Obligatory Overt <i>Wh</i>-Movement in a <i>Wh</i>-in-Situ Language

Simpson, Andrew; Bhattacharya, Tanmoy

doi:10.1162/002438903763255940

Cited by 61 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Working within the framework of antisymmetry (Kayne 1994), Mahajan (1997) proposes that its underlying structure is SVO. This proposal is also advanced for Bangla, a closely related Indo-Aryan language, by Simpson and Bhattacharya (2003). In this article, we use the phenomenon of rightward movement to argue against this proposal.…”

Section: The Core Phenomenonmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Bangla and Marathi differ from Hindi-Urdu in allowing structures where the finite complement CP can appear in preverbal position. In this position, an embedded in-situ wh-expression can take scope outside the embedded clause (see Simpson and Bhattacharya 2003).…”

Section: S V Aux O Whmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…

…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Rightward Scrambling as Rightward Remnant Movement

Bhatt

Dayal

2007

Linguistic Inquiry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mahajan (1997) and Simpson and Bhattacharya (2003) analyze IndoAryan languages such as Hindi-Urdu and Bangla as SVO. We argue against this position, drawing on rightward scrambling in Hindi-Urdu to make this point. We propose an account of the phenomenon in terms of rightward remnant-VP movement. This account differs from proposals that posit rightward movement of individual arguments as well as from the antisymmetric proposals mentioned above, which treat rightward scrambling as argument stranding. Our rightward remnant movement analysis better captures two empirical properties of rightward scrambling that remain elusive in the other accounts: the correlation between linear order and scope, and restricted scope for rightwardscrambled wh-expressions.

show abstract

Section: The Core Phenomenonmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: S V Aux O Whmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Rightward Scrambling as Rightward Remnant Movement

Bhatt

Dayal

2007

Linguistic Inquiry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This equivalence of focus alternatives and whinterpreting alternatives is therefore an important theoretical claim of Beck's (2006) system. This formal equivalence reflects the long-observed similarities between wh and focus realization cross-linguistically, including in syntax and prosody (Horvath 1986;Culicover 1992;Simpson 2000;Drubig 2000;Arregi 2002;Szendrői 2003;Simpson and Bhattacharya 2003;Truckenbrodt 2013 and many others). However, see for example Mayr (to appear) for arguments against this approach.…”

Section: Beck's (2006) Theory Of Focus Intervention Effectsmentioning

confidence: 62%

Covert Pied-Piping in English Multiple Wh-Questions

Kotek

Erlewine

2016

Linguistic Inquiry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper we argue for the existence of covert pied-piping in wh-questions through a previously unnoticed pattern of intervention effects in superiorityobeying English multiple wh-questions. We show that the preference of covert pied-piping is for movement of larger constituents, unlike overt pied-piping.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 Core 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.

show abstract

“…Bayer (1996), Simpson and Bhattacharya (2003) discuss conditions on the position of whphrases in Bangla (also called Bengali). Descriptively speaking, it appears that wh-phrases must linearly precede the complementizer where they take scope.…”

Section: Banglamentioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond Strength and Weakness

Richards¹

2010

Uttering Trees

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The pitch tracks in (2a) and (2b) differ in two ways. First, the wh-word direct object in (2b) has its pitch boosted; compare the lower pitch of the direct object in the statement in (2a). Second, there is a domain, starting with the wh-phrase and ending with the wh-complementizer (shaded in the pitch track in (2b), which is characterized by pitch compression: the peaks in this domain (circled) are lower than they would normally be. Japanese wh-questions, then, involve a prosodic domain of some type which starts with the wh-phrase and ends with the complementizer. The proposal being defended here will be that all languages are attempting to do this; every language tries to create a prosodic structure for whquestions in which the wh-phrase and the corresponding complementizer are separated by as few prosodic boundaries as possible. How languages achieve this varies from language to language, depending on where the complementizer is and on what the basic rules for prosody are.Schematically, then, the proposal is this. Suppose we have an expression in which a whphrase and its corresponding complementizer are separted by prosodic boundaries, as in (3):

show abstract

Obligatory Overt Wh-Movement in a Wh-in-Situ Language

Cited by 61 publications

References 4 publications

Rightward Scrambling as Rightward Remnant Movement

Rightward Scrambling as Rightward Remnant Movement

Covert Pied-Piping in English Multiple Wh-Questions

Beyond Strength and Weakness

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About