Against ‘Dummy Do ’: The ‘Low Do AUX ’ Hypothesis 1

This paper challenges the prevailing view that ‘dummy do ’ is an empty object inserted near Tense or added in Morphology/PF to make the ‘stranded’ tense pronounceable. It argues, instead, that it is the overt exponent of an existential quantifier required to bind the ‘e’ variable of events and a default auxiliary in a ‘low Aux’ position. ‘Low Aux’ is alternatively occupied by be PRED , a complementary quantifier over states. The fact that the ‘e/s’ variable of IP is unique forces the quantifier–variable relation to be local. As a consequence, other auxiliaries cannot intervene between do AUX / be PRED and the lowest IP and never follow either at PF. Do AUX is covert unless it can raise into Force, so is apparently never preceded by other auxiliaries. Main verbs cannot raise in English only because covert do AUX blocks their ascent. In V‐raising languages, there is no do AUX ‐like auxiliary and V itself must raise into ‘low Aux’ and, if higher auxiliaries do not prevent it, further up. The present solution removes a flagrant semantics–syntax mismatch, explains the apparent incompatibility between do AUX and other auxiliaries, accounts for the V in situ constraint of current English, and avoids many generally overlooked conceptual flaws of the ‘dummy do’ account.