This paper discusses the syntactic behaviour of a small subset of object control verbs that have an implicative interpretation (e.g. obrigar ‘force’, impedir ‘prevent’) as well as the behaviour of superficially similar syntactic causatives in European Portuguese. By exploring different syntactic properties and giving special attention to inflected infinitives as complements to the two classes of verbs, we argue that implicative object control verbs are ambiguous between true control verbs (which are ditransitive) and syntactic causatives (which take a single, clausal, internal argument). To this extent, we present an argument defying Landau’s (2015) analysis of control under these verbs as predication. We also argue that the implicative interpretation of these verbs is not determined by the syntactic nature of their complement: This interpretation is maintained in both the causative and the control counterparts of the verb. By comparing implicative object control verbs and the understudied and superficially similar pôr a ‘put to / make’ and deixar a ‘put to / make’, and by highlighting the distribution and interpretation of inflected infinitives in their complements, we can argue that the latter are unambiguous syntactic causatives, which take as complement a small clause in which we internally observe control.

The making of the Passeio Público, Lisbon’s first public garden, is filled with contradictions, advances and setbacks. By looking at the long-term history of this green infrastructure, from its inception in 1764 until the inauguration of the boulevard built on its footprint in 1886, and considering the various technical-scientific, artistic, economic, social and political factors, this article demonstrates that the so-called public garden of the ancién régime was in fact made by the Liberals. Political issues and the Liberals’ narration of events were primarily responsible for the disappearance of the Passeio Público.

Political Equality is the view that, in political matters, everyone should have an equal say. Political Sufficiency is the view that, in political matters, everyone should have enough of a say. Whereas Political Equality is concerned with relativities, Political Sufficiency is a matter of absolutes. It is natural to assume that, to justify ‘one person, one vote’, we must appeal to Political Equality. We argue that this is not the case. If Political Equality justifies ‘one person, one vote’, so does Political Sufficiency. Moreover, there is reason to prefer Political Sufficiency to Political Equality.

The article focuses on the Ukrainian official language policies and their impact on Ukrainian people-building, claiming the state promotion of Ukrainian as an exclusive language of public life and the ethnically-based understanding of the Ukrainian people, inevitably lead to the exclusion of non-Ukrainian communities from participation in democratic processes, politicise the already problematic language situation and risk undermining the role of Ukrainian as an official language.

For such an analysis, and a conceptualisation of how the state can shape the nature of the people, the article proposes a new theoretical understanding of the people as an organisational system, based on a functional adaptation of Niklas Luhmann’s social systems theory and Charles Taylor’s social imaginary.

Contemporary practices of authority by states and non-state actors alike are at odds with international law’s orthodox time-spaces, causing disciplinary anxiety. As a result, although there is a sense of the importance of global value chains (GVCs), these are invisible to the disciplinary gaze. This is not limited to international law; neo-formalist contract law and private international law suffer the same fate. There is for some a turn to ‘the global’ to understand alterity. In this paper, I argue that understanding the time-spaces created by the practice of contracting can offer important reflection on, among other things, what ‘the global’ is. The paper explores the practice of exercising authority through contractual relations at the level of the individual contract, the chain as a whole, and the use of standardised contractual clauses and model contracts. The article suggests these contractual relations are constitutive not only of spatiality but of territoriality. As such, it is possible to reterritorialise global phenomena, and ‘the global’, that have until now been understood to have deterritorialised from state or international legal orders.