SEMANTIC AND SYNTACTIC FACTORS IN CONTROL 1773.1.1 Control in rationale constructions
In RRG terms, rationale constructions are a type of clausal juncture; all
other control constructions we will look at are cases of core juncture. The
syntactic tests for clausal junctures are: 1) there are no obligatorily shared
arguments between the two clauses, i.e. there is no obligatory gap, and 2)
the lower clause does not function as an argument of the main verb.
Rationale constructions encode the rationale or reason, the goal to be
accomplished, that results from the action/event encoded in the matrix
clause. The second or complement event is to be a result of the first or
matrix event; the second event serves as a motivation or rationale for doing
the first event.
(22) a. John bought Mary a book (in order) to please her.
b. John ran the race (in order) to impress his friends.
John sang the children a lullaby (in order to) calm them.
d. John stayed at home all weekend to write the article in order
for his brother to review it.
The subject gap has a non-obligatory control relation; it may be filled or
unfilled. If there is a subject gap, then the actor of the matrix event is also
the actor of the resulting event encoded in the complement clause. The
matrix actor is controller of the infinitival subject gap. There are no other
choices for controller. The embedded clause encodes what the matrix actor
will accomplish by his/her action. Such constructions encode an action/
event and the motives of the matrix actor; the actor does something with a
particular purpose or resulting event in mind.
If the subject gap is filled, as in (23), then the actor of the main clause
is not the actor of the infinitive clause. The actor acts with a resulting event
in mind; by performing the first event, the actor merely aids, or facilitates
the second event, although he/she is not a participant in that event.
(23) John bought the turkey in order for his wife to cook it.
As mentioned previously, rationale constructions are examples of
clausal junctures, the loosest type of juncture. It is to be expected that they
evince some similarities to other types of clausal juncture. For example,
consider the resemblances between rationale constructions and coordinate
constructions evidenced in the following examples.
(24) a. John ran the race to impress his friends.
b. John ran the race and impressed his friends.