scholarly journals The periphery of vP in the theory of wh-in situ

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Caterina Bonan
Keyword(s):  
Language Family ◽  
Internal Focus ◽  
Covert Movement ◽  
Wh Questions ◽  
Question Formation ◽  
Focus Movement ◽  
Economic Understanding

This article outlines an implementation of Cable’s (2010) Grammar of Q that takes into account the role played by the periphery of vP, hitherto unexplored in this framework. Empirically, what I offer is a new example, in a new language family, of a known manifestation of wh-in situ: I indeed argue that Trevisan, a Northern Italian dialect, displays compulsory clause-internal focus movement of both wh-elements and contrastive foci. Theoretically, I use the Trevisan data to present a new, tweaked application of previously proposed approaches whereby wh-elements do not contribute to clause-typing and Q-particles are cross-linguistically needed in the computation of answer-seeking wh-questions. My claim is that wh-in situ languages are characterised not only by language-specific choices between projection and adjunction of Q and overt vs covert movement of Q, but also in terms of the loci where the features relevant to wh-questions, [q] and [focus], are checked: while some languages check both in C (‘feature bundling’), others make use of the clause-internal vP-periphery to check [focus] (‘feature scattering’). The theory developed in this article provides an innovative understanding of the mechanisms involved in Northern Italian wh-in situ: what it offers is a novel, economic understanding of the morphosyntax of this question-formation strategy that reduces all core properties to different combinations of the setting of simple, universal micro-parameters related to interrogative wh-movement.

On Wh-questions in Persian

2001 ◽  
Vol 46 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 41-61 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arsalan Kahnemuyipour
Keyword(s):  
Focus Position ◽  
Wh Questions ◽  
Focus Movement

AbstractThis article explores wh-questions in Persian and examines how the “clausal typing hypothesis” and the “focus-fronting analysis” fare with respect to Persian wh-questions. It is shown that Persian wh-questions involve obligatory movement of wh-phrases to a preverbal focus position. This movement is different from syntactic wh-movement in that it does not involve movement of the wh-phrase to [Spec, CP], whose trigger is a [+wh] feature in C. Thus, in terms of the typology of wh-questions, Persian is neither a syntactic wh-movement nor a wh-in-situ language; rather, it should be classified with languages such as Aghem, Basque, Hungarian, Kirundi, and Serbo-Croatian, in which wh-phrases have been argued to undergo focus movement. It is shown that Persian does not seem to share the properties of Serbo-Croatian, another focus-fronting language. Some possible explanations are provided and the theoretical implications are discussed.

scholarly journals Covert movement in English probing wh-questions

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 180
Author(s):  
An Duy Nguyen ◽  
Géraldine Legendre
Keyword(s):  
Surface Structure ◽  
Information Seeking ◽  
Judgment Task ◽  
Covert Movement ◽  
Wh Questions ◽  
Acceptability Judgment ◽  
Syntactic Difference ◽  
Probing Questions ◽  
Echo Questions

Besides fronted information-seeking questions, English also allows for two types of wh-in-situ ones: echo questions, which are used to request a repetition or a clarification of a previous utterance, and probing questions, which are often used in quiz shows, classroom settings, and child-directed speech to “prompt” the addressee for an answer. An acceptability judgment task shows that PQs with multiple wh-phrases get a significantly lower acceptability score than echo questions with multiple wh-phrases despite their similarity in surface structure, which suggests a syntactic difference below the surface. Independent syntactic evidence confirms the result and further suggests that while echo questions involve no syntactic movement (Dayal, 1996), probing questions involve covert wh-movement.

Japanese wh-phrases as operators with unspecified quantificational force

2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-25 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mamoru Saito
Keyword(s):  
Movement Analysis ◽  
Covert Movement ◽  
Wh Questions ◽  
Unselective Binding ◽  
Existential Quantification ◽  
Prevailing View ◽  
Operator Variable ◽  
Probe Particles

Abstract Japanese wh-expressions appear in various kinds of operator-variable structures, including wh-questions and sentences with universal and existential quantification. The nature of the operator-variable relation is determined by an associated particle, such as the question marker ka or the universal particle mo. Given this, it has been widely assumed since Kuroda (1965) that the wh-expressions are to be interpreted as variables bound by those quantificational particles. This paper argues against this prevailing view by proposing that these wh-expressions are operators with unspecified quantificational force. Building on an insight by Nishigauchi (1990), I argue that they must covertly move to positions that allow them to probe particles and to acquire specific quantificational forces from them. I demonstrate that this analysis captures the main properties of Japanese wh-expressions as well as the differences between them and their Chinese counterparts. Huang (1982) proposed a covert movement analysis for argument wh-phrases in Chinese, which was extended to Japanese, for example, in Lasnik & Saito (1984) and Richards (2001). But Tsai (1999) has convincingly shown that they are subject to unselective binding and are interpreted in situ as variables. If the analysis for Japanese in this paper is correct, it shows that Huang’s approach can be – and should be – maintained for wh-phrases in Japanese with some refinements.

scholarly journals Wh-questions in Kitharaka

2005 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 44-99
Author(s):  
Peter Kinyua Muriungi
Keyword(s):  
Functional Head ◽  
Strong Focus ◽  
Wh Questions ◽  
Question Formation ◽  
Embedded Clauses

This paper explores question formation in Kitharaka (E54; Bantu; Kenyan) within the crosslinguistic approach developed in Sabel (2000, 2002, 2003). According to Sabel, variation in the positioning of wh-phrases in languages can be explained if it is assumed that wh-movement is universally triggered by [+wh] and [+focus] features, both of which are [+interpretable] and can be specified as [±strong]. For Kitharaka, I argue that wh-movement is triggered by a strong [+focus] feature in a functional head (Foc). The strong [+focus] feature on a focus head is morphologically manifested by a focus marker which attaches to a fronted wh-phrase, and in case of long wh-movement, by the focus markers that may appear on embedded clauses crossed by overt wh-movement. Wh-in situ occurs when no strong [+focus] features are introduced in the syntax (Muriungi 2003,2004).

scholarly journals Making questions with tone: Polar question formation in Kinyarwanda

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 213
Author(s):  
Alexander Jarnow
Keyword(s):  
Prosodic Structure ◽  
Final Position ◽  
Bantu Language ◽  
Wh Questions ◽  
Question Formation ◽  
The Right

Kinyarwanda is a Bantu language with one phonemic (H) tone (Kimenyi 2002). This can phonetically realized as high, low, rising, and falling. This talk addresses the tonological discrepancy between declaratives and polar questions in Kinyarwanda. Kimenyi(1980) briefly addresses Kinyarwanda polar questions and describes them as “a rising pitch at the sentence final position”. This generalization captures crucially cannot predict polar questions in which there is no LHL contour at the end of the sentence. I argue that what polar questions share is (a) suspension of downstep on the rightmost lexical H and (b) deletion of all word-final prosodic H. Kinyarwanda forms a prosodic structure that takes the scope of the question. This expands on Richards (2010) analysis of wh-questions. Kinyarwanda marks the right edges of prosodic words using boundary tones, similar to Chichewa (Kanerva 1990; Myers 1996).

scholarly journals D-linking and the semantics of wh-in-situ

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 448
Author(s):  
Joshua Martin
Keyword(s):  
Wh Questions

Theories of pair-list readings of multiple wh-questions commonly posit an interpretive asymmetry between the fronted and in-situ wh-phrases, where the fronted wh-phrase is argued to function as the sortal key, have a requirement to be interpreted exhaustively, or be obligatorily D-linked. To clarify the empirical landscape of such debate, I present three experiments which tease apart the effects of these often-confounded discourse factors on the order and interpretation of multiple wh-questions. They are found to have either inconsistent or insignificant effects, arguing against a unique discourse-sensitivity of the fronted wh-phrase. Theories of questions which encode such an asymmetry should accordingly be revised.

Japanese speakers' second language Chinese wh-questions: a lexical morphological feature deficit account

2007 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 329-357 ◽  
Author(s):  
Boping Yuan
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Empirical Study ◽  
Morphological Feature ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Japanese Speakers ◽  
L2 Chinese ◽  
Wh Questions

In this article, an empirical study of how Chinese wh-questions are mentally represented in Japanese speakers' grammars of Chinese as a second language (L2) is reported. Both Chinese and Japanese are generally considered wh-in-situ languages in which a wh-word is allowed to remain in its base-generated position, and both languages use question particles to mark questions. It is assumed that C0 in wh-questions is essentially ambiguous and unvalued and that unvalued C0 must be valued. In Chinese, the wh-particle ne values C0 with [+Q, +wh] features, which licenses the wh-word in situ. As a result, no wh-movement is necessary and Subjacency becomes irrelevant. Japanese also employs question particles, such as ka or no. However, they are `defective' in the sense that they can only value the ambiguous C0 as [+Q] and they are unable to specify the question as to whether it is [+yes/no] or [+wh]. To value C0 as a head with [+wh], a wh-operator in a wh -word inside the sentence has to raise overtly to C0. The results of an acceptability judgement task show that although the Japanese speakers respond in a broadly target-like way, the lexical morphological feature [+wh] of the particle ne in their L2 Chinese lexicons is permanently deficient, which leads to variability in their intuitions about Chinese wh-questions. A lexical morphological feature deficit account for the results is proposed, and it is suggested that the lexical morphology—syntax interface can be a source of variability in L2 acquisition.

Scope Marking at the Syntax-Semantics Interface

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Veneeta Dayal ◽  
Deepak Alok
Keyword(s):  
Syntactic Structure ◽  
Semantic Interpretation ◽  
Matrix Clause ◽  
Ongoing Research ◽  
The Matrix ◽  
Wh Questions ◽  
Embedded Clauses ◽  
Embedded Clause ◽  
Semantic Properties

Natural language allows questioning into embedded clauses. One strategy for doing so involves structures like the following: [CP-1 whi [TP DP V [CP-2 … ti …]]], where a wh-phrase that thematically belongs to the embedded clause appears in the matrix scope position. A possible answer to such a question must specify values for the fronted wh-phrase. This is the extraction strategy seen in languages like English. An alternative strategy involves a structure in which there is a distinct wh-phrase in the matrix clause. It is manifested in two types of structures. One is a close analog of extraction, but for the extra wh-phrase: [CP-1 whi [TP DP V [CP-2 whj [TP…t­j­…]]]]. The other simply juxtaposes two questions, rather than syntactically subordinating the second one: [CP-3 [CP-1 whi [TP…]] [CP-2 whj [TP…]]]. In both versions of the second strategy, the wh-phrase in CP-1 is invariant, typically corresponding to the wh-phrase used to question propositional arguments. There is no restriction on the type or number of wh-phrases in CP-2. Possible answers must specify values for all the wh-phrases in CP-2. This strategy is variously known as scope marking, partial wh movement or expletive wh questions. Both strategies can occur in the same language. German, for example, instantiates all three possibilities: extraction, subordinated, as well as sequential scope marking. The scope marking strategy is also manifested in in-situ languages. Scope marking has been subjected to 30 years of research and much is known at this time about its syntactic and semantic properties. Its pragmatics properties, however, are relatively under-studied. The acquisition of scope marking, in relation to extraction, is another area of ongoing research. One of the reasons why scope marking has intrigued linguists is because it seems to defy central tenets about the nature of wh scope taking. For example, it presents an apparent mismatch between the number of wh expressions in the question and the number of expressions whose values are specified in the answer. It poses a challenge for our understanding of how syntactic structure feeds semantic interpretation and how alternative strategies with similar functions relate to each other.

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).

Echo Questions in the Minimalist Program

2010 ◽  
Vol 41 (1) ◽  
pp. 131-148 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas Sobin
Keyword(s):  
Minimalist Program ◽  
Wide Scope ◽  
Verb Movement ◽  
Question Formation ◽  
Scope Assignment ◽  
Echo Questions

English echo questions present numerous challenges to the analysis of interrogatives, including (a) simple wh-in-situ (You saw who?); (b) apparent Superiority violations (What did who see?); (c) apparent verb movement without wh-movement (Has Mary seen what?); and (d) requisite wide scope only for echo-question-introduced wh-phrases (underlined in these examples—only who in What did who see? is being asked about). Such apparently contrary features may be explained in terms of independently necessary scope assignment mechanisms and a complementizer that subordinates the utterance being echoed and “freezes” its CP structure. No norms of question formation are violated.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document