This article investigates the complex facts of Malay wh-questions, and suggests a theory of how Malay wh-questions fit into the typology of wh-questions permitted by a Minimalist conception of Universal Grammar. The paper examines the principles that account for overt wh-movement, wh-in-situ and partial wh-movement in Malay. We argue that the apparent optionality seen in Malay reduces to whether, in the lexicon, a question word consists of an operator and variable combined in a single word, or of a variable bound by a separate, phonologically null operator. We then apply the analysis based on Malay to other languages (primarily, to Chinese and English), and show that the principles employed for Malay are sufficient to explain the variation in wh-question formation among these languages.

No abstract

No abstract

It has been claimed widely that in Indonesian the most frequent type of relative clause, that formed with the complementizer yang and with a gap in place of the relativized NP, is restricted to subject relativization. We challenge this claim and argue that complementizer/gap direct object relativization is also well formed. Furthermore, we argue against the proposal that the grammar of Indonesian contains a stipulation that complementizer/gap relativization is restricted to subjects and direct objects. Rather, the appearance of constraints which conform to the Accessibility Hierarchy of Keenan and Comrie [Linguist. Inquiry 8 (1977) 63] is due to the interaction of ECP-like restrictions on extraction with the structure of various clause types in Indonesian. Specifically, Indonesian exhibits a VP shell structure along the lines of Larson [Linguist. Inquiry 19 (1988) 335], which predicts the extraction facts. While the resulting distribution appears to conform to the Accessibility Hierarchy, there does not appear to be any motivation on the basis of the facts of Indonesian to attribute to the Accessibility Hierarchy an independent role in the grammar. Rather, the appearance of conformity to the Accessibility Hierarchy is epiphenomenal.