An infinitival clause with an object gap can be predicated directly of a subject, without there being an AP present. Two examples are given below:

Here the infinitival clause with its object gap behaves as an AP predicated of the subject of the tensed verb, even though there is no AP present. The subject gets the thematic role of the object of the infinitival verb. This type of example is often accompanied by negation, suggesting that the construction is a case of negative polarity. This type of example can semantically be characterised as negative possibility, as is evidenced in the translation by the use of the modal ‘cannot’. Put differently, the construction features deontic aspect.

In specific constructions the subject of the infinitival can also be predicated of an object, as in the following example which involves causation:

This example is different from all previous examples which we discussed. Here there is no object gap in the infinitive, just a subject gap. The direct object of the embedded tensed verb is interpreted as if it was the subject of the infinitive, as the result of predication. This example is also atypical in failing to have the deontic aspect.

In most cases, however, it is the object of the infinitival which is predicated of the subject of the tensed verb, as below:

The question arises whether the gap inside the infinitival clause may also be an adpositional object, such as the one constructed (#) below:

We haven’t found such examples, but gaps in the prepositional complement are found in infinitival clauses of purposes. An example has been given below:

Here the prepositional complement corefers with the subject of the main clause verb, while the infinitival clause functions as a purpose adverbial. In this case, it is also possible to put in an overt pronoun in the embedded clause (in bold in the examples below):

There is another construction in which a clause containing a gap in the position of an adpositional complement is predicated of an argument outside the clause. Consider also the following contrast:

This does not involve predication, but a case in which the R-pronoun has been preposed to the beginning of the sentence, although it looks as if a clause has been predicated of the R-pronoun. This becomes clear from the following sentence:

Returning to infinitives with a direct object gap, it is also possible to coordinate the two infinitives, with the external argument of the predication occurring outside the coordination, as in the following example:

To sum up, infinitival clauses with an object gap can be predicated of subjects outside the infinitival clause, and, more rarely, of objects outside the infinitival clause. See also 6.6 Infinitival clauses with a gap appearing in an AP predication.