Compare:
Maya seems to be tired.
and:
Maya tries to stay calm.
The sentences look similar.
Both have:
- a subject;
- a finite verb;
- a to-infinitive.
Yet the subject Maya relates to the two main verbs in very different ways.
In:
Maya tries to stay calm.
Maya is the person doing the trying.
The verb try assigns her a real semantic role.
In:
Maya seems to be tired.
Maya is not really “doing the seeming” in the same sense.
The core proposition is:
Maya is tired.
Seems adds an evidential or appearance-based stance toward that proposition.
Linguists use the contrast between raising and control to explain this difference.
The terminology is advanced. The reader job is simple:
When a noun appears before an infinitive, ask whether the higher verb gives that noun its own role — or whether the noun belongs semantically only to the lower predicate.
Quick answer: raising versus control
| Construction | Example | Relationship of subject to higher verb |
|---|---|---|
| Raising | Maya seems to be tired. | Maya is not a semantic argument of seem; she belongs to be tired. |
| Control | Maya tries to stay calm. | Maya is an argument of try and also controls the understood subject of stay calm. |
Cambridge’s treatment of raising and control makes this core contrast explicit: control predicates assign a semantic role to their controller, while raising predicates do not assign the same kind of semantic role to the raised subject.
Start with the meaning, not the movement metaphor
The word raising comes from formal syntactic traditions in which the subject is analysed as originating in a lower clause and appearing in a higher subject position.
Students do not need to imagine words physically travelling through a sentence.
The useful question is semantic:
Which predicate actually describes this noun?
For:
Maya seems to be tired.
the meaningful relation is:
Maya → tired
Seems qualifies the speaker’s commitment to that proposition.
The paraphrase test for raising
Compare:
Maya seems to be tired.
with:
It seems that Maya is tired.
The core proposition is preserved:
Maya is tired.
The higher predicate can also appear with an expletive it.
This alternation is strong evidence that Maya is not selected by seem in the same way that an agent is selected by try.
The expletive test: “There seems to be a problem”
English says:
There seems to be a problem.
The word there is an expletive or dummy-like subject in this construction.
It does not refer to a location in the ordinary way.
Now try:
*There tries to be a problem.
The sentence fails under the ordinary control reading because try requires an entity capable of trying.
A dummy subject cannot supply that semantic role.
This is one of the cleanest diagnostics for raising versus control.
Weather “it” gives the same clue
Raising:
It seems to be raining.
The weather it does not refer to a thing that is doing the seeming.
Control:
*It tries to rain.
In ordinary literal interpretation, weather it cannot be an intentional trier.
The contrast reveals the semantic demand of the higher predicate.
Control verbs give the subject a role
Consider:
Amir promised to leave.
Amir is:
- the person who makes the promise;
- the understood person who will leave.
We can represent:
Amir promised [Amir to leave]
English does not normally repeat the lower subject in that form, but the interpretation is clear.
In linguistic terms, the main-clause subject controls the understood subject of the infinitive.
Subject control
Common examples include:
Maya tried to leave.
Amir promised to return.
The students decided to continue.
In each case, the main subject is also understood as the subject of the infinitive.
Maya tries, and Maya leaves.
Amir promises, and Amir returns.
The students decide, and the students continue.
The higher predicate assigns a role to the controller.
Object control
Now:
The teacher persuaded Lina to revise.
Who revises?
Lina
The object Lina controls the understood subject of the infinitive.
Likewise:
The coach encouraged them to continue.
them is both:
- the object of encouraged;
- the understood subject of continue.
This is object control.
Raising can also involve objects
Formal grammar also discusses object-raising or exceptional-case patterns such as:
I believe her to be capable.
The noun phrase her is semantically tied to:
her → capable
rather than receiving an ordinary patient role from believe.
These analyses become theoretically detailed quickly.
For school-level purposes, the crucial distinction remains:
Does the higher predicate independently select and describe the noun, or does the noun’s main semantic role come from the lower predicate?
Why “seem” accepts strange subjects
Because seem does not require its surface subject to be an intentional participant, many kinds of subjects can appear:
The problem seems to be difficult.
There seems to be a mistake.
It seems to be raining.
The key seems to fit.
These subjects are licensed primarily by the lower predicates:
problem → difficult
mistake → exist
weather → raining
key → fit
The higher verb contributes stance.
Why “try” cannot accept the same subjects
Try normally requires an intentional or agentive participant.
Maya tried to leave.
Natural.
*The problem tried to be difficult.
Odd unless a playful personification is intended.
*There tried to be a mistake.
Not the ordinary control construction.
This is a selectional restriction created by the higher verb’s meaning.
Idioms provide another classic diagnostic
Consider an idiom such as:
The cat is out of the bag.
A raising predicate can preserve the idiomatic reading:
The cat seems to be out of the bag.
The sentence can still mean that the secret appears to have been revealed.
The surface subject the cat does not need an independent semantic role with seem.
Control verbs behave differently because their subjects must satisfy the higher predicate’s semantic requirements.
This diagnostic is advanced, but it reveals the same underlying mechanism.
Why raising and control matter for interpretation
Compare:
The student appears to understand the question.
with:
The student tries to understand the question.
The first concerns evidence or appearance:
It appears that the student understands.
The second concerns effort:
The student makes an effort to understand.
The surface grammar is similar.
The event structure is completely different.
Raising is not the same as tough constructions
eduKateSG already has Tough Constructions in English.
Compare:
The problem seems to be difficult.
with:
The problem is difficult to solve.
In the raising example, the problem is the subject of the lower predicate be difficult.
In the tough construction, the problem is interpreted as the missing object of solve:
solve the problem
The pages therefore own different hidden dependencies.
Raising is not the same as small clauses
eduKateSG’s Small Clauses article examines predication without a full finite verb:
I consider her capable.
Raising/control analysis focuses instead on the relationship between a higher predicate and an infinitival clause:
She seems to be capable.
She tries to be capable.
The concepts connect, but the reader jobs remain distinct.
Why this matters for reading academic English
Academic writing often uses raising predicates:
The evidence appears to support the hypothesis.
The intervention seems to have improved attendance.
The difference is likely to reflect sampling variation.
These constructions manage epistemic stance.
The writer is not simply asserting:
The evidence supports the hypothesis.
They are qualifying how strongly the claim is presented.
Recognising raising helps readers separate:
- the core proposition;
- the writer’s confidence or evidential stance.
Why control matters in instructions and intentions
Control predicates encode agency, intention, permission and obligation:
decide to revise
try to improve
promise to return
persuade someone to act
encourage students to explain
The identity of the understood lower subject matters.
In:
The teacher persuaded Lina to revise.
Lina revises, not the teacher.
Object control is therefore crucial to role tracking.
A Singapore comprehension connection
Consider:
The policy appears to have reduced waiting times.
A student should be able to unpack:
It appears that the policy reduced waiting times.
The phrase appears to signals caution.
Now:
The agency tried to reduce waiting times.
This does not say the reduction happened.
It says the agency made an effort.
Confusing raising with control can therefore change a factual inference.
Why this matters for writing
Compare:
The method seems to work.
with:
The method works.
The first leaves room for uncertainty.
That may be appropriate when evidence is incomplete.
Now compare:
The researchers tried to replicate the result.
This reports an attempt, not success.
A writer must not allow a control verb of effort to imply an achieved outcome.
Grammar carries epistemic and event-level commitments.
Diagnosis before prescription
Gap 1: surface-pattern matching
The learner sees “verb + to-infinitive” and assumes all examples have the same structure. Repair: compare seem and try semantically.
Gap 2: expletive blindness
The learner cannot use there seems to… as evidence for raising. Repair: compare expletive subjects across raising and control.
Gap 3: controller confusion
The learner cannot identify who performs the lower action in object-control sentences. Repair: ask “who actually does the infinitive?”
Gap 4: stance loss
The learner paraphrases seems to as a definite assertion. Repair: preserve evidential uncertainty.
Gap 5: attempt/outcome confusion
The learner treats tried to as proof of success. Repair: separate intention or effort from result.
A four-test classroom method
For a possible raising/control verb, ask:
- Does the higher verb assign a meaningful role to the subject?
- Can dummy there appear? There seems to be…
- Can weather it appear? It seems to be raining.
- Who is understood as the subject of the infinitive?
Example:
Lina promised to return.
Lina makes the promise and Lina returns.
Control.
Lina seems to be ready.
Lina is ready; seem contributes stance.
Raising.
Internal-link opportunities
- Tough Constructions in English
- Small Clauses in English
- Dummy Subjects “It” and “There”
- Selectional Restrictions
- Subject and Object Complements
- How Language Works
Connections eduKateAI can learn
Syntax ↔ semantic roles: a surface subject can appear with a higher verb without receiving its main semantic role from that verb.
Raising ↔ stance: predicates such as seem and appear can qualify a proposition without introducing an intentional participant.
Control ↔ agency: control predicates assign roles such as trier, promiser, persuader or decision-maker and link an argument to the understood subject of an infinitive.
Dummy subjects ↔ diagnosis: expletive there and weather it help reveal predicates that do not semantically select their surface subjects.
Reading ↔ epistemic inference: appears to and seems to reduce commitment relative to a bare assertion.
Writing ↔ outcome control: try to reports effort and should not be misread as proof of success.
Grammar ↔ participant tracking: subject-control and object-control constructions require readers to identify who performs the lower action.
Subjects ↔ academic caution: raising predicates are common in evidence-sensitive writing because they allow calibrated claims.
Final checkpoint
Explain why:
There seems to be a problem.
is ordinary English, while:
*There tries to be a problem.
is not an ordinary control construction.
Then identify the controller in:
The teacher persuaded Lina to revise.
Finally, explain the stance difference between:
The method works.
and:
The method seems to work.
If the learner can answer all three, the hidden subject relationships are visible.