In
the list above only (24), (30) and (31), that is, the
ka-na construction and participialized clause
are the ones in which the occurrence constructions of
PRO is licit. |
However,
we have accepted that CP has the construction [NP C]
being the head of the phrase and NP in the complement
position. Under this formulation there is a problem
in accounting for the grammaticity of (24). [PRO ka
] would be treated as a CP and if C is the governor,
then PRO is in a governed position. The occurrence of
PRO here must render the string ungrammatical but it
does not. One way to overcome this problem would be
to maintain that in view of the fact that ka
is not like other lexical CMs, either [PRO ka
] construction be treated as not a CP but an NP or the
ka CM is not a genuine governor, unlike the other
CMs. In either case, ka would not govern PRO
and there being no INFL in the ka-na construction,
the position would be ungoverned. However, accounting
for the occurrence of a lexical NP in this position
would then be a problem. Consider (34): |
