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.

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 Intervention, covert movement, and focus computation in multiple wh-questions

2013 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 23
Author(s):  
Hadas Kotek
Keyword(s):  
Covert Movement ◽  
Wh Questions

Intervention, covert movement, and focus computation in multiple wh-questions

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.

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.

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.

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 Covert Movement in Multiple‐ Wh Questions: Experimental and Theoretical Investigations

Syntax ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 185-202
Author(s):  
Ur Shlonsky ◽  
Sandra Villata ◽  
Julie Franck
Keyword(s):  
Theoretical Investigations ◽  
Covert Movement ◽  
Wh Questions

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
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document