Chapter 8 - The Syntax of Non-Finite Clauses(2) a [CP that [IP the sheriff will [vP ∆ [VP shoot the outlaw]]]]
b [CP for [IP the sheriff ∆ [vP to [VP shoot the outlaw]]]]
But while there certainly are non-finite clauses which fit this pattern, there are others
for which bits and pieces of the structure appear to be missing. In some cases the
complementiser is not only absent, but obligatorily so, which is very unlike the finite
clause which has an optional complementiser:
(3) a I said [(that) the sheriff’s forming a posse]
b I believe [(*for) the sheriff to be forming a posse]
In other non-finite clauses the subject appears to be obligatorily absent, again
contrasting with the finite clause which always has a subject:
(4) a the sheriff tried [(him) to ride the horse]
b the sheriff said [(he) rode a horse]
There are even some cases of non-finite clause where not only is there no evidence of
a complementiser or an inflection, but there isn’t even a verb:
(5) I consider [(for) the cowboy (to) tough]
What is the best analysis for these clauses with obligatorily missing parts? We will
argue in this chapter that the missing elements are mostly not just null, but absent. We
will start by considering those clauses with missing complementisers.
Compare the following sentences:
(6) a the sheriff believes [that they are hiding in the hills]
b the sheriff believes [them to be hiding in the hills]
One difference between the finite embedded clause and the non-finite one is that the
former has a nominative subject and the latter an accusative one. We saw in chapter 5
how the finite inflection is responsible for assigning nominative Case to its specifier. A
relevant question is where the accusative Case of the non-finite subject comes from:
does the non-finite inflection assign accusative Case? The answer would appear to be
no because not all infinitival clauses can have an accusative subject, and if the non-
finite inflection were able to assign accusative Case, we would expect an accusative
subject to be a permanent possibility, just like the nominative subject is always
possible in a finite clause:
(7) a the outlaw attempted [him to escape]
b the cowboy hoped [him to brand the cow]
c *the town relied [him to keep law and order]
Moreover, in some non-finite clauses the subjects Case is dependent on the
complementiser rather than the inflection. This can be seen by the fact that without the
complementiser an accusative subject cannot appear:
(8) a [for him to shoot the sheriff] would not be wise
b [to shoot the sheriff] would not be wise
c *[him to shoot the sheriff] would not be wise