Consider the sentence "Conservative Party (is) Set to Win (a) Majority".

Is it right that "set" in this case is a subject-to-subject raising? I don't think "set" has an agent theta role. However, all tests show that it should be control: "be set to" does not admit expletives, and the meaning of idioms seems not to be preserved. (But I'm not a native speaker, so I may be mistaken on this.)

  • Yes, it means is expected to, and that takes A-Raising with passive: The Tories are expected to win a majority (It takes B-Raising without passive: They expect the Tories to win a majority). Of course, this is headline syntax, with all the bells and whistles removed. – jlawler Dec 15 '19 at 20:13
  • @jlawler How come that this raising verb does not pass tests for raising verbs? Carnie mentions two tests: (1) you should be able to insert expletives; (2) idiomatic meaning should be preserved. (1) doesn't seem to work here: *It is set that ... -- you can't say that. (2) The cat is set to be out of the bag. -- Does this still have idiomatic reading? – user22577 Dec 15 '19 at 21:00
  • 1
    Another idiom-part test is ??"The shit is set to hit the fan," which I find to be quite odd-sounding. – Greg Lee Dec 15 '19 at 23:50
  • As I said, it's headlinese, quite a restricted context. – jlawler Dec 16 '19 at 2:41
  • @jlawler I'm not sure I understand why being headlinese or having restricted context matters here. Are headline-type raising predicates "allowed" to not pass tests for raising predicates? This expression can be used in non-headline contexts as well; this wouldn't change the raising nature, but it still wouldn't be able to pass tests for raising predicate. – user22577 Dec 16 '19 at 3:13

Your Answer

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

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.