Itival complement. Let us Let us abstract tree in tree illustrate the discussion: use the use the abstract (4) toin (four) to illustrate the discussion: 4. vPv[acc]VPbelieveTPDPT’TdefvPRtoObj involves a functional feature in the matrix clause that establishes dependency RtoObj entails a functional feature within the matrix clause that establishes aadependency with an argument in the reduced clause–hence, accusative case along with the the object-like with an argument within the lower clause–hence, thethe accusative case andobject-like home in the the raised DP. functional feature should be in a position able to into a subordinate clause. property ofraised DP. This This functional feature must beto probeprobe into a subordinate In our In our 2-Methoxyestradiol supplier structure in (four), and following a tradition that starts with Chomsky (1995), clause. structure in (four), and following a tradition that starts with Chomsky (1995), we take it take it head that assigns assigns accusative case for the in the decrease the reduce wethat the that the head thataccusative case towards the argument argument of clause is v. clause is v. In addition, RtoObj Nocodazole manufacturer demands a feature within the infinitival complement that makes it transparent for any probe within the matrix clause. Following a line of pondering that originates it On top of that, RtoObj calls for a feature within the infinitival complement that makes in transparent(1995), we assumematrix clause.epistemic verbs canthinking deficient T phrase Chomsky for any probe inside the that English Following a line of select a that originates in Chomsky (1995), we assume that English epistemic verbs can choose a deficient T the the(TdefP) that is unable to license an overt or covert DP, with all the consequence that phrase (Tdef P) topic of theto license ancomplement have to with all the consequence thatin the matrix matic that is unable infinitival overt or covert DP, establish a dependency the thematic subject of the infinitival complement have to establish a dependency within the matrix clause. clause. Considering that RtoObj needs two characteristics in the structure, the absence of RtoObj in Spanish Because RtoObj demands two options within the structure, the absence of RtoObj in Spanish could come about due to the absence of 1 of those characteristics within the Spanish inventory. could come about as a consequence of the absence of 1 of these capabilities inside the Spanish inventory. 1 possibility is the fact that the Spanish v doesn’t have the capability to probe decrease than aaTP A single possibility is the fact that the Spanish v doesn’t have the capability to probe lower than TP barrier. Alternatively, the absence of RtoObj in Spanish would suggest that epistemic verbs barrier. Alternatively, the absence of RtoObj in Spanish would recommend that epistemic cannotcannotfor Tdef or Tdef or that Spanishthis category altogether. verbs select choose for that Spanish lacks lacks this category altogether. Therefore, the question that this short article addresses is: What tends to make English and Spanish Hence, the question that this short article addresses is: What tends to make English and Spanish distinct–is it the matrix v or the subordinate TTdefIn In order extricate thethe featurefeadistinct–is it the matrix v or the subordinate def order to to extricate feature or or characteristics that yield RtoObj, we propose usingcode-switching data. As we shall show, codetures that yield RtoObj, we propose utilizing code-switching data. As we shall show, codeswitching by deep bilinguals–those that acquired both languages from aavery early age switching by deep bilinguals–those that acquired both languages from incredibly early.