Suggested answer for Exercise 6

DPs undergo DP movement for Case. DP movement can target Spec,IP under the condition that this position is not filled by the thematic (deep) subject of the predicate of the clause. DP movement must be local. DPs move in a cyclic manner. DPs have to move to each Spec,IP on their way to the highest Spec,IP where they can get case. There can be no DP that intervenes between the head and the foot of the chain formed by the movement of the element.

In sentence (1a) the DP John is the thematic subject of the verb meet. The inflectional head of the most embedded sentence is non-finite, it cannot assign case therefore the subject of the embedded verb has to move to a case position. The predicates likely and seem are raising predicates. They have no thematic subjects. The Spec,IP positions of the sentences lexically headed by these raising predicates are empty. The DP John can move to the Spec,IP position of the matrix sentence. This movement is problematic, as it does not land in each Spec,IP position on its way up to the highest Spec,IP. The expletive it occupies the intermediate subject position of the clause lexically headed by the adjective likely. The expletive it intervenes between the head of the chain formed by the moved DP and the foot of the chain, its trace. Locality is not respected, hence the sentence is ungrammatical.

In sentence (1b) we seem to have the same problem as in sentence (1a). The verb hate is a two-place predicate. It has an experiencer subject and a theme object. The matrix sentence contains the raising verb seem that does not have a thematic subject, therefore the Spec,IP position of the matrix sentence is available as a landing site for the DP to move there for case. As can be seen the object DP of the embedded sentence moves to the subject position of the matrix sentence. This movement is illegitimate as the subject of the embedded sentence the DP Mary intervenes between the moved DP and its trace in the VP of the embedded sentence. Locality is not respected. Also, John is assigned Case in its base position, it does not have to undergo Case-motivated movement at all.

In sentence (1c) as the derivation shows the moved DP is the thematic experiencer subject of the predicate clever. This DP moves to the subject position of the matrix sentence. It is obvious that in this sentence the problem is not that the movement of the DP I is not local. I moves from the Spec,IP position of the embedded sentence to the Spec,IP position of the matrix sentence. Still the sentence is ungrammatical. Notice though that the verb believe is an ECM verb that can assign Case to the subject of its infinitival complement, so no movement is necessary.

In sentence (1d) the DP John is the thematic object of the passive verb killed. Passive verbs cannot assign case. The object DP must move to a case position where it can get case. It moves to Spec,IP of the embedded sentence where it cannot get nominative case because I is non-finite. Notice that the verb believe is an ECM verb, that is it can assign case to the item in the Spec,IP position of its complement clause. The problem is that the verb believe is in its passive form therefore it cannot assign accusative case. Hence the DP John has no case. The Case Filter is violated.