Disagreement between complementizer and force (-reconsidering the structure of CP-)

Abstract

This paper reconsiders the traditional CP (complementizer phrase) analysis in generative grammar, focusing on mismatches between complementizers and sentence force. In standard theory, the complementizer (C) directly determines the force of its sister IP (e.g., declarative, interrogative). However, examples like “I don’t know which street that he lives in” reveal mismatches: “that” is declarative, while the embedded clause is interrogative. To address this, the author proposes three hypotheses. First, the Split-Complementizer Hypothesis claims that “that” occupies the C head, while other elements (e.g., “if,” “whether” “do”) are adjoined. Second, the Force Checking Hypothesis suggests “that” carries all force features ([decl], [int], [imp], [excl]), which are activated via feature-checking with ForceP or Spec-CP. Third, the Complementizer Collaboration Hypothesis integrates these two. This framework accounts for both embedded and root clauses. The paper further supports this by citing historical and modern uses of “that” across all force types, including imperatives and exclamatives. The proposed analysis offers a unified syntactic explanation for force mismatches, resolving limitations in previous CP analyses and revealing the broader functional role of “that” in clause structure.