Subject Criterion and Quotative Inversion in English

Abstract

There are two major types of inversions - Subject Auxiliary Inversion(SAI) and Stylistic Inversion(SI). In the minimalist approach, SAI can straightforwardly be analyzed as movement of an auxiliary from T to C for feature checking, with the subject remaining in the canonical subject position Spec,TP. By contrast, SI constructions involve inversion around a full lexical verb rather than an auxiliary. This poses a significant challenge for the minimalist theory of derivation, as it cannot be straightforwardly accounted for by movement of the verb to T or C. This is due to the widely accepted analysis of English, according to which main verbs generally do not undergo overt movement. In this paper, we aim to focus on SI constructions, especially Quotative Inversion(QI), demonstrating that they are also derived systematically. As we discuss the derivation of QI, we will put forward the following claims. First, contrary to some claims that the EPP can be violated under certain conditions in SI, we will argue that the EPP should be reanalyzed as a Criterial requirement, allowing elements other than default subjects to satisfy it. Second, contrary to some proposals that the subject in SI constructions uniformly remains in its base position within vP, we will show that in the case of QI, the subject occupies the canonical Spec,TP position. Third, we propose that SI results from the interaction between syntax and phonology and/or semantics.