The phenomena that classic transformational syntax handled by means of ‘raising’ rules pose an interesting challenge to theories that do not posit movement or derivation from underlying structures. An account of these phenomena is formulated in the context of cognitive grammar. Raising is analyzed as a special case of the metonymy that virtually all relational expressions exhibit in regard to their choice of overtly coded arguments. The transparency of these constructions—the fact that the main clause imposes no restrictions on the ‘raised’ NP—is explained with reference to the semantics of the governing predicates.
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 256 citations exist upstream.