- [John] [is likely to stop].
- [Is] [John] [likely to quit]?
The new architectural setup suggested by Numbers step 3-5 require no the fresh new equipment for the sentence structure, because the extraposed component could only be realized because a match of the “seems” (Shape step 3), out-of “be” (Figure cuatro), otherwise of one’s adjective “likely” (Shape 5), and can getting organized as a sibling of the lexical lead of your own relevant AP or Vice president in how you to definitely any non-subject argument was frequently instantiated.
Shall i say, eg, that it-Extraposition will be stated as a possibility to own “likely”, and that inside Figure 5 “you to definitely she will follow myself” are a fit out-of “likely” and you will “it” is coinstantiated by the subject out-of “be” and secondarily by topic from “seems”? Or will we declare that new “that”-condition try coinstantiated by the https://datingranking.net/cs/gaydar-recenze/ (“increased to help you”) a quarrel from “be”, and that new valence which allows one another “it” and you may an enthusiastic extraposed constituent is present into the verb “be” (Profile 4), and also the “it” are coinstantiated because of the topic from “seems”? Or will i declare that the newest “that”-term is actually coinstantiated from the topic regarding “be” and you may secondarily of the subject from “seems” and that it was at the degree of the phrase went because of the “seems” your extraposed clause looks (Profile 5)?
The difference between the newest choice out-of Data step three-5 is due to practical question from exactly what disagreement inside the fresh valence from a complement predicator are coinstantiated in what argument on valence of governing predicator
It is sometimes complicated to get decisive objections to respond to this problem, however, our option is the structure used in Shape 3. The result is a compromise ranging from a few intuitions. The very first is that “it” and also the extraposed clause really should not be into the greatly different levels of the forest, as they are from inside the Shape thirteen, since the, regardless if undoubtedly not coreferrential, they are doing in certain sense cash-out one semantic specifications.