In this paper, we consider two kinds of vP-fronting constructions in English and argue that they receive quite different analyses. First, we show that English vP-preposing does not have the properties that would be expected of a movement-derived dependency. Evidence for this conclusion is adduced from the licensing conditions on its occurrence, from the availability of morphological mismatches, and from reconstruction facts. By contrast, we show that English participle preposing is a well-behaved case of vP-movement, contrasting with vP-preposing with respect to reconstruction properties in particular. We propose that the differences between the two constructions follow from the interaction of two constraints: the excluded middle constraint (EMC), which rules out derivations involving spellout of linearly intermediate copies only, and the N-only constraint, which restricts movement to occurring where the trace position would license a nominal. The EMC rules out deriving vP-fronting by true movement and instead necessitates a base-generation analysis, while the N-only constraint ensures that participle preposing is only possible in limited circumstances.

中文翻译：

---

带有和不带有残余运动的 vP-fronting

在本文中，我们考虑两种v英语中的 P-fronting 结构，并认为它们得到了完全不同的分析。首先，我们证明英语vP-preposing 不具有运动衍生依赖项所期望的属性。这一结论的证据来自其发生的许可条件、形态不匹配的可用性以及重建事实。相比之下，我们表明英语分词前置是一个表现良好的情况vP 运动，与v特别是关于重建属性的 P-preposing。我们建议两种结构之间的差异来自两个约束的相互作用：排除中间约束 (EMC)，它排除了仅涉及线性中间副本拼写的推导，以及 N-only 约束，它限制移动发生在跟踪位置将许可名义上的。EMC 排除了推导vP-fronting 通过真正的运动，而是需要进行基础生成分析，而 N-only 约束确保分词前置仅在有限的情况下才有可能。