@article{BrandtTrawińskiW{\"o}llstein2016,
  author    = {Brandt, Patrick and Trawiński, Beata and W{\"o}llstein, Angelika},
  title     = {(Anti-)Control in German: evidence from comparative, corpus- and psycholinguistic studies},
  journal   = {Co- and subordination in German and other languages},
  issn      = {0024-3930},
  series    = {Linguistische Berichte - Sonderhefte},
  number    = {21},
  pages     = {77 -- 98},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {The present investigation targets the phenomenon commonly called control. Many languages including German and Polish employ non-finite clauses (besides finite clauses) as propositional complements. The subject of these complement clauses is left unexpressed and must generally be interpreted co-referentially with the subject or object of the matrix clause (subject or object control). However. there are also infinitive-selecting verbs that do not allow for a co- referential interpretation of the embedded subject - semantically, the embedded infinitives of these anti-control verbs are thus less dependent on or less unifiable with the matrix proposition. In Polish anti-control constructions, non-finite complements are overtly marked with the complementizer zeby, suggesting that they are structurally more complex (namely. containing a C-projection) than the non-finite complements in control constructions lacking zeby (modulo special contexts. viz. 'control switch'). In a comparative perspective, the paper brings corpuslinguistic and experimental evidence to bear on the question whether surface appearances notwithstanding, the infinitival complements of anti-control verbs in German should similarly be analyzed as truly sentential, i.e., C-headed structures.},
  language  = {en}
}