I argue in this paper that Nez Perce has covert hyperraising to object: the DP in the highest A-position of a finite embedded clause covertly moves into an object position in the matrix VP. Implications of the Nez Perce facts include the following: The distribution of hyperraising cannot be regulated purely in terms of Activity (Chomsky 2001), but it cannot be regulated purely in terms of Intervention (Halpert 2016), either. CPs that are transparent for hyperraising may be opaque for other phi-Agree (viz complementizer agreement, A scrambling). My analysis follows Chomsky's 2001 version of the PIC (``Delayed Opacity''): CP becomes impenetrable only when the next phase head up (v) is merged. The diagnosis of Long-Distance Agreement vs. Covert Raising to Object requires attention to the A/A' status of the embedded DP. A-movement may be covert.
January 1, 2017
Deal, Amy Rose. 2017. Covert hyperraising to object. In Andrew Lamont and Katerina Tetzloff (eds.), Proceedings of NELS 47, pp. 257-270. Amherst: GLSA.