Featured Linguist!

Jost Gippert: Our Featured Linguist!

"Buenos dias", "buenas noches" -- this was the first words in a foreign language I heard in my life, as a three-year old boy growing up in developing post-war Western Germany, where the first gastarbeiters had arrived from Spain. Fascinated by the strange sounds, I tried to get to know some more languages, the only opportunity being TV courses of English and French -- there was no foreign language education for pre-teen school children in Germany yet in those days. Read more

Donate Now | Visit the Fund Drive Homepage

Amount Raised:


Still Needed:


Can anyone overtake Syntax in the Subfield Challenge ?

Grad School Challenge Leader: University of Washington

Publishing Partner: Cambridge University Press CUP Extra Publisher Login
amazon logo
More Info

New from Oxford University Press!


What is English? And Why Should We Care?

By: Tim William Machan

To find some answers Tim Machan explores the language's present and past, and looks ahead to its futures among the one and a half billion people who speak it. His search is fascinating and important, for definitions of English have influenced education and law in many countries and helped shape the identities of those who live in them.

New from Cambridge University Press!


Medical Writing in Early Modern English

Edited by Irma Taavitsainen and Paivi Pahta

This volume provides a new perspective on the evolution of the special language of medicine, based on the electronic corpus of Early Modern English Medical Texts, containing over two million words of medical writing from 1500 to 1700.

Query Details

Query Subject:   Czech sentence processing
Author:   Shravan Vasishth
Submitter Email:  click here to access email

Sat, 22 Jan 2000 10:28:03 +0000 (GMT)
inversion in embedded clauses

I want to know if native speakers of English would accept relativisation
(or questioning) of a constituent of a sentence which contains a
stylistically marked subject-verb inversion.

For example, it is possible to say (1b) as a stylistically marked variant
of (1a):

(1a) My mother went into the garden.
(1b) Into the garden went my mother.

Do native speakers of English accept (2b) and (3b) as stylistically marked
variants of (2a) and (3a)? Or are (2b) and (3b) plainly ungrammatical?

(2a) I wonder into which garden my mother went.
(2b) I wonder into which garden went my mother.
(3a) That is the garden into which my mother went.
(3b) That is the garden into which went my mother.

Your judgment or suggestion of relevant literature (formal explanation,
corpus-based studies?) would be much appreciated. Thank you in anticipation!

Ming-Wei Lee
Anglia Polytechnic University, UK
LL Issue: 11.128
Date posted: 22-Jan-2000


Sums main page