Focus intervention effects in Mandarin multiple wh-questions

2015 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 361-382 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haoze Li ◽  
Candice Chi-Hang Cheung
Keyword(s):  
Intervention Effects ◽  
Wh Questions ◽  
Focus Intervention

Dissociating intervention effects from superiority in English wh-questions

2017 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 397-417 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hadas Kotek
Keyword(s):  
Natural Language ◽  
Semantic Theory ◽  
Natural Language Semantics ◽  
Intervention Effects ◽  
Oxford University ◽  
Language Semantics ◽  
Wh Questions ◽  
Quantifier Raising ◽  
Comprehensive Study

Abstract In wh-questions, intervention effects are detected whenever certain elements – focus-sensitive operators, negative elements, and quantifiers – c-command an in-situ wh-word. Pesetsky (2000, Phrasal movement and its kin. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press) presents a comprehensive study of intervention effects in English multiple wh-questions, arguing that intervention correlates with superiority: superiority-violating questions are subject to intervention effects, while superiority-obeying questions are immune from such effects. This description has been adopted as an explanandum in most recent work on intervention, such as Beck (2006, Intervention effects follow from focus interpretation. Natural Language Semantics 14. 1–56) and Cable (2010, The Grammar of Q: Q-particles, wh-movement, and pied-piping. Oxford University Press), a.o. In this paper, I show instead that intervention effects in English questions correlate with the available LF positions for wh-in-situ and the intervener, but not with superiority. The grammar allows for several different ways of repairing intervention configurations, including wh-movement, scrambling, Quantifier Raising, and reconstruction. Intervention effects are observed when none of these repair strategies are applicable, and there is no way of avoiding the intervention configuration – regardless of superiority. Nonetheless, I show that these results are consistent with the syntax proposed for English questions in Pesetsky (2000, Phrasal movement and its kin. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press) and with the semantic theory of intervention effects in Beck (2006, Intervention effects follow from focus interpretation. Natural Language Semantics 14. 1–56).

scholarly journals Wh-questions in Balkar

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 163
Author(s):  
Anastasiia Voznesenskaia
Keyword(s):  
Intervention Effects ◽  
Wh Questions ◽  
Coordinate Structures

This paper deals with the properties of wh-questions in Balkar. It is shown that wh-in-situ structures in Balkar are island insensitive (with an exception of coordinate structures). I discuss the complement/adjunct asymmetry regarding intervention effects. I also consider embedded multiple wh-structures. In this paper, I discuss a puzzle that the Balkar data presents to the prominent theories of wh-questions, which do not explain the properties it shows.

Deriving Chinese alternative questions

2020 ◽  
Vol 46 (2) ◽  
pp. 206-239
Author(s):  
Rui-heng Ray Huang
Keyword(s):  
Empirical Support ◽  
Movement Analysis ◽  
Intervention Effects ◽  
Focus Intervention ◽  
Island Constraints ◽  
Alternative Questions ◽  
Better Than ◽  
Feature Percolation

Abstract This study proposes an approach which derives Chinese alternative questions by means of feature percolation and LF movement. This approach is argued to fare better than a movement approach as proposed by C.-T. Huang (1998) and a non-movement binding approach as proposed by R.-H. Huang (2010) in that it may successfully explain why Chinese alternative questions are only sensitive to the wh-island constraint, but not to other types of island constraints. The LF movement analysis may receive empirical support from the observed fact that Chinese alternative questions exhibit focus-intervention effects, generally assumed to be induced by LF movement.

scholarly journals Not all wh-dependencies are created equal: processing of multiple wh-questions in Romanian children and adults

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-40
Author(s):  
Anamaria Bentea ◽  
Theodoros Marinis
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Times ◽  
Comprehension Question ◽  
Typically Developing ◽  
Intervention Effects ◽  
Online Processing ◽  
Ordering Constraints ◽  
Wh Questions ◽  
Listening Experiment

Abstract The aim of this study was to examine the acquisition and processing of multiple who- and which-questions in Romanian that display ordering constraints and involve exhaustivity. Toward that aim, typically developing Romanian children (mean age 8.3) and adults participated in a self-paced listening experiment that simultaneously investigated online processing and offline comprehension of multiple wh-questions. The study manipulated the type of wh-phrase (who/which) and the order in which these elements appear (subject–object [SO]/object–subject [OS]). The response to the comprehension question could address the issue of exhaustivity because we measured whether participants used an exhaustive or a non-exhaustive response. Our findings reveal that both children and adults slow down when processing who- as compared to which-phrases, but only adults show an online sensitivity to ordering constraints in who-questions. Accuracy is higher with multiple who- than which-questions. The latter pose more difficulties for comprehension, particularly in the OS order. We relate this to intervention effects similar to those proposed for single which-questions. The lack of intervention effects in terms of reaction times indicates that these effects occur at a later stage, after participants have heard the whole sentence and when they interpret its meaning.

scholarly journals Covert Pied-Piping in English Multiple Wh-Questions

2016 ◽  
Vol 47 (4) ◽  
pp. 669-693 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hadas Kotek ◽  
Michael Yoshitaka Erlewine
Keyword(s):  
Intervention Effects ◽  
True Preference ◽  
Wh Questions

In this article, we argue for the existence of covert pied-piping in wh-questions through a previously unnoticed pattern of intervention effects in Superiority-obeying English multiple wh-questions. We show that the preference of covert pied-piping, unlike that of overt pied-piping, is for movement of larger constituents. We argue that this discrepancy stems from conflicting requirements of PF and LF: overt pied-piping feeds both LF and PF, but covert pied-piping feeds LF only. The study of covert pied-piping thus reveals the true preference of LF and narrow syntax with regard to pied-piping: larger pied-piping constituents are preferred over smaller ones. This preference can be overridden by certain PF constraints that apply to overt pied-piping.

scholarly journals Exhaustifying Focus Intervention Effects: A Crosslinguistic Study

2013 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 317
Author(s):  
Zhiguo Xie
Keyword(s):  
Theoretical Analysis ◽  
Intervention Effects ◽  
Adjunct Questions ◽  
Focus Intervention ◽  
Exhaustive Interpretation

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt:This paper describes, from a crosslinguistic perspective, the empirical pattern of focus phrases interacting with wh-in-situ arguments in their scope, and provides a preliminary theoretical analysis of the pattern. I cite examples from genetically unrelated languages to show that, contrary to Kim’s (2002, 2005) claim, not all focus phrases (FPs) trigger intervention effects (IEs). To control for any potential asymmetry between wh-arguments and wh-adjuncts, in my discussion of focus-included IE, I exclude wh-adjunct questions from consideration. I will show that whether an FP is an intervener for wh-in-situ argument questions depends on whether the FP receives an exhaustive interpretation or not. 

scholarly journals Intervention Effects follow from Scope Rigidity in Turkish

2022 ◽  
Vol 31 ◽  
pp. 082
Author(s):  
Ömer Demirok
Keyword(s):  
Robust Method ◽  
Intervention Effects ◽  
Covert Movement ◽  
Wh Questions ◽  
General Restriction

Intervention effects in Turkish wh-questions can be obviated by the overt movement of the wh-phrase past the intervener. This cross-linguistically robust method of intervention obviation raises an important question: what is it that bans the covert movement of the wh-phrase? I argue that this question finds a natural answer in Scope Rigidity, a general restriction on the availability of inverse scope. Importantly, including wh-phrases in the domain of Scope Rigidity calls for a scopal account of wh-phrases. I argue that this general approach has welcome consequences in explaining the source of intervention effects and in predicting what can intervene, and can even accommodate how extraction islands containing wh-phrases behave in intervention configurations.

scholarly journals Agreeing and Moving across Traces: On Why Lower Copies May Be Transparent or Opaque

Philosophies ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 3
Author(s):  
Jairo Nunes
Keyword(s):  
Intervention Effects ◽  
Copy Theory Of Movement ◽  
Wh Questions ◽  
Copy Theory

Within Minimalism, traces are often taken to be transparent for agreement and movement across them, which raises the question of how this could be properly accounted for within the copy theory of movement. This paper examines wh-traces in multiple wh-questions and argues that traces (lower copies) may or may not induce intervention effects depending on whether or not they are fully specified.

Responses of Language-Disordered Children to Wh-Questions

1986 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 95-106 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martha M. Parnell ◽  
James D. Amerman ◽  
Roger D. Harting
Keyword(s):  
Relative Difficulty ◽  
Normal Children ◽  
Cognitive Linguistic ◽  
Wh Questions

Nineteen language-disordered children aged 3—7 years responded to items representing nine wh-question forms. Questions referred to three types of referential sources based on immediacy and visual availability. Three and 4-year-olds produced significantly fewer functionally appropriate and functionally accurate answers than did the 5- and 6-year-olds. Generally, questions asked with reference to nonobservable persons, actions, or objects appeared the most difficult. Why, when, and what happened questions were the most difficult of the nine wh-forms. In comparison with previous data from normal children, the language-disordered subjects' responses were significantly less appropriate and accurate. The language-disordered children also appeared particularly vulnerable to the increased cognitive/linguistic demands of questioning directed toward nonimmediate referents. A hierarchy of wh-question forms by relative difficulty was very similar to that observed for normal children. Implications for wh-question assessment and intervention are discussed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document