Abstract
This article argues that a that-clause is categorially a legitimate object of a preposition, and that it is prevented from following a preposition by a set of morphological constraints: e.g., on that; by that. This is based on the descriptive generalization that the sequence“preposition that”in construction is prohibited. I tentatively extend this type of generalization to cover the cases involving for to- and to-clauses. The proposal is empirically superior to the analyses of Kaplan and Bresnan (1982), Sag et al. (1985), Stowell (1981) and Horn (1975).
