Analysis demonstrates lexical semantics and biclausality in Russian's purpose constructions, highlighting a new control type.
In the article I consider the use of the conjunctionless purpose infinitive with the verbs ‘bring’ and ‘take’ in the matrix position in Russian. It is unclear whether the expressed object is a dependent of the matrix verb or the embedded verb and whether the two verbs form a single predicative complex or each constitutes a clause. In the paper, I demonstrate the results of syntactic tests regarding the monoclausality/biclausality of the construction. The data provided speaks in favour of the biclausality of the constructions and suggests that the object resides in the dependent clause. Such a configuration can be called “object-to-object backward control”, and it has been documented previously neither in literature on control nor in studies on purpose clauses. The control of the infinitival subject is also non-trivial. The choice between non-obligatory and subject control depends on the argument structure of both verbs and on their lexical semantics. Finally, I give a possible explanation for the emergence of the construction through merging of the verbs from the GIVE and TAKE frames and purpose constructions with motion verbs.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
D. G. Fedorov (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: