This paper will show that long-standing assumptions about non-nominal subjects are incorrect, and that their distribution is broader than previously acknowledged. Evidence suggests that previous conclusions about them were driven by facts whose explanation maylie outside the realm of syntactic structure. While much of the debate about sentential subjects, the issue is still relevant. This is a bit surprising, given the fact that the Case-theoretic explanations have declined in importance with the paradigm shift from Principles and Parameters (i.e. GB) to the Minimalist Program. What follows is an attempt to lay out previously established facts as well as some new ones, to call attention to long-standing misconceptions about sentential subjects, to distill the correct generalization for subject positions in English, and to point to potential sources of new data on the topic.
1. Introduction
2. Why It s Not about Case
3. Non-Syntactic Explanations
4. Obstacles to linguistic inquiry
5. Towards an analysis of subjects in English
6. Nominal properties of non-NPs in canonical DP complement positions
7. Subject islands and the D-prominence of English