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


New from Oxford University Press!

ad

Oxford Handbook of Corpus Phonology

Edited by Jacques Durand, Ulrike Gut, and Gjert Kristoffersen

Offers the first detailed examination of corpus phonology and serves as a practical guide for researchers interested in compiling or using phonological corpora


New from Cambridge University Press!

ad

The Languages of the Jews: A Sociolinguistic History

By Bernard Spolsky

A vivid commentary on Jewish survival and Jewish speech communities that will be enjoyed by the general reader, and is essential reading for students and researchers interested in the study of Middle Eastern languages, Jewish studies, and sociolinguistics.


New from Brill!

ad

Indo-European Linguistics

New Open Access journal on Indo-European Linguistics is now available!


Query Details


Query Subject:   (non)topicalizability of wh-phrases
Author:   Liang Chen
Submitter Email:  click here to access email

Query:   Dear colleagues,

There seems to be language variation with respec to topicalizability
of wh-phrases in world languages. For example, Lasnik and Uriagereka
(1988:15) notes the impossibility of syntactic topicalization in
English, as shown by the contrast in (1) below.

(1) a. Who said that John likes who?
b. * Who said that who John likes?

In addition,the topicalization of subject is equally bad in English.
In Chinese, however, equivalent of (1b) in (2) is good.

(2) shei shuo shei zhangsan hen xihuan
who say who Zhangsan very like

It is also possible to construct subject cases.
My questions are:

a. What are the languages which are similar to English or CHinese?

b. In those languages similar to CHinese w.r.t. topicalizability of
wh-phrases, is it certain that the process involved is topicalization?
Say, is it scrambling or other process? How to determine which is
which?

c. It is suggested that the English (1b) might be accounted for in
terms of the conflict of information status of "topicalized' elemen
and 'wh-phrases'. That is: topicalized elements in English contain old
information, while "wh-phrases" seek for new information. Is it the
case that topicalized elements contain old information in every
language? How to determine this?

Any comments and suggested references on this issue are highly
appreciated. As usual, I will post a summary if there is enough
feedback.

References:

Lasnik, H. and J. Uriagereka. 1988 A course in GB
syntax: Lectures on Binding and Empty Categories. MIT
Press, CA, MA.

Epstein, S. D. 1992. Derivational constraints on
A'-Chain Formation. LI 23: 235-259.


Best,
Liang Chen
337 Mansfield Road
Department of Linguistics
University of Connecticu
Storrs, CT 06269-1145



LL Issue: 12.2554
Date posted: 13-Oct-2001



Back

Sums main page