Since Ross (1967), movement has been known to display what is called the island-sensitivity. As has long been advocated and assumed in the generative grammar, English DP and TP are the cyclic nodes/bounding nodes/barriers from which an extraction is disallowed, which turns into different versions of locality in the name of Phase Impenetrability Condition (PIC) in Chomsky (2000, 2001). With this technology, the bounding nodes enter into a new stage, Phases. In essence, however, Cyclicity, Subjacency, and PIC are all dealing with locality constraint on movement (Boecks 2012:58). While maintaining a theory-neutral stance between different versions of locality constraint on Wh-movement, the purpose of this paper is to highlight the two closely related constructions of English, Sentential Subject Construction (SSC) and its corresponding Extraposition Construction (EC) with respect to the island effect. The fact that Wh-constituent can be extracted neither from finite that-CP nor non-finite for-CP in SSC, while it freely moves out of both that-CP and for-CP in EC is analyzed with a null D head. As a consequence of this analysis, it is argued that a null D(P) is a necessary constituent in order to account for the impossibility of Wh-extraction from SSC. On the other hand, the ban on extraction is lifted in EC, due to the lack of the encapsulating DP.

This paper provides a unified analysis for the three types of right displacement in English as the clause-final right-displaced element has in common the function of specifying/elaborating on what has been left referentially indeterminate or blank in the preceding clause. We take the surface make-up of the three constructions at issue to indicate that the right-displaced element has coordinate structure relation with the preceding 'propositional' constituent such as vP or TP. Based on this initial conception of the three constructions at issue, we make three points. First, we argue that these constructions involve clausal coordination and their surface forms are derived by eliding the second conjunct except for the base-generated/ leftward-moved element outside it. Second, we show that the economy of structure-building is at work in the formation of the two coordinate conjuncts in the constructions, accounting for the well-known Right Roof constraint or clause-boundedness condition. Third, we also demonstrate that the ban on P-stranding heavy NP shift of a certain argument element follows from the unavailability of an implicit argument to the relevant position of the first conjunct.

This paper explores the propositional content of subject it- extrapositions, which has received less attention because of individuality and variety in itself but may contribute to the pedagogical significance of studying grammatical features in relation to communicative functions. Using methods sections of international research articles in applied linguistics, I scrutinize the propositional content in order to understand when and where expert writers employ extrapositions. An analysis of extrapositions, referring to a possible counterpart, first person subject pronouns in the methods section, shows that content presented in it-clauses covers one not only applicable to present research or researchers but also general research or researchers in applied linguistics. Furthermore, a comparison of the journal papers is made with Korean students' master's theses. The findings indicate that the students may not fully understand the communicative or rhetorical function. The examination of the propositional content is hoped to help students who are still vaguely using it - clauses.

Mismatch or non-isomorphic mapping between form and function is prevalent in natural languages. English is no exception in this respect. It displays various instances of mismatch phenomena that can be classified into two main groups: complexity and content mismatch. This paper discusses several instances of these two types of mismatch in English and sketches how the lexicalist grammar with parallel architecture can license such non-isomorphic relations or no direct correspondences between form and meaning.