<?xml version="1.0" standalone="yes"?>
<Paper uid="W06-1524">
  <Title>Reconsidering Raising and Experiencers in English</Title>
  <Section position="3" start_page="0" end_page="159" type="intro">
    <SectionTitle>
1 Introduction
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> The raising predicate seem is often cited as one of the core examples in discussions of TAG's application to natural language syntax. Under a generative/minimalist account, a sentence such as (1a) will have the underlying structure in (1b): (1) a. John seems to like coffee.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="1"> b. Johna0 seems a1 ta0 to like coffeea2 .</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="2"> In TAG, the subject John remains local to the elementary tree headed by like, the elementary tree in which its theta role is assigned. The observed displacement effect is a result of the extension of the like-headed tree after the adjunction of an auxiliary tree headed by seem (Kroch and Joshi, 1985).</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="3"> In the more recent analysis of Frank (2002), a sentence such as (1a) is derived through the composition of the elementary trees of Figure 1 to derive the final tree in Figure 2.</Paragraph>
    <Section position="1" start_page="159" end_page="159" type="sub_section">
      <SectionTitle>
1.1 Defining the Problem
</SectionTitle>
      <Paragraph position="0"> At issue in this paper will be the structure of sentences such as those in (2): (2) a. John seems to me to like coffee.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="1"> b. John seems to like coffee to me.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="2"> Here, a prepositional phrase to me now appears in the clause; as illustrated, its position is variable. The individual introduced in this prepositional phrase is interpreted as being an experiencer of the verb seem, in no way dependent upon the embedded like predicate. As such, according to the Fundamental TAG Hypothesis (Frank, 2002), this experiencer must be composed as a part of the seem auxiliary tree. For discursive ease, the case in (2a) will be termed a medial experiencer, and the (2b) case will be a final experiencer. What is now required is an auxiliary tree for seem which retains the desired recursivity, and supports this experiencer in either possible position. Further syntactic diagnostics will be used to determine the necessary shape of such an auxiliary tree.</Paragraph>
    </Section>
    <Section position="2" start_page="159" end_page="159" type="sub_section">
      <SectionTitle>
1.2 An Existing Account
</SectionTitle>
      <Paragraph position="0"> In Frank (2002), a structure is given for this type of raising verb with an experiencer, as in Figure 3.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="2"> encer (Frank, 2000) This tree would adjoin into the Ta3 node of an infinitival clause tree, as in Figure 1, yielding the correct string order (after substitution of the frontier DP-experiencer), for a raising sentence with a medial experiencer (2a). Frank's discussion of this ternary structure is essentially limited to the well-formedness of its functional architecture, and the fact that a stipulation will need to be put in place to obviate the satisfaction of the T head's EPP feature by the experiencer. While a valid point, there are still two key unanswered questions with regards to this structure: first of all, are the complements of the verb straightforwardly interchangeable (to account for the variable position of the experiencer), and is there any evidence for or against the ternary branching structure? These questions emerge to be inter-related, and in exploring the consequences of the ternary structure, it will be shown that simple transposition of the verb's complements is not an option within a flat ternary structure.</Paragraph>
    </Section>
  </Section>
class="xml-element"></Paper>