Wh-agreement in Ojibwe relative clauses: Evidence for CP Structure

Abstract

This article discusses the morphological and syntactic structure of relative clauses in Ojibwe (Algonquian), in particular their status as wh-constructions. Relatives in this language are full clauses that bear special morphology, show evidence of A′-movement of a wh-operator, and consequently exhibit wh-agreement also found in interrogatives and certain types of focus constructions. Ojibwe shows the possibility of wh-agreement realized on T (in addition to C and v for other languages), as it appears on tense prefixes. We account for the realization of wh-agreement on T in Ojibwe via the mechanism of feature inheritance. We propose that while declarative matrix clauses are canonical in that C introduces φ-features in Ojibwe, the role of C in embedded or wh-contexts is to introduce δ-features (discourse features), such as [uwh], rather than φ-features. These δ-features can be introduced by C, but are transferred down to T where they spell out as wh-agreement.

Clause Typing and Feature Inheritance of Discourse Features

“…In ‎(15), the embedded verb stem takes the changed past‐tense prefix gaa‐ (rather than gii‐ ), and in ‎(16), the embedded verb uses the changed future form waa‐ (and not wii‐ ). The appearance of IC is predicted by our account of wh ‐agreement in these relative clauses, which involve operator movement of a (covert) relative pronoun to Spec,CP (see a more complete discussion of Ojibwe relative‐clause structure in Lochbihler & Mathieu ).…”

“… Ojibwe is a wh ‐fronting language (not wh ‐in‐situ) (Pagotto :77, Lochbihler & Mathieu ): (i)a.Weneshgaa‐waabmaat?weneshgaa‐waabam‐aa‐twho wh .past‐ see‐3′ obj ‐ 3(conj) ‘Who did you see?’b.*Gaa‐waabmaat wenesh? …”