In current GB theory, traces of movement, both A- and A′-movement, are assumed to be regulated by the binding theory as well as the ECP. However, in recent years it has been noted that the effects of the binding theory for traces of movement overlap with those of the ECP to a great extent and therefore, no harm is done even if traces are exempt from the binding theory. Specifically, my main concern in this paper is the validity of the binding theory for A-movement. In addition to data of the aforementioned kind, which merely suggests the redundancy of binding theory for movement, I present data which, crucially disconfirms the validity of the binding theory as a regulating principle for A-movement, namely, long-distance A-movement involved in ECM (raising)-constructions in some languages. Based on this data, I claim that traces of A-movement are not subject to binding theory, and thus the binding theory should be reserved only for the referential dependencies of lexical anaphors
