Wh-Expletives and Secondary Predication: German Partial Wh-Movement Reconsidered

Felser, Claudia

doi:10.1017/s1470542701003178

Cited by 16 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…e.g. the papers in Lutz et al, 2000;Horvath, 1997;Stepanov, 2000;Lahiri, 2002;Felser, 2001). It is not the purpose of the present paper to review the arguments for these approaches.…”

Section: Wh-scope Markingmentioning

confidence: 91%

Successive cyclicity as residual wh-scope marking

Stepanov

Stateva

2006

Lingua

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…e.g. the papers in Lutz et al, 2000;Horvath, 1997;Stepanov, 2000;Lahiri, 2002;Felser, 2001). It is not the purpose of the present paper to review the arguments for these approaches.…”

Section: Wh-scope Markingmentioning

confidence: 91%

Successive cyclicity as residual wh-scope marking

Stepanov

Stateva

2006

Lingua

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…what believe you who M. met has 'Who do you believe that Mary has met?' (Felser 2001: 5) Since the literature on this phenomenon cross-linguistically is substantial and the correct analysis controversial (see Dayal 1996;Horvath 1997;Felser 2001Felser , 2004 inter alia), it will not be discussed further here. Munaro & Obenauer (1999) have little to say about the analysis of exclamatives, or how the underspecified interrogative pronoun receives its interpretation of 'how' or 'how much', speculating only that 'since it is structurally and .…”

Section: The Polysemy Of Interrogative Pronouns Cross-linguisticallymentioning

confidence: 99%

The status ofhwætin Old English

Walkden¹

2013

English Language and Linguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is commonly held that Old English hwæt, well known within Anglo-Saxon studies as the first word of the epic poem Beowulf, can be ‘used as an adv[erb]. or interj[ection]. Why, what! ah!’ (Bosworth & Toller 1898, s.v. hwæt, 1) as well as the neuter singular of the interrogative pronoun hwā ‘what’. In this article I challenge the view that hwæt can have the status of an interjection (i.e. be outside the clause that it precedes). I present evidence from Old English and Old Saxon constituent order which suggests that hwæt is unlikely to be extra-clausal. Data is drawn from the Old English Bede, Ælfric's Lives of Saints and the Old Saxon Heliand. In all three texts the verb appears later in clauses preceded by hwæt than is normal in root clauses (Fisher's exact test, p < 0.0001 in both cases). If hwæt affects the constituent order of the clause it precedes, then it cannot be truly clause-external. I argue that it is hwæt combined with the clause that follows it that delivers the interpretive effect of exclamation, not hwæt alone. The structure of hwæt-clauses is sketched following Rett's (2008) analysis of exclamatives. I conclude that Old English hwæt (as well as its Old Saxon cognate) was not an interjection but an underspecified wh-pronoun introducing an exclamative clause.

show abstract

“…wat in Dutch, was in German) is the syntactic object of the matrix verb (Dayal 1994, Felser 2001) ; on the second, the wh-pronoun is an expletive, generated in the functional domain related to the matrix object (cf. Matrix wat is coindexed with the entire embedded clause and the latter functions as the restriction of this operator.…”

Section: S Y N T a C T I C D O U B L I N G A N D W H-c H A I N Smentioning

confidence: 99%

“…See Beck & Berman (2000), Horvath (2000), Felser (2001), Fanselow (2006) for arguments suggesting that the CP-clause occupies a low, VP-internal position. This, however, has been shown to be problematic for German.…”

Section: S Y N T a C T I C D O U B L I N G A N D W H-c H A I N Smentioning

confidence: 99%

“…she with.brings Although Felser (2001Felser ( , 2004 uses this contrast as an argument against analysing full copying on a par with partial copying (and thus also as an argument against the direct dependency approach), it in fact only argues against an approach in which the ' contentful ' wh-element replaces the scope marker was at LF. she with.brings Although Felser (2001Felser ( , 2004 uses this contrast as an argument against analysing full copying on a par with partial copying (and thus also as an argument against the direct dependency approach), it in fact only argues against an approach in which the ' contentful ' wh-element replaces the scope marker was at LF.…”

Section: S Y N T a C T I C D O U B L I N G A N D W H-c H A I N Smentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Syntactic doubling and the structure ofwh-chains

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper discusses cases of syntactic doubling in wh-dependencies attested in dialects of Dutch, where more than one member of the same chain is spelled out. We focus on cases of non-identical doubling, in which the chain links spelled out have different forms. We demonstrate that the order of elements in a chain is fixed : the first (or syntactically higher) one is less specific that the second one. We argue that this generalization follows from partial copying, a process that copies a proper subconstituent and remerges it higher in the structure. This naturally excludes the ungrammatical orders, as these would involve full copying plus the addition of features, in violation of the inclusiveness condition. The proposal requires pronouns to be spell-outs of phrases, and it is in combination with this hypothesis that the full set of data is accounted for in a uniform way. Advantages over alternative accounts of syntactic doubling are discussed.[1] Earlier versions of this paper (see also were presented at the 30th GLOW conference (Tromsø 2007) WCCFL 26 (Berkeley 2007) the 22nd Comparative Germanic Syntax Workshop (Stuttgart 2007), the EGG school (Brno 2007) and at a workshop on WH-pronouns (Konstanz 2007). We would like to thank the audiences present at those occasions for their feedback. We also wish to express our gratitude to the following people for discussion on various aspects of this work: Ellen Brandner, Jeroen van Craenenbroeck, Jacqueline van Kampen, Marjo van Koppen, Øystein Nilsen, Andreas Pankau, Arnim von Stechow and Nelleke Strik. Finally, we thank two anonymous reviewers for valuable comments. The usual disclaimers apply.

show abstract

Wh-Expletives and Secondary Predication: German Partial Wh-Movement Reconsidered

Cited by 16 publications

References 25 publications

Successive cyclicity as residual wh-scope marking

Successive cyclicity as residual wh-scope marking

The status ofhwætin Old English

Syntactic doubling and the structure ofwh-chains

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About