Introduction

In chapter 3 we examined the reasoning that points to the conclusion that arguments are θ-marked within a lexical projection. In particular, we discussed several pieces of evidence for the Predicate-Internal Subject Hypothesis (PISH), according to which external arguments are θ-marked within a verbal projection. Under the PISH, he in (1), for instance, receives its θ-role when it merges with V′ or v′, depending on whether one assumes a single VP-shell or a double VP-shell involving a light verb v (see section 3.3), as respectively shown in (2).

1. (1) He greeted her.

2. (2) a. he + Merge [V′ greeted her] →

3. [VP he [V′ greeted her]]

4. b. he + Merge [v′v [VP greeted her]] →

5. [vP he [v′v [VP greeted her]]]

In chapter 4, in turn, we discussed conceptual and empirical arguments for the proposal that by LF, DPs must uniformly check their structural Case requirements outside the domains where they are θ-marked. More specifically, we discussed two possible scenarios depending on the choice between the theoretical possibilities in (2), as respectively illustrated in the simplified representations in (3).

Under the single-VP-shell approach sketched in (3a), the subject argument moves to [Spec,AgrSP] at some point in the derivation to check its nominative Case, and the object moves to [Spec,AgrOP] to check its accusative Case.