This article outlines an account of the syntax of existential constructions (e.g., There are [too many problems]) based on a view of the postcopular NPas a predicate. This NPfigures as the predicate in an embedded clausal complement of be with expletivethere as its subject. There consequently moves to the higher Spec, IPposition for Case-theoretic reasons. Existential constructions and existential interpretation are a particular instance of a wider phenomenon involving the use of predicates of various categories with expletive subjects (e.g., It is cold).Long-distance agreement between the main (inflected) verb and the postcopular NPis a combined effect of the relation of subject-predicate agreement holding between the expletive subject (there) and a predicate NPwithin the embedded clausal structure and the relation of specifier-head agreement (feature checking) between the raised expletive and the matrix I/T. This analysis is generalized to other cases of long-distance agreement (e.g., There appeared a man). It is shown that an analysis based on the notionAgree (Chomsky 2000) is empirically inadequate. Well-known restrictions on the distribution of NPs/ DPs in existential constructions follow from the proposed analysis.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ilan Hazout (2004) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched one closely related paper. Consider it for comparative context: