Search

This article is an introduction to a collection of papers discussing the identity of form and diversity of function in non-finite verb forms from a variety of perspectives. We start by illustrating the phenomenon and introducing the main functions that non-finite forms can have in the languages of the world. We provide a concise typological overview of the attested combinations of these functions and show how and to what extent these patterns are reflected in the traditional labels, such as participles, converbs, verbal nouns, and infinitives. We briefly discuss the main approaches to the phenomenon under study that have been proposed within both functional and formal frameworks. Finally, we provide a summary of the papers comprising this Special Issue, highlighting the perspectives adopted in the individual contributions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Infinitives are known to encode covert modality in certain environments including infinitival relatives and questions. Beyond these environments, however, the precise distribution and interpretation of infinitival modality remains poorly understood. In that light, this paper investigates infinitive-embedding enough/too sentences like Pat is tall enough to be the thief or Lee is too old to drive. These sentences have a modal semantics whose compositional source is contested: on one approach, the infinitive encodes the modality, and on another approach, the enough/too morpheme itself is modal. To adjudicate this debate, I consider heretofore largely overlooked finite-clause-embedding enough sentences like Pat is tall enough that she might/must be the thief or Lee was fast enough that she won the race. They provide, I argue, novel support for the view that the modality is in the embedded clause (whether nonfinite or finite) and not in enough/too. I then compare the covert modality of nonfinite enough clauses to the covert modality of infinitival relatives, questions, and complements to attitude predicates and content nouns. I generalize that covert modality in nonfinite clauses never encodes epistemic necessity, and I tentatively hypothesize that this constraint reflects the marked status of nonfiniteness in the finite/nonfinite opposition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]