Dear professor, I've been studying syntax at our faculty but it was not until I found your precious lessons that I truly learned the English syntax! Yesterday we had a syntax exam at our faculty. And now we've just got the results!!! I got A!!!!!!! CAN YOU BELIEVE IT!!!! It is absolutely wonderful how much you've helped me!!!! It's your A! In fact our syntax professors are great but you are the greatest!!!!! THANK YOU SO SPLENDIDLY MUCH! I'd take to you to a beer 🍺 if I had known you in real life!!!!! Wish you were our professor in real life! You are truly an awesome teacher! Thank you again!! Keep up with the good work! I've recommended you to a friend of mine and she got also an excellent score on the exam thanks to you!!!!! A lots of thanks from Serbia!🙏🙏🙏🙏☺️☺️🌼🌼🌼🌼🌼🍀🍀🍀🥳🥳🥳🥳🥳🥳🍺🍺🍺
HI. in the last sentence you prefered to make a trinary branching; i thought that binare branching is the only acceptable brancing model in the generative literature
8:00 I finally understood syntactically why I found the sentence "It's trying to rain" so funny when I heard it on TV. It's not just about animacy ... it's that "try" assigns the theta role Agent to the expletive "it".
i wonder how we can draw the tree structure of “he has to resign from his job” and decides whether there exist an PRO. Intuitively, I think "have to" is similar to the auxiliray "must" and cannot be a theta-role assigner.
Wholesome content and superb explanation! But I have a question that I hope you can answer: in a usage manual, it was stated that verbs like "promise" cannot have an NP intervening between the matrix verb and the dependent verb which makes a sentence like: I promise you to be home at five, wrong, at least according to the book I am quoting from. It is Advanced Grammar In Use by the way. Thanks in advance.
The idiom test and the theta role check seemed very obscure to me. Can you please throw some more light to help me understand the difference between raising and control verbs?
I want to ask a question about my assignment *She persuaded it to snow Why is this sentence ungrammatical? "Snow" can't assign theta role to "it", so "it" just raised to gain the theta role from "persuaded"?
To me "want" does not require a theme because it only does a agent and proposition. Also I believe that "persuade" requires an agent, a theme, and proposition. And then I'll agree that "to leave" only requires an agent. What i want to say here is that in the sentence "Jeff wants Marion to leave", Marion is going up from the subject of "to leave", which is what is called subject to object raising instead of object control. What do you think about it?
I don't know how to analyze the following sentence: He was seen to rob the bank... because seen is raising and after seen I need a dp trace to he but then rob is a control so I should write a control co index with he... I'm quite confused!
"The cat wants to be out of the bag." You explained this sentence that there's a PRO which is coreferent with The cat moving up to the subject of the main clause. However, let's imagine a sentence. "John wants the cat to be get out of the bag." The obvious fact is that "want" gives a theta role "Agent" to "John" but not give "theme" to "the cat" which is not a DO. Plus, "the cat" simply moves up to the position from SPEC of VP[be out of the bag] so it's just a rising not a control theory. Therefore, it needs to think that "the cat" is a subject of the subordinate clause but not a DO.
The idiom test and the theta role check seemed very obscure to me. Can you please throw some more light to help me understand the difference between raising and control verbs?
Dear professor, I've been studying syntax at our faculty but it was not until I found your precious lessons that I truly learned the English syntax! Yesterday we had a syntax exam at our faculty. And now we've just got the results!!! I got A!!!!!!! CAN YOU BELIEVE IT!!!! It is absolutely wonderful how much you've helped me!!!! It's your A! In fact our syntax professors are great but you are the greatest!!!!! THANK YOU SO SPLENDIDLY MUCH! I'd take to you to a beer 🍺 if I had known you in real life!!!!! Wish you were our professor in real life! You are truly an awesome teacher! Thank you again!! Keep up with the good work! I've recommended you to a friend of mine and she got also an excellent score on the exam thanks to you!!!!! A lots of thanks from Serbia!🙏🙏🙏🙏☺️☺️🌼🌼🌼🌼🌼🍀🍀🍀🥳🥳🥳🥳🥳🥳🍺🍺🍺
PLEASE CONTINUE THIS SERIES TO ADVANCES SYNTAX!!!
There are not enough words to express how much you are saving my life with this videos.
This is very helpful. Does anyone have a resource that has a lot of sentences with answers that I can practice on and check?
HI. in the last sentence you prefered to make a trinary branching; i thought that binare branching is the only acceptable brancing model in the generative literature
I was thinking the same thing!
You really have a gift for explaining things. I find your reasoning much clearer than my lecturer's. Thanks a lot!
You're the best teacher ever! Thank you so much for the crystal clear explanation. Please make videos on advanced Syntax as well.
Loving these, really useful. You might want to update the syntax playlist or include the new videos though
It should contain all of them through automatic updating? I"ll check it out.
8:00 I finally understood syntactically why I found the sentence "It's trying to rain" so funny when I heard it on TV. It's not just about animacy ... it's that "try" assigns the theta role Agent to the expletive "it".
i wonder how we can draw the tree structure of “he has to resign from his job” and decides whether there exist an PRO. Intuitively, I think "have to" is similar to the auxiliray "must" and cannot be a theta-role assigner.
Very clear and precise! Thank you so much for your amazing lecture!
Wholesome content and superb explanation! But I have a question that I hope you can answer: in a usage manual, it was stated that verbs like "promise" cannot have an NP intervening between the matrix verb and the dependent verb which makes a sentence like: I promise you to be home at five, wrong, at least according to the book I am quoting from. It is Advanced Grammar In Use by the way. Thanks in advance.
your series is better than Carnie's this is phenomenal, Trev
The idiom test and the theta role check seemed very obscure to me. Can you please throw some more light to help me understand the difference between raising and control verbs?
Thanks Trev! These videos are super helpful!
What about obligatory control and arbitrary control.
Thanks, your videos really help me. Please upload more.
Very well explained. Thank you.
difference between control verb and ECM construction are bit hard, can you explain?
I want to ask a question about my assignment
*She persuaded it to snow
Why is this sentence ungrammatical? "Snow" can't assign theta role to "it", so "it" just raised to gain the theta role from "persuaded"?
I love you so much , you make me understand so well, thank you so much for helping me do the final exam in PhD in English Liguistics courses!
5:33 the DP under V' should (must) be the spec of the CP next to it
primary bases of X-bar is no more than 2 nodes under any other
or a vP-VP structure
If the sentence is "Jeff wants Marion to leave", how do you explain?
To me "want" does not require a theme because it only does a agent and proposition. Also I believe that "persuade" requires an agent, a theme, and proposition. And then I'll agree that "to leave" only requires an agent. What i want to say here is that in the sentence "Jeff wants Marion to leave", Marion is going up from the subject of "to leave", which is what is called subject to object raising instead of object control. What do you think about it?
This is brilliant, thank you very much !
I don't know how to analyze the following sentence: He was seen to rob the bank... because seen is raising and after seen I need a dp trace to he but then rob is a control so I should write a control co index with he... I'm quite confused!
Ungrammatical sentence.
Tomorrow morning, I have a presentation about Control Theory and I'm lost😓, please help
Thank u so much
U are great
"The cat wants to be out of the bag." You explained this sentence that there's a PRO which is coreferent with The cat moving up to the subject of the main clause. However, let's imagine a sentence. "John wants the cat to be get out of the bag." The obvious fact is that "want" gives a theta role "Agent" to "John" but not give "theme" to "the cat" which is not a DO. Plus, "the cat" simply moves up to the position from SPEC of VP[be out of the bag] so it's just a rising not a control theory. Therefore, it needs to think that "the cat" is a subject of the subordinate clause but not a DO.
Thank you!
YOU ARE THE BEST
The idiom test and the theta role check seemed very obscure to me. Can you please throw some more light to help me understand the difference between raising and control verbs?