[i] Equi
Billᵢ wants [[(for) Billᵢ] to leave at noon]
[Billᵢ wants [ __ ᵢ to leave at noon]]
[ii] Raising
[[(For) the casserole] to be done] seems
The casserole seems [to be done]
(Prof.John Lawler's article)

[case 1] She was last to arrive.(OALD)
[i] Equi: She was last [[for her] to arrive].
[ii] Raising: [[For her] to arrive] was last.

[case 2] They were the last to arrive.(OALD)
[i] Equi: They were the last [[for them] to arrive]].
[ii] Raising: [[For them] to arrive] was the last.

Are both, case 1 and case 2, Raising’s?
I tilt my head once one way, then the other. May I get the idea clear?

  • Cases 1 and 2 have already been done things to. Put back all the stuff that was taken out before you worry about Equi and Raising. I'll answer presently, but this is a chance to figure out the logic and what other concepts are involved Jul 30 '14 at 15:43

This is really not about Raising or Equi; let's look at at the sentences:

  1. She was last to arrive.
  2. They were the last to arrive.

There are a couple of irrelevant differences between them.

  • Sentence (2) uses the last, while (1) uses no article (both versions are grammatical here)
  • Sentence (1) has a singular subject and verb, while (2) has plurals.
    Aside from these differences, however, the sentences are the same in structure.
    I'll concentrate on (1) here.

(1) has a lot of deletions -- i.e, lots of words are missing.
(This is grammatical; it's all done by rules)
(1) is equivalent to

  • She was the last to arrive.
  • She was the last one to arrive.
  • She was the last person to arrive.
  • She was the last one who arrived.
  • She was the last one of the people who arrived.

The infinitive to arrive in (1) and (2) is a Relative Infinitive, not a Complement Infinitive.
Since it's not a subject or object complement clause of last, Raising is not applicable.
More on relative infinitives here.

In this case the predicate is a definite noun phrase containing a relative infinitive

  • [vp (was) [np (the) last (one) (of the people) to arrive np] vp]

and there is no complement clause.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.