Your browser does not support the PubReader view.
Go to this page to see a list of supporting browsers.
The Korean Association for the Study of English Language and Linguistics
[ Article ]
Korea Journal of English Language and Linguistics - Vol. 26, No. 0, pp.630-650
ISSN: 1598-1398 (Print) 2586-7474 (Online)
Print publication date 31 May 2026
Received 27 Mar 2026 Revised 19 Apr 2026 Accepted 21 Apr 2026
DOI: https://doi.org/10.15738/kjell.26..202605.630

자유 병합과 표찰 알고리즘에 기반한 영어 동사 help의 부정사 보문에 대한 구조적 분석

Dayoon Baek
PhD Graduate, Department of English Language and Literature Pusan National University 2, Busandaehak-ro 63beon-gil, Jangjeon-dong, Geumjeong-gu, Busan 46241, Republic of Korea, Tel: +82-51-510-1510 100dayoon@naver.com
A structural analysis of infinitival complements of the English verb help based on Free Merge and the Labeling Algorithm


© 2026 KASELL All rights reserved
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons License, which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

This paper examines the syntactic structure of bare infinitival and to-infinitival complements in help-constructions within the framework of Free Merge and the Labeling Algorithm. While previous studies have attempted to account for the contrast in terms of semantic or pragmatic factors, or within ECM/control-based analyses, this paper argues that the distinction is fundamentally structural. Specifically, bare infinitival complements are derived via Pair-Merge between v* and a defective T (uTdef), forming a complex head and yielding a reduced clause (v*P) without an independent TP. In contrast, to-infinitival complements are derived via Set-Merge, in which T is independently merged and projects a full TP. This structural difference accounts for a range of asymmetries, including passivization, temporal interpretation, aspectual marking, and the distribution of negation, adverbs, and adjuncts. The analysis shows that the contrast between the two complement types follows from differences in Merge operations rather than from selectional or interpretive factors. This approach provides a unified account of infinitival variation and can be extended to other non-finite constructions.

Keywords:

help-construction, bare infinitival complement, to-infinitival complement, Free Merge, the Labeling Algorithm, Pair-Merge, Set-Merge

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Ministry of Education of the Republic of Korea and the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2025S1A5B5A17016603).

References

  • 백다윤(Baek, D-Y). 2023. 영어 help의 부정사 보문 구조(A structural analysis of infinitival complements for the English verb help). ≪언어과학연구≫(The Journal of Linguistic Science) 103, 105-125.
  • 백다윤⋅장경철(Baek, D-Y. and K-C. Chang). 2025. 영어 지각동사의 부정사 보문에 대한 표찰 알고리즘 기반 분석. ≪언어과학≫(Journal of Language Sciences) 32(4), 69-92.
  • Aarts, B. 2024. English Syntax and Argumentation. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Biber, D., S. Johansson, G. Leech, S. Conrad and E. Finegan. 1999. Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. New York: Longman.
  • Blümel, A. 2024. A case study in underspecification of UG: External Pair-Merge of v and T. Syntax 27(1), 1-25. [https://doi.org/10.1111/synt.12266]
  • Bolinger, D. 1977. Meaning and Form. London: Longman.
  • Chomsky, N. 1995. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Chomsky, N. 2004. Beyond explanatory adequacy. In A. Belletti, ed., Structures and Beyond: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, 104-131. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195171976.003.0004]
  • Chomsky, N. 2013. Problems of projection. Lingua 130, 33-49. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2012.12.003]
  • Chomsky, N. 2015. Problems of projection: Extensions. In E. Di Domenico, C. Hamann and S. Matteini, eds., Structures, Strategies and Beyond: Studies in Honour of Adriana Belletti, 1-16. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. [https://doi.org/10.1075/la.223.01cho]
  • Chomsky, N. 2021. Minimalism: Where are we now, and where can we hope to go. Gengo Kenkyu: Journal of the Linguistic Society of Japan 160, 1-41.
  • Close, R. 1975. A Reference Grammar for Students of English. London: Longman.
  • Dixon, R. 2005. A Semantic Approach to English Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199283071.001.0001]
  • Duffley, J. 1992. The English Infinitive. London: Longman.
  • Epstein, S., H. Kitahara and D. Seely. 2015. Phase Cancellation by External Pair-Merge. Paper presented at the 150th Annual Meeting of the Linguistic Society of Japan. [https://doi.org/10.1515/tlr-2015-0015]
  • Hah, E. C. 2013. A corpus-based study on English help-constructions. The Mirae Journal of English Language and Literature 18(2), 291-308.
  • Haiman, J. 1983. Iconic and economic motivation. Language 59(4), 781-819. [https://doi.org/10.2307/413373]
  • Huddleston, R. and G. Pullum. 2002. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. [https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316423530]
  • Hwang. K. H. 2002. The syntax of the infinitival perception verb complement in English. The New Korean Journal of English Language and Literature 44(2), 705-730.
  • Hwang, K. H. 2016. A labeling algorithm approach to infinitive complements in English. The New Korean Journal of English Language and Literature 58(1), 245-260. [https://doi.org/10.25151/nkje.2016.58.1.012]
  • Jespersen, O. 1965. A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles. London: George Allen & Unwin.
  • Mair, C. 1995. Changing patterns of complementation, and concomitant grammaticalisation, of the verb help in present-day British English. In B. Aarts and C. F. Meyer, eds., The Verb in Contemporary English: Theory and Description, 258-272. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  • McEnery, A. and Z. Xiao. 2005. Help or help to: What do corpora have to say? English Studies 86(2), 161-187. [https://doi.org/10.1080/0013838042000339880]
  • Mizuguchi, M. 2016. De-activation of Φ through Pair-Merge. English Linguistics 33(1), 108-118. [https://doi.org/10.9793/elsj.33.1_108]
  • Nation, P. 2013. What Should Every EFL Teacher Know? Seoul: Compass Publishing.
  • Palmer, F. 1987. The English Verb. London: Longman.
  • Quirk, R., S. Greenbaum, G. Leech and J. Svartvik. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.
  • Radford, A. 2009. Analysing English Sentences: A Minimalist Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511801617]
  • Rohdenburg, G. 2003. Determinants of Grammatical Variation in English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. [https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110900019]
  • Rudanko, J. 2003. More on horror aequi: Evidence from large corpora. In Proceedings of the Corpus Linguistics 2003 Conference, 662-668.
  • Sohng, H-K. and S-C. Moon. 2007. Infinitives in the history of English. The Linguistic Association of Korea Journal 15(3), 285-308.
  • Wang, M., G. Jiang and Y. Cheng. 2024. A corpus-based multifactorial study of help/help to alternation in learners’ language: From the perspective of probabilistic grammar. SAGE Open 14(4), 21582440241293535. [https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440241293535]