusetts Institute of Technology"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Thesis"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Linguistics and Philosophy."]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language.iso","label":"Language (ISO)","values":["eng"]},{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["M.I.T. theses are protected by copyright. They may be viewed from this source for any purpose, but reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission. See provided URL for inquiries about permission."]},{"key":"dc:rights.uri","label":"Rights URI","values":["http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7582"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/77800"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description","label":"Description","values":["Thesis (Ph. D.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Linguistics and Philosophy, 2012.","Cataloged from PDF version of thesis.","Includes bibliographical references (p. 135-141)."]},{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["This thesis argues that clausal arguments of mental-state predicates divide into two main types: those that express the content, or \"subject matter\" of the mental state, and those that express the cause of the mental state. My central theoretical claim is that this dichotomy corresponds to a difference in syntactic structure. I propose that these different structures derive from an operation of promotion to subject position that is constrained by two factors. First, it is constrained by syntactic category: DPs, but crucially not CPs, are eligible for promotion, and I argue that clauses in subject position are in fact DPs. Second, it constrained by locality: even among DPs, only the highest DP is eligible for promotion. I explore a range of cases where this locality constraint is not met-i.e., cases of \"argument intervention\" in a variety of constructions. Finally, I discuss how these constraints interact to derive the realization of clausal arguments and the syntactic properties of the predicates that select them."]},{"key":"dc:description.degree","label":"Dc Description Degree","values":["Ph.D."]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Varieties of clausal complementation"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor.advisor":["Sabine Iatridou. David Pesetsky and Danny Fox."],"dc:contributor.department":["Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Dept. of Linguistics and Philosophy."],"dc:contributor.other":["Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Dept. of Linguistics and Philosophy."],"dc:creator":["Hartman, Jeremy"],"dc:date.accessioned":["2013-03-13T15:48:35Z"],"dc:date.available":["2013-03-13T15:48:35Z"],"dc:date.issued":["2012"],"dc:description":["Thesis (Ph. D.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Linguistics and Philosophy, 2012.","Cataloged from PDF version of thesis.","Includes bibliographical references (p. 135-141)."],"dc:description.abstract":["This thesis argues that clausal arguments of mental-state predicates divide into two main types: those that express the content, or \"subject matter\" of the mental state, and those that express the cause of the mental state. My central theoretical claim is that this dichotomy corresponds to a difference in syntactic structure. I propose that these different structures derive from an operation of promotion to subject position that is constrained by two factors. First, it is constrained by syntactic category: DPs, but crucially not CPs, are eligible for promotion, and I argue that clauses in subject position are in fact DPs. Second, it constrained by locality: even among DPs, only the highest DP is eligible for promotion. I explore a range of cases where this locality constraint is not met-i.e., cases of \"argument intervention\" in a variety of constructions. Finally, I discuss how these constraints interact to derive the realization of clausal arguments and the syntactic properties of the predicates that select them."],"dc:description.degree":["Ph.D."],"dc:identifier.uri":["http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/77800"],"dc:language.iso":["eng"],"dc:publisher":["Massachusetts Institute of Technology"],"dc:rights":["M.I.T. theses are protected by copyright. They may be viewed from this source for any purpose, but reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission. See provided URL for inquiries about permission."],"dc:rights.uri":["http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7582"],"dc:subject":["Linguistics and Philosophy."],"dc:title":["Varieties of clausal complementation"],"dc:type":["Thesis"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:20:59Z"}