This paper presents arguments to remove the NP-movement component from hyperraising and copy raising constructions, and to unite these constructions with an analysis in which a complex predicate is created which is predicated directly of the subject of the matrix clause. The analysis at the same time affirms the versatility of the predication relation in syntax and eliminates the need to facilitate NP-movement of the nominative subject of a finite clause across a CP-boundary.
In Den Dikken (2017b) arguments are presented for a predicational approach to hyperraising and copy raising constructions in which the ‘raised’ DP serves as the subject of the matrix clause. In this sequel, I show that hyperraising and copy raising also occur in secondary predication constructions embedded under propositional attitude verbs such as consider. An examination of the properties of these hyperraising and copy raising to object constructions leads to the conclusion that overt subject-toobject raising (‘object shift’) definitely exists in English but is obligatory only for subjects of small-clause complements of verbs. Apart from yielding a clearer perspective on the distribution of overt object shift in English, the study also delivers a unified account of a variety of restrictions on the subject of the non-finite complement of propositional attitude verbs.