Theoretical Aspects of Movement(105) a it seems [Fiona favours dancing]
b Fiona seems [to favour dancing]
Given the near synonymy of these two sentences and the fact that the subject of seem
in (105b) does not appear to be semantically related to this verb (Fiona is not the one
who ‘seems’) we might assume that the latter is formed by a movement of the lower
clause subject into the higher clause subject position:
(106) a [e] seems [Fiona to favour dancing]
b Fiona 1 seems [ t 1 to favour dancing]
This movement is known as raising as the subject of the lower clause raises to the
subject of a higher clause.
Raising can apparently happen out of a number of clauses:
(107) a it seems [it is believed [it is unlikely [that Stan will steal diamonds]]]
b [e] seems [to be believed [to be unlikely [Stan to steal diamonds]]]
c Stan 1 seems [to be believed [to be unlikely [ t 1 to steal diamonds]]]
Thus, at first sight it would seem that movement is unrestricted in terms of how far an
element can be moved. But on closer inspection this might not be an accurate
description of what is going on here. For example, note that in (107b) and (c) all the
clauses that the subject is raised out of are non-finite and none of them seem to have
subjects.
Suppose we try to move out of a finite clause instead:
(108) a *Stan 1 seems [it is unlikely [t 1 to steal diamonds]]
b it seems [Stan 1 is unlikely [t 1 to steal diamonds]]
As we can see, a subject can be raised out of a non-finite clause into the subject
position of a finite clause, but it cannot be raised out of a finite clause. Note that the
finite clause in (108a) has a subject of its own: it. It is a fact about English finite
clauses that they must have subjects and hence the sentence would be ungrammatical if
the subject were missing for independent reasons. So this case differs from the
grammatical movement in (107c) in two ways: the moved subject is moved out of a
finite clause and it is moved out of a clause with a subject.
To control for these variables, let us consider a case where the movement is out of
a non-finite clause with a subject:
(109) a it is unusual [for Eric to hope [Stan will steal diamonds]]]
b *Stan 1 is unusual [for Eric to hope [t 1 to steal diamonds]]]
Again the result is ungrammatical, demonstrating that movement over a subject is
itself enough to cause an ungrammaticality. But why would moving over a subject be a
problem? If long distance movements are possible, it is hard to understand why the
presence or absence of a subject should make any difference at all. However, if we
suppose that long distance movements are not possible, though an element can move a
long way via a series of short movements, we can come to an understanding of these
observations. Consider the grammatical case of (107). As each subject position is