The Category P Features, Projections, Interpretation

62
(37) a. What did he eat in the morning?
b. *Eat what did he in the morning?
c. What did he give up?
d. *Up what did he give?
Furthermore, in languages such as English, where P-stranding is attested, the P-
morphemes occurring with PP-verbs can be stranded, thus again exhibiting the typical
prepositional behavior:
(38) a. Dan can be relied on.
b. Who did you rely on?
Note that the availability of stranding cannot discriminate between prepositions
and P-particles, as the latter are stranded as well (37c). 26
In order to see clearly that P C is not a verbal particle, consider the coordination
possibilities in PP-verb constructions (39), as opposed to those in V-particle
constructions (40):
(39) a. bart somex al lisa ve-homer
Bart relies on Lisa and-Homer
b. bart somex al lisa ve-al homer
Bart relies on Lisa and-on Homer
(40) a. Bart gave up Lisa and Homer.
b.*Bart gave up Lisa and up Homer.
In PP-verb constructions the coordination can be either between DPs (39a) or
between two larger constituents, arguably PPs (39b). In V-particle constructions (40)
only coordination of DPs is possible. The crucial contrast is between the grammatical
(39b) and the ungrammatical (40b). In (40) the P-morpheme up is not an independent
26 If P-stranding is indeed contingent on V-P reanalysis, as proposed in Hornstein and Weinberg
(1981), and if reanalysis applies to syntactic heads, then P-stranding in PP-verb constructions may be
considered as an argument against the analysis of P as a Case-marker (35).