and parameters theory, the difference between SVO and VOS clauses is the direction in which parameters are set for projection of a T category's specifier. When the parameter is to the right of T(ense)'s specifier, VOS is realized, and when it is to the left, SVO is realized. The motivation for movement from SVO to VOS structure is still undetermined, as some languages show inconsistencies with SVO underlying structure and an absence of VP-raising (such as Chamorro and Tzotzil). In verb-initial languages, the extended projection principle causes overt specifier movement from the strong tense [T], verb [V], or predicate [Pred] features. Chung proposes a syntactic profile for verb-initial languages that are derived through VP-raising: VP coordination is allowed. The subject and other constituents outside the verb phrase can be extracted. The subject has narrow scope over sentential elements. VOS can be derived from SVO, but Maria Polinsky suggests that verb-initial languages (V1 languages) display other properties that correlate with verb-initiality and are crucial to analysis of V1 order. Subject-only restriction The subject-only restriction (SOR) exists in most, if not all, Austronesian languages and follows from the VP-raising account of VOS. In a given clause, only one argument such as the external arguments, the subjects, or the sentence's most prominent argument, is attainable for "extraction" to undergo movements, which includes A-bar movements like wh-movement, topicalization, and relativization. No other arguments, such as the internal arguments or VP adjuncts, may undergo such movement. Since SOR restricts any internal arguments and VP adjuncts from undergoing any movements, the VP-internal or low adjuncts are not qualified to behave as if they are stranded by VP-raising. As a result, VOS is retained in those languages. Examples in Seediq: VP-external constituents are the only accessible constituents when structures require movements (like relative clauses or topicalization). In other words, structures requiring movements may access constituents only if they are external to VP. Any movement regarding the VP-internal or adjuncts constituents fails to satisfy the subject-only restriction. Since movements with respect to internal arguments and VP adjuncts are not allowed in Seediq, and only VP-external movement is possible (unless the predicate undergo a change in voice morphology), only VOS is grammatical. VP-remnant raising Remnant raising and clause-final adjuncts VP-raising accounts for Toba Batak are proposed by Cole and Herman. However, prior to the VP moving to its final position, they argue that adverbs and prepositions move out of