null pronouns
1. Explain only Hypothesis B
Hypothesis B: The null subject is specified for interpretable ?-features, values the uninterpretable features of Agr, and moves to Spec, IP, just like any other subject. This implies that the nullness is a phonological matter: the null subject is a pronoun that is not pronounced.
According to this theory, explain also how Partial-null-subject languages like Finnish differ in licencing pro from consistent-null-subject languages like Spanish. In other words explain the following quotations from the conclusion:
?there is a proper null subject in Spec,IP in finite null subject sentences in Finnish. However, it is not pro as defined in Chomsky 1982 or Rizzi 1986; instead, it is either a null pronoun that is specified for 4)-features but lacks D (the 3rd person null subject), or a fully specified pronoun with D, which is deleted in the phonology (the 1st and 2nd person null subjects)? ?? ?These languages are distinguished from consistent null subject languages (Spanish, Greek, Turkish, etc.) in that they lack a D-feature in I. Presence of D in I means that a D-less subject pronoun can be interpreted as definite. Absence of D in I means it must be bound or interpreted as generic? ?? Where does this leave the correlation between rich agreement and null subjects, which undoubtgeedly exists, although there are counterexamples both ways ?.?

ORDER THIS ESSAY HERE NOW AND GET A DISCOUNT !!!