Duffley Patrick. Reclaiming Control as a Semantic and Pragmatic Phenomenon

John Benjamins, 2014. — x, 246 pages. — (Pragmatics & Beyond New Series). — ISBN: 978-90-272-6947-8.This monograph is part of a growing research agenda in which semantics and pragmatics not only complement the grammar, but replace it. The analysis is based on the assumption that human language is not primarily about form, but about form-meaning pairings. This runs counter to the autonomous-syntax postulate underlying Landau (2013)’s Control in Generative Grammar that form must be hived off from meaning and studied separately. Duffley shows control to depend on meaning in combination with inferences based on the nature of the events expressed by the matrix and complement, the matrix subject, the semantic relation between matrix and complement, and a number of other factors.The conclusions call for a reconsideration of Ariel (2010)’s distinction in Defining Pragmatics between semantics and pragmatics on the basis of cancelability: many control readings are not cancelable although they are pragmatically inferred. It is proposed that the line be drawn rather between what is linguistically expressed and what is not linguistically expressed but still communicated.Thee conclusions call for a reconsideration of Ariel (2010)’s distinction in Defining Pragmatics between semantics and pragmatics on Thee basis of cancelability: many control readings are not cancelable although they are pragmatically inferred. It is proposed that the line be drawn rather between what is linguistically expressed and what is not linguistically expressed but still communicated.Linguistic semantics and pragmatics – what is said and what is not
The phenomenon of control
The meaning of Thee to-infniitive and of Thee gerund-participle
Control with the infinitive and gerund-participle in subject functionController identified intra-sententially
Controller identified extra-sententially
Control with the infinitive and gerund-participle as direct complement of another verb
The gerund-participle
The infinitive
The explanation of control
Verbs of choice
Verbs of risk
Control in structures with non-finite verb forms in both subject and complement functions
[b]Introduction
The natural-language semantic categories involved in control structures with non-finite verb forms in both subject and complement functions
Verbs denoting entailment
Verbs denoting risk
Verbs denoting facilitation
Verbs expressing The notion of requirement
Verbs denoting inclusion and exclusion
Verbs expressing avoidance
Verbs denoting justification
Conclusions
[b]Control in adjective + to-infinitive constructionsSubject=subject constructions
Subject=object constructions
Conclusions
Control in verb + NP + to-infinitive constructionsWhat the ICE-GB corpus shows
What the ICE-GB doesn’t show
Conclusions
Control in verb + to + gerund-participle vs. verb + to + infinitive constructionsVerbs expressing the notion of agreement
Verbs expressing the notions of admitting and attesting
Control in constructions composed of matrix verb + deverbal nounVerbs which have non-subject control with the gerund-participle
Verbs which have subject control with the gerund-participle
A few generalizations arising from the data
General conclusions and criticism of Haiman and Givón’s iconicity account
Particular issues raised by other approaches to control
Control vs. raising: A false dichotomy
Obligatory vs. non-obligatory control
Obligatory, semi-obligatory and prominence control
Partial control vs. exhaustive control
PRO-gate
Free, nearly free and unique control
Adjunct control
Control with the to-infinitive in rationale clauses
A final note on the positive side of lack of control in free adjuncts
Control in FrenchBaschung’s lexico-syntactic approach
Achard’s cognitive perspective
Reichler-Béguelin’s micro- vs macro-syntactic account
Control in French verbal complement constructions
Control in French adjective + infinitive constructions
Conclusion: Human language as the place where mind meets matter