Documentation

Linglib.Studies.Landau2015

Landau (2015): A Two-Tiered Theory of Control #

[Lan15] [Lan04a] [Lan13]

MIT Press. ISBN 978-0-262-02885-1.

The TTC's own apparatus — the predicative/logophoric Tier, the eight PredicateClasses, and their tier assignment — is defined here, mapped into the neutral vocabulary by Tier.mechanism (Control.Mechanism); the finiteness scale it consumes is Control.ClauseClass (Syntax/Control/Head.lean). The file holds the book's empirical engagement: the table (80) contrasts, the de se/de te split in object control (table (36)), the derivation of predicate classes from English Fragment verb entries, and the consilience bridge to [Noo07]'s CTP classification.

Main results #

The two tiers #

The two tiers of obligatory control.

Predicative control (EC complements): selected by nonattitude predicates; PRO moves to Spec,Fin and control is syntactic predication; forces exhaustive control.

Logophoric control (PC complements): selected by attitude predicates; C^OC projects a perspectival coordinate and control is predication + variable binding; allows partial control and forces an attitude-holder-bound reading — de se under subject and psych-object control, de te under communicative object control (table (36), objectControlReading).

  • predicative : Tier

    Predicative control: nonattitude, predication only

  • logophoric : Tier

    Logophoric control: attitude, predication + variable binding

Instances For
    @[instance_reducible]
    instance Landau2015.instDecidableEqTier :
    DecidableEq Tier
    Equations
    @[instance_reducible]
    Equations
    def Landau2015.instReprTier.repr :
    TierStd.Format
    Equations
    Instances For

      Logophoric control corresponds to attitude complements.

      Equations
      Instances For

        Each tier's dependency mechanism, in the neutral vocabulary (Control.Mechanism): predication shares the referent; logophoric control composes a binding leg over predication.

        Equations
        Instances For

          Predicate classification #

          The control predicate classes ([Lan00a]; (4a–d)/(5a–d)): classes (4a–d) select untensed complements (nonattitude → predicative control), classes (5a–d) tensed ones (attitude → logophoric control), [Lan04a]'s correlation. Membership is a property of predicate–complement pairs, not lexemes, and the evaluative class is the of-frame adjectives specifically ([Lan04a] for the class). [Pea16]'s rival cut is temporal, not attitudinal.

          • implicative : PredicateClass

            avoid, dare, manage, remember, … (nonattitude)

          • aspectual : PredicateClass

            begin, continue, finish, start, stop (nonattitude)

          • modal : PredicateClass

            have, is able, may, must, need, should (nonattitude)

          • evaluative : PredicateClass

            bold, crazy, kind, rude, silly, smart (nonattitude; of-frame adjectives)

          • factive : PredicateClass

            dislike, glad, hate, regret, sorry, … (attitude)

          • propositional : PredicateClass

            affirm, believe, claim, declare, say, think (attitude)

          • desiderative : PredicateClass

            agree, choose, decide, hope, intend, want, … (attitude)

          • interrogative : PredicateClass

            ask, guess, inquire, know, wonder (attitude)

          Instances For
            @[instance_reducible]
            Equations
            Equations
            • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
            Instances For

              Table (80): empirical contrasts #

              The six contrast rows of table (80) of [Lan15].

              • inflectedComplement : Table80Row

                OC into an inflected complement (the OC-NC generalization (70); inflectedComplement_realizes_ocnc)

              • nonhumanPRO : Table80Row

                [−human] PRO ((81): the logophoric binder is the AUTHOR/ADDRESSEE function, defined only for humans)

              • implicitControl : Table80Row

                Implicit control ((90)/(93): predication needs an overt external argument)

              • controlShift : Table80Row

                Control shift (Control.IsSaturating.eq_of_controllers blocks it under predication: the shifted reading assigns the saturated slot a different controller)

              • partialControl : Table80Row

                Partial control (Control.IsSaturating.not_hasPartial blocks it under predication)

              • splitControl : Table80Row

                Split control (Control.IsSaturating.not_hasSplit blocks it under predication)

              Instances For
                @[instance_reducible]
                Equations
                Equations
                • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                Instances For

                  Table (80) is a perfect split: every contrast is available under exactly one tier.

                  The inflected-complement row is the OC-NC generalization ((70)), derived from the calculus: [+Agr] leaves OC in [−T] complements (the predicative tier) and destroys it in [+T] complements (the logophoric tier), by the Feature Transmission asymmetry ((60): predication is not contingent on feature matching — Icelandic quirky constructions — while variable binding is, [Hei08], [Kra09b]). Its empirical scope is contested ([Gan19]).

                  EC verbs resist impersonal passives ((98) in [Lan15]): a direct consequence of condition (90), since impersonal passives suppress the external argument that predicative control needs — the implicit-control row of table (80). Cross-linguistic evidence: Hebrew, German, Dutch, Russian.

                  De se / de te in object control (table (36)) #

                  The two logophoric readings of OC PRO under attitude predicates (table (36) of [Lan15]): which coordinate of the embedded context is projected depends on the object control verb subclass.

                  • deSe : DeSeReading

                    PRO = AUTHOR(i'): attitude holder's identification of self

                  • deTe : DeSeReading

                    PRO = ADDRESSEE(i'): attitude holder's identification of addressee

                  Instances For
                    @[instance_reducible]
                    Equations
                    Equations
                    • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                    Instances For

                      Object control verb subclasses (table (36)).

                      Instances For
                        @[instance_reducible]
                        Equations
                        Equations
                        • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                        Instances For

                          Derived Landau class from Verb #

                          Derive [Lan15]'s predicate class from Verb fields — a bridge from Fragment verb entries to the TTC deriving the classification from existing semantic fields rather than storing it independently. Returns none when the classification cannot be determined from the available fields (e.g., try has no implicative, attitude, or cosType).

                          Mapping: cosType → aspectual; implicative/causative → implicative; factivePresup → factive; question-embedding without attitude → interrogative; doxastic → propositional; preferential → desiderative.

                          Equations
                          • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                          Instances For

                            Derive control tier from Verb fields: a control verb induces logophoric control iff it selects an attitude complement (detected via attitude, factivePresup, or takesQuestionBase); otherwise predicative. Returns none for non-control verbs.

                            Equations
                            • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                            Instances For

                              Per-verb verification #

                              "continue" (CoS continuation) → aspectual → predicative

                              "manage" (positive implicative) → implicative → predicative

                              "fail" (negative implicative) → implicative → predicative

                              "remember" (positive implicative) → implicative → predicative

                              "forget" (negative implicative) → implicative → predicative

                              "force" (coercive causative) → implicative → predicative

                              "want" (preferential attitude) → desiderative → logophoric

                              "hope" (preferential attitude) → desiderative → logophoric

                              "promise" (preferential attitude) → desiderative → logophoric. Previously unclassified; fixed by adding attitude to the Fragment entry per [Lan15] (5c).

                              "persuade" (preferential attitude, object control) → desiderative → logophoric. Table (36) establishes persuade as logophoric object control; the desiderative label is this file's derivation from the Fragment's preferential-attitude field ((4)/(5) list no class for it).

                              "know" (factive + question) → factive → logophoric

                              "believe" (doxastic attitude) → propositional → logophoric

                              "think" (doxastic attitude) → propositional → logophoric

                              "wonder" (question-embedding, non-attitude) → interrogative → logophoric

                              "try" has no cosType, implicative, causative, factivePresup, takesQuestionBase, or attitude, so derivedLandauClass cannot classify it. This is correct: "try" is not implicative (trying doesn't entail succeeding) and not clearly attitudinal.

                              Noonan CTP → Landau tier bridge #

                              theorem Landau2015.ctp_tier_consistent (c : CTPClass) (hTier : (ctpToControlTier c).isSome = true) (hClass : (ctpToLandauClass c).isSome = true) :
                              ctpToControlTier c = Option.map (fun (x : PredicateClass) => x.tier) (ctpToLandauClass c)

                              When both mappings are defined, they agree on the control tier.

                              [Noo07]'s equi-deletion criterion (§2.1) and [Lan15]'s control tiers classify the same English verbs by independent properties; the bridge theorem makes the consilience kernel-checked, witnessed by manage.

                              Cross-paper consilience: Noonan-equi on the achievement class coincides with Landau's predicative tier.

                              Chierchia (1984) comparison #

                              The TTC engages [Chi84]'s property theory as its major predecessor; the two cut the control verb space differently:

                              The systematic divergence: Chierchia → obligatory → predicative for ALL control verbs, while Landau → logophoric for attitude verbs. The theories agree on non-attitude verbs (both predicative) and diverge precisely on attitude verbs.

                              The CP/no-CP distinction aligns with the predicative/logophoric distinction: CP-bearing classes are predicative, CP-lacking classes are logophoric. Chierchia's CP is thereby the semantic reflex of Landau's condition (90): the entailment needs a specific overt argument to serve as controller, which is what predication demands.

                              Non-attitude verbs: Chierchia and Landau agree #

                              For verbs without an attitude builder (try, manage, begin, stop, force, fail), both systems classify them as predicative control.

                              Attitude verbs: systematic divergence #

                              For verbs with an attitude builder (want, hope, promise, persuade), the two systems diverge: Chierchia classifies them as obligatory (→ predicative), while Landau classifies them as logophoric.

                              This is a genuine theoretical disagreement: Chierchia groups by entailment structure (all verbs with the CP are treated uniformly), Landau groups by attitude status (attitude verbs introduce a perspectival coordinate that changes the control mechanism).