Control, Binding, and the Statue vs. Identity Interpretation


  • Youssef A. Haddad University of Florida


English obligatory control constructions, as well as ECM structures with locally bound reflexives, only allow de se construal. Hornstein and Pietroski (2010) attribute this fact to movement. They hold that PRO and reflexives in these structures are non-distinct copies of their antecedents, and as such they function as vehicles for de se interpretation. This argument for nondistinctness as a result of movement is challenged by the fact that, given enough context (e.g. the so-called “Madame Tussaud context”), PRO and the reflexive may receive a statue interpretation that is distinguishable from the identity interpretation of their antecedents. I present the relevant statue data and show that they do not pose a challenge for the movement approach to control and binding. I suggest that the statue interpretation is the result of property shift – rather than reference shift – brought about by overt or covert free as-adjuncts that function as stage-level predicates.