Advances in Role and Reference Grammar

A SYNOPSIS OF ROLE AND REFERENCE GRAMMAR 131

Figures 43 and 44 in terms of linking is the effect of (117): persuade is a
causative verb, and hence it has undergoer control, whereas promise is a
commissive speech act verb, not a directive, and consequently it has actor
control. It should be noted that the relation between the controller and the
missing argument position is "sharing" in terms of the linking algorithm,
not coreference, as in GB; there is no zero element in the linked core
coreferential with the controller in the matrix clause in the RRG analysis.^62

7.2.2 "Raising" constructions

Classic examples of this type of non-subordinate core juncture are pre­

sented in (119).

(119) a. Mary seems to be cleaning the clock.

b. It seems to be raining.

 John believes Mary to have cleaned the clock.

d. The clock is believed by John to have been cleaned by Mary.

The syntactic structure of (119a,b) is the same as that of (113a) in Figure

41, and the structure of (119c,d) is the same as that of (113b,c) in Figures 43

and 44. The LSs for these sentences are shown in (120).

(120) a. seem' (0, [[do' (Mary)] CAUSE [BECOME clean'

(clock)]]), [-MR]63

b. believe' (John, [[do' (Mary)] CAUSE [BECOME clean'

(clock)]])

The central property that distinguishes "raising" verbs from "equi"

verbs is syntactic transitivity: the number of direct core arguments that the

verb takes. Because most theories erroneously analyze constructions like

(113) and (119) as involving subordination and therefore treat the infinitive

as the "direct object" of the verb, it has not been widely recognized that

most verbs vary in their syntactic transitivity between their uses in simple

clauses and as complement-taking predicates. For example, try in a simple

clause is syntactically transitive and takes two direct core arguments, but in

(113a), as shown in Figure 41, it takes only one direct core argument and

therefore is syntactically intransitive. The same is true with verbs like want

and remember, e.g. / remembered the time of the meeting (two direct core

arguments) vs. / remembered to go to the meeting (one direct core argu­

ment). The number of direct core arguments that a complement-taking

predicate has is a function of its semantics: causative, speech act and per­

ception verbs have two, all others have one. All of the "equi" verbs follow