page text refers to 222 see section 4.7 316 222 See section 4.6 312 223-4 entire paragraph 49-50, 214 note 20 228 see section 4.9 348 228 as already noted 227 228 we will sharpen it 280 229 returning .. in section 4.5.2 279 231 we will return .. 4.2.2 236 231 see section 4.3.3 263 232 we will see .. 292 232 I-to-C raising 290 233 until then 342 233 in chapter 3 198 233 noted earlier 232 233 to which we return 292 235 typical position 330 237 section 4.10.3 375 242 section 1.3.2 53 245 to which we return 285 246 not always through strict identity 248 248 we will return to this matter 254 250 we will return to this matter 254 251 section 3.5 202 252 see sections 1.5 and 3.5 125, 203 253 section 1.4.3 124 255 a more complex alternative 197 260 we will see 323 261 assumed in the preceding chapters 124 266 as discussed in section 3.5 202 267 we will return 307 267 an analysis to be revised below 273, 286 268 see end of section 4.4.1 255 269 raises the categorial feature 232 271 independently, we will see 319 271 questions remaining .. YP-adjunction to XP 324 275 LF movement approach 104, 208 276 further evidence 273 278 the intuitive asymmetry 259 279 accessible to the computational system 230, 266 279 in an interesting way 354 281 will be explored below 354 281 see (24) =(25), 262 281 the parallelism cases discussed earlier 252 282 to which we will return 286 282 since I has a strong D-feature (EPP) 199 282 see section 1.4.3 110 283 agreement with the adjective 353 284 the fact that agreement can be assigned... 175 285 as noted earlier 245 287 earlier we considered 276 287 the alternative idea 65 288 contrary to the assumption in chapter 2 158 288 we have seen some reason 273f 290 as proposed earlier 232 292 we came to the conclusion 232 296 as discussed in chapter 3 184 296 (82) 311 299 the issue will dissolve later on 356 299 we will see in section 4.10 356 300 co-constituent 252 300 it was suggested in chapter 1 124 300 in chapter 3 we assumed 182 309 we will see 371 311 the definition (82) of the MLC 296 312 some will be suggested in section 4.10 352 313 it makes little sense... 180 314 receives independent confirmation 357 315 are given in section 4.9 347 316 as we will see 331, 352 318 adjunction of features 271 318 see (51) and note 47 280, 384 319 (119) 177 320 the uniformity condition (17) 253 321 discussed earlier 315 322 a case that we now assume does not exist 276 323 in section 4.7.5 329 323 adjunction...has a very restricted range 260 326 understood...as in chapter 3 202 326 reconstruction...in A-chains 210 327 the "extension condition" of chapter 3 190 328 already discussed 248 328 briefly sketched in section 4.4.1 254 328 we will return in section 4.10 365 328 principle (95) =(94), 304 328 As discussed 307 329 see 130 and note 97 323, 390 329 a dubious idea, as noted 323 330 we have speculated 320 332 for reasons already discussed 315 333 see section 4.7.3 324 333 for reasons discussed 325? 339 the narrow options discussed earlier 323 342 section 4.2.1 233 342 to which we will turn in section 4.10 350, 372 342 provide additional support 287 343 we have found considerable evidence 273 345 the ECM cases 122, 267 347 In section 4.6 315 347 We will return to this question 362 348 Let us delay the question 366 348 the basic assumption about reference sets 227 349 The Status of Agr 137 349 Agr lacks phi-features 240, 255 350 a fact yet to be explained 372 350 As noted 342 351 Continuing tentatively to assume 349 352 Recall that subject... 311 353 as we will see 368 353 We assumed 283 354 overcoming an earlier problem 385 note 51 354 of the kind discussed earlier 286 357 We will return to a closer analysis 368f 358 Holmberg's generalization and other effects 185, 180 358 the earlier, more complex definition 298-299 358 see (94) and discussion 304 363 We have seen 315, 347 364 and we have seen that 287 365 We concluded earlier 304 365 see discussion of (138) 328 365 we will return to this ? 365 But see note 68 387 365 lingering from before 344 366 economy principle (76) 294 368 In section 4.9 we noted 342 368 [object raising to inner/outer spec] 358 369 by merged Subj, as we have seen 352 369 We have already excluded Merge 304, 355 369 lacks a -role, violating FI 315 369 merged in this position, as we have seen 362f 369 We have briefly (and incompletely) 356?, 365? 371 several earlier assumptions 304, 309 372-3 We know that...deleted by N-raising from Subj 364 376 the last gap in establishing (196) 365 note 140 381 note 11 74, 208 383 note 28 307 383 note 29 182, 300 383 note 36 200, 286 385 note 51 282, 354 389 note 84 314 389 note 87 181, 280 389 note 88 312 390 note 94 177 393 note 131 311-312 393 note 133 283 393 note 139 324 393 note 140 376 394 note 141 354 394 note 142 372