Trace and PRO differ in their structural distribution and phonetic realization in syntax.
the verdict
SUPPORTED
the evidence backs this
refutedsupported
the weight of evidence
1 source for · 0 against
AS REPORTEDno primary record reached; this is what the reporting says
Retrieved linguistic literature confirms that while both trace and PRO belong to empty categories without phonetic realization, they differ in their structural distribution and derivation because PRO is a D-structure element not formed by movement, whereas traces are the result of movement operations.
# What is the difference between trace and PRO?
Tags: syntax, generative-grammar
- Score: 4
- Views: 840
- Answers: 1
- Answered: yes
- Asked by: Jenna Liu (43 rep)
- Asked: 2019-02-04
- Edited: 2019-02-04
- Site: linguistics
## Question
Is it like the trace is the result of movement and has to be in the chain with the head, while PRO is just a null duplication taken the position but with no phonetic realization?
## Answers
### Answer by Tsutsu (score: 3 [ACCEPTED])
Both PRO & Trace have no phonetic realisation, they belong to empty categories (null elements). I see that you took 'trace' in general, you have to specify which trace: (i) wh-tace or (ii) NP trace. Anyways, PRO is not a result of Movement like the trace, because in GB, PRO is taken to be a DS element (a pre-movement/transformation phase).
PRO has also a distinct theta role (even if it's coindexed). If an element is co-indexed with another element, it forms a chain. As you may know, empty categories are another requirement of grammar, i.e. Projection Pricniple, so traces and other empty categories guarantee the preservation of semantic information of either the: (i) moved elements (like NPs) or (ii) the in-situ