Advances in Role and Reference Grammar

132 ROBERT D. VAN VALIN, JR.

this generalization, but, crucially, "raising" verbs like believe violate it.

That is, they have one more direct core argument than their meaning

licenses. Because there are two direct core argument slots in a clause with

believe in a non-subordinate core juncture and there is only one argument,

the actor-experiencer, which can appear as a direct core argument, the

propositional argument being realized as the linked core, the open syntactic

argument slot must be filled by an argument from the embedded LS. This

is illustrated in Figure 45, which exemplifies the linking between (120b) and

(119c). No modifications of (115) are necessary to handle these construc­

tions. As with "equi" constructions, the argument that would be the pivot

of the linked core cannot assume a syntactic function in it; in order to avoid

a CC violation, it must be linked to a syntactic function in the matrix core.

In the "equi" construction, it is linked to the same syntactic function as an

identical argument from the matrix LS, whereas in the "raising" construc­

tion it is linked to the open syntactic function in the matrix core. Hence

"raising" involves the occurrence of an argument from the embedded LS in

the matrix core. Since constructions like (119c) are relatively rare cross-lin-