The constituency-based trees are again on the left, and the dependency-based trees on the right. The material in bold now forms a single constituent. This is accomplished in the constituency trees by adding the clause node S, and in the dependency trees, it is accomplished by subordinating the ECM object/subject to the particle "to". One can now debate which of the two analyses is better. The more layered analysis has the advantage that it accommodates the insight that the subject/object constituent is a semantic argument of the infinitival verb. The flat analysis has the advantage that it is more consistent with data delivered by operational considerations: the object morphology on the pronoun (e.g. "him", "her", "them", etc.), the ability of the object/subject to become the subject in the passive counterpart (e.g. "That was proved to be true"), the obligatory appearance of the reflexive pronoun when coindexation occurs with the subject (e.g. "They1 judge themselves1/*them1 to be important"), and the inability of constituency tests to clearly identify a clausal constituent (e.g. Topicalization: "??That to be true, you proved)".