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


New from Oxford University Press!

ad

Holy Sh*t: A Brief History of Swearing

By Melissa Mohr

Holy Sh*t: A Brief History of Swearing "contains original research into the history of swearing, and is scrupulous in analyzing the claims of other scholars."


New from Cambridge University Press!

ad

A New Manual of French Composition

By R. L. Graeme Ritchie

A New Manual of French Composition "provides a guide to French composition aimed at university students and the higher classes in schools. "


The LINGUIST List is dedicated to providing information on language and language analysis, and to providing the discipline of linguistics with the infrastructure necessary to function in the digital world. LINGUIST is a free resource, run by linguistics students and faculty, and supported primarily by your donations. Please support LINGUIST List during the 2016 Fund Drive.

Summary Details


Query:   Summary: multiple wh-questions
Author:  Miura Ikuo
Submitter Email:  click here to access email
Linguistic LingField(s):   Syntax

Summary:   DEAR LINGUISTS,

IN SEPTEMBER, I POSTED TWO QUESTIONS ABOUT MULTIPLE WH-QUESTIONS IN
ENGLISH. I'D LIKE TO THANK EVERYONE WHO REPLIED TO ME, AND APOLOGIZE FOR
TAKING SO LONG TIME TO POST THE SUMMARY.
MY QUESTIONS WERE THE FOLLOWING.

*********
1. IN THE LITERATURE, IT IS OBSERVED THAT WHILE THE SENTENCE IN (1A) IS
GRAMMATICAL, THE CORRESPONDING (1B) IS NOT. IT IS KNOWN THAT EVEN IF (1B)
IS GRAMMATICAL, IT IS ONLY AS AN ECHO-QUESTION.

(1) A. WHO SAID WHAT?
B. WHAT DID WHO SAY?

I WANT TO KNOW WHETHER THE FOLLOWING PAIRS OF SENTENCES EXHIBIT THE SAME
CONTRAST AS IN (1).

(2) A. WHOSE MOTHER BOUGHT WHAT?
B. WHAT DID WHOSE MOTHER BUY?
(3) A. PEOPLE FROM WHERE BOUGHT WHAT?
B. WHAT DID PEOPLE FROM WHERE BUY?
(4) A. TELL ME WHOSE ADVISOR IS WHERE.
B. TELL ME WHERE WHOSE ADVISOR IS?

THE SENTENCES IN (2B) AND (3B) ARE FROM STROIK (1995). HE SAYS THAT THEY
ARE GRAMMATICAL EVEN IF THE OBJECT WH-PHRASES HAVE MOVED ACROSS THE OTHER
WH-PHRASES IN THE SAME WAY AS (1B). BUT HE DOESN'T MENTION ABOUT THE
GRAMMMATICALITY OF (2B) AND (3B).

2. IN THE LITERATURE, PSYCH-VERBS LIKE 'WORRY' AND 'ANNOY' WHICH TAKE THE
EXPERIENCER ARGUMENT AS THE OBJECT BEHAVE DIFFERENTLY FROM VERBS LIKE 'SAY'
WITH RESPECT TO SOME PHENOMENA LIKE ANAPHOR BINDING. SO I WANT TO KNOW
WHETHER OR NOT MULTIPLE WH-QUESTIONS OF PSYCH-VERBS LIKE (5) AND (6)
EXHIBIT THE SAME CONTRAST AS (1).

(5) A. WHAT WORRIES WHO?
B. WHO DOES WHAT WORRY?
(6) A. WHAT ANNOIES WHO?
B. WHO DOES WHAT ANNOY?
*********

THE FOLLOWING ARE THOSE WHO ANSWERED THESE QUESTIONS:

DAN FAULKNER
JIM WITTE
BERNARD KRIPKEE
VINCENT JENKINS
AND ROSTA

AS FOR QUESTION 1, ALL OF THEM AGREE THAT (2B) AND (3B) HAVE THE SAME
STATUS AS (1B). THAT IS, THEY ARE UNGRAMMATICAL, OR GRAMMATICAL IN SPECIAL
CONTEXTS. THESE JUDGMENTS ARE SURPRISING, BECAUSE STROIK TAKES (2B) AND
(3B) TO HAVE THE SAME STATUS AS (1A) NOT (1B), I.E., HE SEEMS TO JUDGE (2B)
AND (3B) AS GRAMMATICAL IN ISOLATION.
THE CONTEXTS WHICH MAKE (1B), (2B), AND (3B) ACCEPTABLE ARE ECHO-QUESTION
CONTEXTS OR

LL Issue: 10.173
Date Posted: 04-Feb-1999
Original Query: Read original query