The Syntax and Semantics of Wh-Questions

published_at 2001
アクセス数 : 844
ダウンロード数 : 804

今月のアクセス数 : 0
今月のダウンロード数 : 0
File
abstract_acknowledgements_table_of_contents.pdf 87.7 KB エンバーゴ : 2007-05-20
File
appendix_some_notes_on_argument-adjunct_asymmetry.pdf 45.9 KB エンバーゴ : 2007-05-20
File
chapter_1_the_third_position_for_a_wh-phrase.pdf 185 KB エンバーゴ : 2007-05-20
File
chapter_2_the_framework.pdf 227 KB エンバーゴ : 2007-05-20
File
chapter_3_wh-questions_in_focus_languages.pdf 165 KB エンバーゴ : 2007-05-20
File
chapter_4_wh-questions_in_japanese.pdf 353 KB エンバーゴ : 2007-05-20
File
chapter_5_wh-questions_in_english.pdf 267 KB エンバーゴ : 2007-05-20
File
references.pdf 71.8 KB エンバーゴ : 2007-05-20
Title
The Syntax and Semantics of Wh-Questions
Creator
Descriptions
The goal of this thesis is to show that there is a syntactic position for an exhaustive interpretation. A constituent that can be interpreted exhaustively bears a [foc(us)]-feature, and enters into an agreement relation with a functional cateory Foc(us). This means that an identificational focus and a nominal wh-phrase bear the same feature, establish the same kind of agreement, and in some languages undergo the same kind of movement. The suggested analysis adopts Chomsky's (1998, 1999) minimalist framework. Chapter 2 reviews several major minimalist concepts, and proposes a new constraint on locality. In Chapter 3, I demonstrate that the suggested analysis accounts for various facts about focus sentences and wh-questions in "focus" languages such as Hungarian, Basque, and Serbo-Croatian. Focus languages are peculiar in that an EPP-feature is obligatorily associatedwith a [foc]-feature of a goal, which induces an obligatory "focus"-movement to SPEC-Foc. Therefore a focus and a nominal wh-phrase, but not an adverbial wh-phrase, undergo the same movement. Chapter 4 considers focus- and wh-phenomena in Japanese. Japanese is slightly different from "focus" languages in that an EPP-feature is optionally associated with a [foc]-feature of a goal, which induces an optional "focus"-movement to SPEC-Foc. Under this assumption, it follows that a nominal wh-phrase optionally moves out of v*P to have an exhaustive interpretation. I also show that the suggested analysis accounts for a strong island effect of a focalized wh-clause and anti-superiority effects. Chapter 5 considers focus- and wh-phenomena in English. In English, an EPP-feature is never associated with a [foc]-feature of a goal, which means that neitehr a focus nor a nominal wh-phrase undergo "focus"-movement. However, they establish the same agreement relation with Foc. It explains why a focus and a nominal wh-phrase cannot cooccur. The suggested analysis also accounts for the facts about multiple wh-questions and weak island phenomena.
Subjects
wh-question ( Other)
focus ( Other)
multiple question ( Other)
pair-list ( Other)
single-pair ( Other)
anti-superiority ( Other)
Language
eng
Resource Type other
Date of Issued 2001
Publish Type Accepted Manuscript
Access Rights open access