Singular wh-questions carry a uniqueness presupposition. Dayal (1996) proposed that uniqueness is triggered by an answer operator (ANS), which occurs highest in the question LF, outside the question nucleus. We observe data which we take to show that uniqueness may be triggered at a low scope site, beneath operators which themselves are within the question nucleus. In response to these “low uniqueness” cases, we remove the uniqueness presupposition from ANS, and suggest re-localizing it to the wh itself, which can reconstruct into the question nucleus to take narrow scope. This paves the way for a weakening of ANS previously suggested in Fox (2013) to accommodate mention-some questions.
<p>The distribution of lexical stress is sensitive to the weight of rhythmic units such that heavier units more strongly attract stress. This paper addresses the question: what is the rhythmic unit relevant for weight computation? The traditional approach links weight to the <em>syllable</em>: weight is computed over the syllable rime (review in Blevins 1995), possibly with limited onset-sensitivity (Kelly 2004, Gordon 2005, Ryan 2013). I present experimental data which challenge this view, and support a recently proposed non-syllable-based alternative according to which weight is computed over the total vowel-to-vowel <em>interval</em> (Steriade 2012). Using a nonce word production paradigm, I test how likely participants are to stress the initial vs. final vowel in bi-vocalic sequences, manipulating the consonantal interlude separating the two vowels between a single C (e.g. <em>aka</em>) and CC cluster (<em>akra</em>). Initial stress is more likely with CC than C -- medial consonants contribute weight to pull stress to the initial vowel, CC contributing more weight than C. This is incompatible with syllable constituency which parses C/CC in the onset of the final syllable (<em>a.ka</em>, <em>a.kra</em>), and supportive of interval constituency which parses C/CC in the initial interval (<em>ak*a</em>, <em>akr*a</em>).</p>
As defined in Horn 1969, only (p) presupposes p. von Fintel & Iatridou (2007) note, however, that only (have to p) may presuppose that p is possible, rather than necessary, and propose revising the analysis of only to weaken its contribution. Building on Ippolito 2007, we show that this revision predicts interpretations which are too weak in data involving plurals and negation. A paradox thus arises: Horn’s only is too strong in some cases, but required in others. To resolve the paradox, we maintain Horn’s only, but introduce an external source of weakening that is not always available: in von Fintel and Iatridou’s modal environment, the argument of only is weakened by a covert operator (AT LEAST, Crnic ̆ 2011; Schwarz 2004) that is blocked in the problematic cases involving plurals and negation.
Based on the scope possibilities of pre-DP only relative to modals and their interaction with ellipsis, we provide a new argument (following Benbaji 2021) for a theory according to which only is always a propositional operator at LF, despite surface appearance.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.