It has been generally assumed that there is a major asymmetry between `subject' and `object' in English-type languages. In overt syntax, subject must raise out of its VP-internal position to the Spec of a functional head, while object remains inside the VP.' Over the last several years, however, substantial evidence has come to light indicating that object, like subject, raises out of its initial position, hence, that the asymmetry is only apparent. I will review this evidence, concluding that it is decisive. Subject raises to [Spec, Agrs] and object to [Spec, Agro], driven by an EPP requirement of Agr. Nonetheless, I will show that a residue of the original asymmetry remains, as overt `object shift' in English is, contrary to the situation with subjects, optional. I will suggest that that residual asymmetry is to be instantiated in terms of optionality of Agro vs. obligatoriness of Agrs. If Agro is present, overt raising will be forced by its EPP requirement, and if an NP raises to satisfy that requirement, its Case will be checked. If Agro is absent, there will be no overt raising; the nominal's Case will be checked by covert raising of its formal features to the V, or, alternatively, be licensed in situ by the Agree operation of Chomsky (1998).
[1]
Emmon W. Bach,et al.
On Raising: One Rule of English Grammar and Its Theoretical Implications
,
1978
.
[2]
Hidekazu Tanaka.
Raised Objects and Superiority
,
1999,
Linguistic Inquiry.
[3]
Noam Chomsky.
Some notes on economy of derivation and representation
,
2013
.
[4]
M. D. Dikken,et al.
Binding, expletives, and levels
,
1995
.
[5]
Noam Chomsky.
Knowledge of Language
,
1986
.
[6]
Molly Diesing,et al.
Semantic Variables and Object Shift
,
1996
.
[7]
Noam Chomsky,et al.
Lectures on Government and Binding
,
1981
.
[8]
Masatoshi Koizumi.
Object agreement phrases and the Split VP Hypothesis
,
1993
.
[9]
Željko Bošković,et al.
The Syntax of Nonfinite Complementation: An Economy Approach
,
1997
.
[10]
R. Larson.
On the double object construction
,
1988
.
[11]
Noam Chomsky,et al.
The Logical Structure of Linguistic Theory
,
1975
.