Two Structures for Modal Clauses in Marathi and Implications for Case

In this talk, I argue that some Marathi modals occur in both raising and control structures, where certain readings (epistemic and ought-to-be deontic) require a raising structure, and others (ought-to-do deontic) require a control structure. The syntactic distinction in Marathi provides new support for a classic view (Brennan 1993), according to which the subject of ought-to-do modal clauses is assigned a ‘bearer of obligation’ theta role—a position later rejected in favor of analyses where an inference mechanism, rather than syntax, determines who bears the obligation in root modal statements (Bhatt 1998, Wurmbrand 1999, a.o.). The two structures in Marathi are morphosyntactically distinguished by the case-marking of their subjects: in raising structures, we see standard ergative alignment, while in control structures, the subject is obligatorily marked ergative regardless of the verb's transitivity. I consider how two major approaches to ergative case assignment—inherent and dependent case theories—can account for these patterns. Although the inherent case approach initially seems well-suited to the data, I suggest that a dependent case analysis makes for a more elegant account, provided we adopt the crucial assumption that controlled DPs can serve as case competitors to their controllers.