(25)
is an impossible D-structure because the subject
position (going by the insights of existing
grammars, both generative and non-generative)
of lag is a theta-position and as such cannot
remain empty in the D-structure. Furthermore,
there is absolutely no justification for postulating
the D-structure (25) and the corresponding
S-structure (26). The only motivation seems
to be to account for the verbal agreement.
But, it may be recalled that the verb agrees
not with the subject but with the NP which
does not have an overt CM attached to it.
Therefore, we reject the D-structure (25)
and the S-structure (26) and the movement
analysis. That is, we are left with the configuration
(18) and we have argued that (18) provides
counter-example to the claim that anaphors
have subjects as their antecedents in Hindi. |
