The Category P Features, Projections, Interpretation

203
.
Let us now turn to the internal argument of the verb embedded in the PP. Since
P-to removes Accusative, it is not surprising that the internal argument of the verb
cannot be phonetically realized in its theta-position (57):
(57) a. The book is easy to read (*it).
b. Dan brought the car to repair (*it).
The question arises as to whether because of the removal of Accusative the
internal argument of the verb is externalized like in the Hebrew le N.
Note that if we tried to assume that the internal argument of the verb in the
English PP is externalized like in Hebrew, there would be no syntactic position
corresponding to this argument prior to externalization. There are, however, at least
two syntactic phenomena attested in English object gap constructions, which indicate
that the syntactic position corresponding to the (phonetically unrealized) internal
argument is projected.
Resultative secondary predication is known as a typical object-oriented
phenomenon, sensitive to the existence of a syntactic object position (58) (cf.
Rothstein 2003 and references cited therein). As (59) shows, a resultative predicate
can be added in the TC, indicating that the object position is syntactically realized: 40
(58) a. Dan i wiped the table j clean j /*tired i
b. The table j was wiped t j clean j .
(59) This house j will be easy to paint t j blue j
Further, consider (60):
a. This book i is easy [ PP [Th]i to try [ CP PRO to convince John [ CP PRO to read [Thi] ]]]
b. Dan brought the car i [ PP [Th]i to try [ CP PRO to convince John [ CP PRO to repair [Thi] ]]]
Although, by hypothesis, the whole embedded constituent in (60) is a PP, it is
undeniable that this PP includes two fully clausal constituents (CPs). Note that the
40 The impossibility to add a resultative secondary predicate is probably due to the role of the PP in the
OPC. See 5.5.2 where the PP in the OPC and resultative secondary predicates are argued to function on
a par.