The Category P Features, Projections, Interpretation

13
1.2 The goal and outline of the study
The primary goal of the research presented in this study is to shed more light on
the status of the category P and develop a coherent theory explaining the various
manifestations of P in syntax on the basis of their properties.
A critical reexamination of the lexical/functional distinction, juxtaposed with the
properties of P, leads to the main hypothesis of the study (17):
(17) The main hypothesis
The category P is uniformly functional.
Given the major hypothesis, the following claims are advanced:
a. P-morphemes are meaningful. Some of them, labeled descriptively as small,
are assumed, in addition, to be associated with formal φ-features (Kayne 2001),
or marked for a grammatical function (chapter 2).
b. The realizations of P that follow from its functional classification are: (i) an
independent, phonetically full syntactic P-head; (ii) an affixal P, syntactically
part of the hosting head (it is affixed to); (iii) a phonetically null syntactic P-
head consisting of features.
c. Drawing on the variety of functions performed by each of the familiar
functional categories (e.g. C [-mod] introduces argumental clauses, C [+mod] heads
predicative (relative) clauses, Siloni 1997), I propose that P fulfills the
following three roles (i.e. functions) in syntax: P C(ase) , P R(elation) , and P pred(icate)
(chapter 2).
d. The proposed roles of P are clearly distinguished. The function of P R is to
specify the relation of its complement to some other entity (individual or event).
The particular semantic relation specified by P R (e.g. locative, cause, etc.) is
determined by the meaning of the P-morpheme realizing P R . Although P R is
interpreted as a predicate-argument function, it does not involve thetaassignment
(chapters 2, 4). P C has a Case checking function, licensed (selected)