Kim Young-roung. 1996. INFL-Lowering vs V-Raising. Studies in Modern Grammatical Theories 8: 227-241. Chomsky claims that English undergo lnfl-lowering at S-structure to assign an appropriate θ-role and V-raising at LF not to violate the ECP. However, all that French needs is V-raising, not Infl-lowering. This is because Infl-lowering is against his core economy principle. Thus, for a better economy principle, I argue that English also does not need to undergo Infl-lowering at S-structure. Only V-raising is required, not Infl-lowering. This claim confirms to the Least Effort Condition. I present two devices for my claim of V-raising in English at D-and S-structures: In the case of a verb with a PP complement, as a way for solving the problems concerning a θ-role when assuming V-raising at S-structure, I claim that verbs raise only with Case-marking feature, while leaving behind a θ-role-marking feature. Thus, an appropriate θ-role can be assigned to the complement through reanalysis. In the case of "often-type" adverbs, a verb move together with an adverb.

• Young Roung Kim