LINGUIST List 12.2554

Sat Oct 13 2001

Qs: Topicalization/Wh-phrases, Language Families

Editor for this issue: Karen Milligan <>

We'd like to remind readers that the responses to queries are usually best posted to the individual asking the question. That individual is then strongly encouraged to post a summary to the list. This policy was instituted to help control the huge volume of mail on LINGUIST; so we would appreciate your cooperating with it whenever it seems appropriate. In addition to posting a summary, we'd like to remind people that it is usually a good idea to personally thank those individuals who have taken the trouble to respond to the query.


  1. Liang Chen, (non)topicalizability of wh-phrases
  2. Dandy H. Taylor, Books on Language Families

Message 1: (non)topicalizability of wh-phrases

Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2001 09:36:07 -0700 (PDT)
From: Liang Chen <>
Subject: (non)topicalizability of wh-phrases

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

c. It is suggested that the English (1b) might be accounted for in
terms of the conflict of information status of "topicalized' element
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


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.

Liang Chen
337 Mansfield Road
Department of Linguistics
University of Connecticut
Storrs, CT 06269-1145 
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue

Message 2: Books on Language Families

Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2001 00:52:10 -0400
From: Dandy H. Taylor <dandy.h.taylorM.CC.UTAH.EDU>
Subject: Books on Language Families

I was wondering if anyone could direct me to a good book that has a
comprehensive description of all the language families and the
languages that belong to them.

Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue