At long last,11b. At long last,11b. WhWh--movementmovement

(9.1-9.3)(9.1-9.3)

CAS LX 522CAS LX 522Syntax ISyntax I

WhWh-questions-questions WhWh-questions are “information-seeking” -questions are “information-seeking” questions, involving a questions, involving a whwh-word.-word. WhoWho, , whatwhat, , whenwhen, , wherewhere, , whywhy, , HoWHoW, , whichwhich

What will they bake?What will they bake?

Observe that Observe that whatwhat is basically the is basically the object of object of bakebake. And look how far away . And look how far away it is from it is from bakebake, the thing that assigns , the thing that assigns it a it a -role.-role. Cf also. “echo questions”:Cf also. “echo questions”: I drank WHAT?I drank WHAT?

Also, notice that T has moved to C here Also, notice that T has moved to C here too (like it does in yes-no questions).too (like it does in yes-no questions).

[wh][wh] WhWh-words are a little bit like -words are a little bit like pronouns, standing in for whatever pronouns, standing in for whatever category of thing we’d like category of thing we’d like information about.information about.

These interrogative expressions are These interrogative expressions are different from non-interrogative different from non-interrogative pronouns and demonstratives.pronouns and demonstratives. *That will they bake.*That will they bake.

WhatWhat, , wherewhere, , whenwhen are differentiated are differentiated from from thatthat, , therethere, , thenthen in being in being interrogative. This is a feature of interrogative. This is a feature of the the whwh-word: -word: [wh][wh]..

[wh][wh]

A A whwh-word has the same category as its -word has the same category as its non-non-whwh-counterpart—therefore, -counterpart—therefore, whwh-words -words come in several different categories.come in several different categories. WhatWhat [wh, D][wh, D] WhoWho [wh, D, human][wh, D, human] WhenWhen [wh, Adv, temporal][wh, Adv, temporal] WhereWhere [wh, Adv, locational][wh, Adv, locational] HowHow [wh, Adv, manner][wh, Adv, manner] WhyWhy [wh, Adv, reason][wh, Adv, reason] WhichWhich [wh, D, [wh, D, uuN*]N*]

How are How are whwh-questions -questions formed?formed?

What we have in English What we have in English whwh-questions is -questions is like a limited form of V2.like a limited form of V2.

The analysis of The analysis of whwh-questions is the -questions is the same:same: The T head moves to CThe T head moves to C The The whwh-expression moves to SpecCP-expression moves to SpecCP

Let’s suppose that the reason/mechanism Let’s suppose that the reason/mechanism moving T to C is the same as in yes-no moving T to C is the same as in yes-no questions:questions: We have an interrogative C, We have an interrogative C, with [clause-type:Q]. When the [with [clause-type:Q]. When the [uuclause-clause-type:type:] feature of T is valued by [Q], it ] feature of T is valued by [Q], it is strong.is strong.

What will they bake?What will they bake? To start out, we have a To start out, we have a vvP and TP as P and TP as usual. The only unusual thing so far is usual. The only unusual thing so far is that we have a that we have a whwh-object -object whatwhat..

VPv

T

v

vVbake

TP

DPthey

T[uclause-type:]

<V> DPwhat[wh]

<DP>

vP

MP

<M>

TM

will

What will they bake?What will they bake? The complementizer The complementizer C has the C has the information about information about clause-type, and clause-type, and this is a this is a question. As question. As before with yes-no before with yes-no questions, we questions, we assume that this C assume that this C has the feature has the feature [clause-type:Q] [clause-type:Q] (or “[Q]” for (or “[Q]” for short).short).

As with yes-no As with yes-no questions, the questions, the [[uuclause-type:clause-type:] ] feature of T is feature of T is strong when valued strong when valued by Q.by Q.

C

C[Q]

VPv

T

v

vVbake

TP

DPthey

T[uclause-type:]

<V> DPwhat[wh]

<DP>

vP

MP

<M>

TM

will

What will they bake?What will they bake? As for how As for how whatwhat winds up at the winds up at the beginning of the beginning of the sentence, we will sentence, we will treat this treat this essentially like essentially like we treated German we treated German V2.V2.

In a In a whwh-question, -question, C has a [C has a [uuwh*wh*] ] feature.feature.

This forces This forces whatwhat to move into to move into SpecCP to check SpecCP to check the feature.the feature.

C

C[Q, uwh*]

VPv

T

v

vVbake

TP

DPthey

T[uclause-type:]

<V> DPwhat[wh]

<DP>

vP

MP

<M>

TM

will

What will they bake?What will they bake? What What moves to moves to SpecCP and checks SpecCP and checks the [the [uuwh*] wh*] feature of C.feature of C.

T moves to check T moves to check the (now strong) the (now strong) [[uuclause-type:Q*clause-type:Q*] ] feature.feature. (Not pictured (Not pictured here)here)

C

C[Q, uwh*]

CP

DPwhat[wh]

VPv

T

v

vVbake

TP

DPthey

T[uclause-type:]

<V> <DP>

<DP>

vP

MP

<M>

TM

will

Interrogative QInterrogative Q vs. Declarative Q vs. Declarative Q

Looking at Looking at whwh-questions as compared to -questions as compared to yes-no questions, it looks as if there yes-no questions, it looks as if there are two kinds of interrogative C:are two kinds of interrogative C: ““yes-no” C:yes-no” C: [C, clause-type:Q][C, clause-type:Q] whwh-question C:-question C: [C, clause-type:Q, [C, clause-type:Q, uuwh*]wh*]

This is in fact often supposed in the This is in fact often supposed in the syntax literature— and many languages syntax literature— and many languages seem to have a special particle reserved seem to have a special particle reserved for yes-no questions (e.g., English for yes-no questions (e.g., English ifif, , Mandarin Mandarin mama)) Adger notes a problem, however:Adger notes a problem, however:Nothing in our system so far prevents us from Nothing in our system so far prevents us from using a yes-no C with a using a yes-no C with a whwh-word, predicting:-word, predicting:

Will they bake what?Will they bake what?

OpOp Accordingly, Adger proposes that Accordingly, Adger proposes that there’s a there’s a whwh-word even in “yes-no -word even in “yes-no questions”.questions”. There are actually other reasons to think There are actually other reasons to think this as well, but we’ll get to them later.this as well, but we’ll get to them later.

That is That is Will they bake cookies?Will they bake cookies? is is actually something pretty close to:actually something pretty close to:

Whether will they bake cookies?Whether will they bake cookies?

except with a “silent” except with a “silent” whetherwhether, called , called OpOp..

Will they bake pie?Will they bake pie? OpOp appears appears in yes-no in yes-no questions in questions in the same the same place that place that whwh-words do -words do in in whwh--questions questions (and we (and we assume it assume it has a [wh] has a [wh] feature as feature as well).well).

OpOp is is probably probably like a like a “silent” “silent” whetherwhether ((whwh++eithereither).).

VP

v

T

v

vVbake

TP

C

DPthey

C[Q,uwh*]

Twill

[uclause-type:]

<V> DPpie

<DP>

vP

CP

DPOp

[wh]

Summary so farSummary so far

In In whwh-questions such as -questions such as What did they bakeWhat did they bake?? WhatWhat is like a pronoun, standing in for the is like a pronoun, standing in for the theme.theme.

WhWh-words are differentiated by having a [wh] -words are differentiated by having a [wh] feature.feature.

The structure of a The structure of a whwh-question is like a V2 -question is like a V2 clause:clause:

T moves to C:T moves to C: The [The [uuclause-type:] feature of T is strong when valued clause-type:] feature of T is strong when valued as Q.as Q.

The The whwh-word moves to SpecCP:-word moves to SpecCP: The interrogative C has a strong uninterpretable [The interrogative C has a strong uninterpretable [uuwh*wh*] ] feature.feature.

Subject Subject whwh-questions-questions

This works nicely for all kinds of This works nicely for all kinds of whwh-questions.-questions. What did Toby sign?What did Toby sign? How did Toby sign the press release?How did Toby sign the press release? Why did Toby sign the press release?Why did Toby sign the press release? When did Toby sign the press release?When did Toby sign the press release? Where did Toby sign the press release?Where did Toby sign the press release?

But But subject wh-questionssubject wh-questions pose pose something of a puzzle:something of a puzzle: Who signed the press release?Who signed the press release?

Who signed the press Who signed the press release?release?

If this is If this is the the structure, structure, what is the what is the problem?problem?

VP

v

T

TP

C

<DP>C[Q,uwh*] <T>

<V> DPthe pressrelease

<DP>

vP

CP

DPwho[wh] C

T[past,

[uclause-type:Q*]

v

v[uInfl:past]

Vsign

Two ways to goTwo ways to go

There is a decision to make here as There is a decision to make here as we move our analysis forward to we move our analysis forward to handle handle Who signed the press release?Who signed the press release?.. Option one:Option one: All All whwh-questions work the -questions work the same way. In main clauses, T moves to C, same way. In main clauses, T moves to C, the the whwh-word moves to SpecCP. Nice, tidy, -word moves to SpecCP. Nice, tidy, elegant. But we need to re-evaluate PTR elegant. But we need to re-evaluate PTR and and dodo-support.-support.

Option two:Option two: Subject Subject whwh-questions are -questions are different. PTR works the same way different. PTR works the same way everywhere, T moves to C in most everywhere, T moves to C in most whwh--questions, but in questions, but in subject subject whwh-questions-questions, T , T stays where it is.stays where it is.

Option twoOption two We’ll pursue option two. T doesn’t move We’ll pursue option two. T doesn’t move in subject in subject whwh-questions. How might that -questions. How might that work?work?

Why does T move to C in other questions?Why does T move to C in other questions? [[uuclause-type:clause-type:] on T is strong when valued ] on T is strong when valued as [as [uuclause-type:Q*clause-type:Q*].].

Adger’s proposal:Adger’s proposal:[[uuclause-type:clause-type:] can be valued as [wh].] can be valued as [wh]. Ancillary assumptionAncillary assumption[[uuclause-type:clause-type:] can only be valued “from ] can only be valued “from above” (the only above” (the only whwh-word that can value -word that can value [[uuclause-type:clause-type:] on T is one that c-commands ] on T is one that c-commands T, a subject T, a subject whwh-word).-word).

Who signed the press Who signed the press release?release?

Merging up Merging up to Tto T……

VP

v

T

C[Q,uwh*]

<V> DPthe pressrelease

vP

DPwho[wh]

T[past,

[uclause-type:]

v

v[uInfl:past]

Vsign

Who signed the press Who signed the press release?release?

Move Move whowho to to SpecTP (EPP).SpecTP (EPP).

Now [wh] c-Now [wh] c-commands commands [[uuclause-clause-type:type:] and ] and can value it.can value it.

VP

v

T

TP

C[Q,uwh*]

<V> DPthe pressrelease

<DP>

vP

DPwho[wh] T

[past,[uclause-type:wh]

v

v[uInfl:past]

Vsign

Who signed the press Who signed the press release?release?

Now the head Now the head of T’s sister of T’s sister isis vv, so , so tense is tense is pronounced on pronounced on the verb.the verb.

VP

v

T

TP

C

<DP>

C[Q,uwh*]

<V> DPthe pressrelease

<DP>

vP

CP

DPwho[wh]

T[past,

[uclause-type:wh]

v

v[uInfl:past]

Vsign

Multiple Multiple whwh-questions-questions

Although less common, it is possible to ask Although less common, it is possible to ask a question with more than one a question with more than one whwh-word:-word: (What I want to know is:)(What I want to know is:)What will Dan give to whom?What will Dan give to whom?

Casey knows who moved where.Casey knows who moved where. Notice what happens:Notice what happens:

[[TP TP Dan will [Dan will [vvP P <Dan><Dan> vv+give [+give [VP VP what what <give><give> [ [PP PP to to whom]]whom]]

[[CP CP what C+will [what C+will [TPTP Dan Dan <will><will>[[vvP P <Dan><Dan> vv+give [+give [VP VP <what><what> <give><give> [ [PP PP to to

whom]]whom]]

Wh-in-situWh-in-situ In English In English whwh-questions, a -questions, a whwh-word moves up -word moves up to SpecCP. But if there are to SpecCP. But if there are twotwo, then only , then only one moves, the other stays behind, “in its one moves, the other stays behind, “in its natural place.”natural place.”

Does our system so far predict this?Does our system so far predict this? In In whwh-questions, C has a [Q] feature and a [-questions, C has a [Q] feature and a [uuwh*wh*] ] feature.feature.

When the [When the [uuclause-type:clause-type:] feature of T is valued by ] feature of T is valued by Q the resulting [Q the resulting [uuclause-type:Q*clause-type:Q*] feature on T is ] feature on T is strong.strong.

Sort of…Sort of…

*What did who give to *What did who give to Casey?Casey?

It turns out that when you have two options It turns out that when you have two options ininprinciple, only one is actually grammatical:principle, only one is actually grammatical: Who gave what to Casey?Who gave what to Casey? *What did who give to Casey?*What did who give to Casey?

What’s the difference?What’s the difference?

[[CP CP who C [who C [TP TP <who><who> T [ T [vvP P <who> <who> vv+give [+give [VPVP what what <give> <give> ……

[[CP CP what C+T [what C+T [TP TP who who <T><T> [ [vvP P <who> <who> vv+give [+give [VPVP <what> <what> <give><give>

*What did who give to *What did who give to Casey?Casey?

SuperioritySuperiorityThe highest The highest whwh-word moves.-word moves.(All things being equal, the shorter move is (All things being equal, the shorter move is preferred)preferred) Compare:Compare: A book was given <a book> to Pete.A book was given <a book> to Pete. *Pete was given a book to <Pete>.*Pete was given a book to <Pete>.

[[CP CP who C [who C [TP TP <who><who> T [ T [vvP P <who> <who> vv+give [+give [VPVP what what <give> <give> ……

[[CP CP what C+T [what C+T [TP TP who who <T><T> [ [vvP P <who> <who> vv+give [+give [VPVP <what> <what> <give><give>

D-linkingD-linking Just a note:Just a note:Sometimes Superiority appears to be Sometimes Superiority appears to be violated.violated.

I have a list of the authors here, and a I have a list of the authors here, and a list of the books. But I don’t know…list of the books. But I don’t know…which book which author wrote.which book which author wrote.

When this happens, the interpretation is When this happens, the interpretation is somewhat special. somewhat special. The The whwh-word that is -word that is “skipped” (and generally both of them) is “skipped” (and generally both of them) is picking out one of a small, known list. picking out one of a small, known list. D(iscourse)-linking.D(iscourse)-linking.

The The whwh-typology-typology English: English: One One whwh-word -word moves to the front.moves to the front.

What did Bill give to whom?What did Bill give to whom? Japanese:Japanese: No No whwh-words-words move to the front. move to the front.

Taroo-ga dare-ni nani-o ageta no?Taroo-ga dare-ni nani-o ageta no?T-nom who-to what-acc gave QT-nom who-to what-acc gave Q‘What did Taroo give to whom?’‘What did Taroo give to whom?’

Bulgarian:Bulgarian: All All whwh-words -words move to the front.move to the front. Kakvo na kogo Ivan dade?Kakvo na kogo Ivan dade?what to whom Ivan gavewhat to whom Ivan gave‘What did Ivan give to whom?’‘What did Ivan give to whom?’

French:French: One One whwh-word or no -word or no whwh-words -words move to move to the front.the front. Qui as-tu vu?Qui as-tu vu? Tu as vu Tu as vu qui?qui?Who have-you seenWho have-you seen You have seen whoYou have seen who‘Who did you see?’‘Who did you see?’ ‘Who did you see?’‘Who did you see?’

Wh-in-situWh-in-situ languages languages How might we account for the difference How might we account for the difference between English and Japanese (Korean, between English and Japanese (Korean, Turkish, Chinese, …) with respect to moving Turkish, Chinese, …) with respect to moving whwh-words?-words?

Why does one Why does one whwh-word move in English?-word move in English?

We account for the difference betweenWe account for the difference betweenFrench French ((vv moves to T) moves to T) and and English English ((vv does not move does not move to T) to T) in terms of whether the [in terms of whether the [uuInfl:Infl:] feature on ] feature on vv is is strongstrong (French) or (French) or weakweak (English) when valued (English) when valued by T.by T.

Kakvo na kogo Ivan Kakvo na kogo Ivan dade?dade?

How about languages like Bulgarian, where How about languages like Bulgarian, where all of the all of the whwh-words move?-words move?

[[CPCP kakvo na kogo kakvo na kogo[[TPTP Ivan dade Ivan dade <kakvo> <na kogo><kakvo> <na kogo>]]

This one is somewhat trickier… but This one is somewhat trickier… but interesting.interesting. Why do Why do whwh-words have to move (in general)?-words have to move (in general)? Why is it sufficient to move just one (in English)?Why is it sufficient to move just one (in English)? What might we propose in order to ensure that any What might we propose in order to ensure that any whwh-word has to move?-word has to move?

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

Multiple Multiple whwh-movement-movement

To account for this stretches To account for this stretches our system in several ways, but our system in several ways, but ultimately we want to be able to ultimately we want to be able to say that Bulgarian and English say that Bulgarian and English differ minimally, so we’ll need differ minimally, so we’ll need to account for Bulgarian too.to account for Bulgarian too.

Suppose that Suppose that whwh-words in -words in Bulgarian have the strong Bulgarian have the strong feature: [feature: [uuQ*Q*].].

Kakvo na kogo Ivan Kakvo na kogo Ivan dade?dade?

For this to work, we For this to work, we need to suppose that need to suppose that it is possible for a it is possible for a strong feature like strong feature like [[uuQ*Q*] on a ] on a whwh-word to -word to “wait” if there is no “wait” if there is no way to be checked way to be checked yet.yet. That is, we can That is, we can proceed on to proceed on to vvP (by P (by HoP), despite the fact HoP), despite the fact that there are strong that there are strong features left inside features left inside VP (but not VP (but not onon VP). VP).

V

Vdade

PPna kogo [uQ*]

VP

DPkakvo[uQ*]

Kakvo na kogo Ivan Kakvo na kogo Ivan dade?dade?

Otherwise, things Otherwise, things proceed just as in proceed just as in English…English…

V

<V> PPna kogo [uQ*]

VP

DPkakvo[uQ*]

v

v+Vdade

vP

DPIvan

Kakvo na kogo Ivan Kakvo na kogo Ivan dade?dade?

Otherwise, things Otherwise, things proceed just as in proceed just as in English…English…

V

<V> PPna kogo [uQ*]

VP

DPkakvo[uQ*]

v

v+Vdade

vP

<DP>

T

T[past]

TP

DPIvan

Kakvo na kogo Ivan Kakvo na kogo Ivan dade?dade?

When we get to When we get to C, the C, the whwh-words -words finally have a finally have a way to be way to be checked.checked.

We’ve got two We’ve got two choices.choices. Na kogoNa kogo has been has been waiting longer.waiting longer.

Moving Moving kakvokakvo would result in would result in a shorter move.a shorter move.

V

<V> PPna kogo [uQ*]

VP

DPkakvo[uQ*]

v

v+Vdade

vP

<DP>

T

T[past]

TP

DPIvan

C

C[Q]

Kakvo na Kakvo na kogo kogo Ivan Ivan dade?dade?

Given what we Given what we see in see in Bulgarian, it Bulgarian, it seems that seems that “seniority” is “seniority” is more important more important than “making than “making the shortest the shortest move.”move.” Recall that the Recall that the Superiority Superiority effect in effect in English comes English comes from a need to from a need to “make the “make the shortest move,” shortest move,” but in English, but in English, there’s no there’s no consideration consideration of “seniority.”of “seniority.”

V

<V> <PP>

VP

DPkakvo[uQ*]

v

v+Vdade

vP

<DP>

T

T[past]

TP

DPIvan

C

C[Q]

C

PPna kogo[uQ*]

Kakvo na Kakvo na kogo kogo Ivan Ivan dade?dade?

Et voilà.Et voilà.

InterestinInteresting:g:Point to Point to the the specifier specifier of CP.of CP.

V

<V> <PP>

VP

<DP>

v

v+Vdade

vP

<DP>

T

T[past]

TP

DPIvan

C

C[Q]

C

PPna kogo[uQ*]

CP

DPkakvo[uQ*]

Cross-linguistic Cross-linguistic variationvariation

By now, we’ve accumulated a (relatively small, By now, we’ve accumulated a (relatively small, all things considered) set of parameters on all things considered) set of parameters on which languages can vary, in terms of whether which languages can vary, in terms of whether uninterpretable features are strong or weak.uninterpretable features are strong or weak.

Tense on Aux:Tense on Aux: Strong Strong (aux moves to T): English, French, German, (aux moves to T): English, French, German, IrishIrish

WeakWeak (aux doesn’t move to T): Swedish(aux doesn’t move to T): Swedish Tense on Tense on vv::

StrongStrong ((vv moves to T): French, German, Irish moves to T): French, German, Irish Weak Weak ((vv doesn’t move to T): English, Swedish doesn’t move to T): English, Swedish

EPP on T:EPP on T: StrongStrong (subject moves to SpecTP): E, F, S, G(subject moves to SpecTP): E, F, S, G WeakWeak: Irish: Irish

Cross-linguistic Cross-linguistic variationvariation

To this we can add the parameters of To this we can add the parameters of whwh--movement…movement…

[wh] on [Q]-type C:[wh] on [Q]-type C: Strong Strong (A (A whwh-word moves to SpecCP): English, -word moves to SpecCP): English, German, …German, …

Weak Weak (No (No whwh-word need move to SpecCP): Japanese, -word need move to SpecCP): Japanese, ……

Optional Optional (either is possible): French(either is possible): French [Q] on [Q] on whwh-words:-words:

StrongStrong (All (All whwh-words move to SpecCP): Bulgarian, -words move to SpecCP): Bulgarian, ……

Weak Weak ((WhWh-words need not move to SpecCP): English, -words need not move to SpecCP): English, ……

Long-distance Long-distance relationshipsrelationships

Next time:Next time:WhWh-words can move pretty far:-words can move pretty far: Who did Jason thinkWho did Jason think

[[CP CP (that) Medea had poisoned __ ](that) Medea had poisoned __ ]

Cf.Cf.Jason seems [Jason seems [<J><J> to be likely [ to be likely [<J><J> to to leave]]leave]]

But there are limits:But there are limits: *What did Moe blame the breakdown of for the *What did Moe blame the breakdown of for the rise in crime?rise in crime?

Last major topic this semester:Last major topic this semester:Locality restrictions on movementLocality restrictions on movement