Remarks on the Predicate Analysis of CP

This paper explores the nature of complement CPs in English on the one hand and Korean/Mongolian on the other. Moulton (2015, 2019) observes the dual faces of complement CPs and proposes that the regular complement CP in English can be a predicate. Details aside, from the perspective that a CP is a phase because of its propositionality (Chomsky 1995, et seq.), Moulton s idea that CPs are predicates has unwanted consequences about phases and their governing principles like PIC, since a predicate CP cannot be a phase to Moulton. As such, he must assume that even non-propositional predicates can be a phase, which is too strong a claim to make correct predictions about movement and ellipsis. In this regard, this paper proposes that what looks likes a predicate is not exactly a CP but a layer of the left periphery. To accommodate this idea, this paper adopts the spirit of the left periphery of Rizzi (2004, et seq.) and proposes a new structure for the complement clause. To be specific, the higher RP (Relator Phrase) is an argument as has been traditionally assumed and the lower ForceP is a predicate in the sense that Moulton argues about CP . This paper extends the proposed analysis to a more plausible analysis of similar constructions in Korean and Mongolian.