UTTERING AND INTERPRETING TREES

This article first selectively overviews the discussion on the interaction of phonology and syntax offered in Richards (2010), then pursues the same project from a different angle. Pointing out that both wh-in-situ and overt wh-movement express sound-meaning correlations by appealing to some physical marking at (near) surface level, we propose that both should be regarded as instances of overt syntax. Accordingly, the notion 'overt syntax' is redefined as the grammatical procedure that synchronizes PFand LF-effects. We then argue that the synchronized PF-LF effects of overt syntax can be captured if feature complexes that induce the legibility of linguistic expressions at PF and at LF are encoded into lexical items. This approach enables us to solve what we called a 'look-across' problem posed by the prosody-semantics correlations observed in wh-in-situ as well as a 'look-ahead' problem posed by overt movement. It also frees us from various potential problems arising in the 'prosodic boundary' approach proposed by Richards, permitting us to strictly maintain the major tenet of the minimalist program.

[1]  Shinichiro Ishihara,et al.  Japanese focus prosody revisited: Freeing focus from prosodic phrasing , 2011 .

[2]  Mats Rooth.  A theory of focus interpretation , 1992, Natural Language Semantics.

[3]  Noam Chomsky,et al.  Lectures on Government and Binding , 1981 .

[4]  Shigeto Kawahara,et al.  Rhythmic Boost and Recursive Minor Phrase in Japanese , 2003 .

[5]  Johan Rooryck,et al.  Licensing Wh‐in‐situ , 2000 .

[6]  Ray Jackendoff,et al.  Semantic Interpretation in Generative Grammar , 1972 .

[7]  Scott Myers,et al.  Boundary tones and the phonetic implementation of tone in Chichewa , 1996, Studies in African Linguistics.

[8]  Jennifer L. Smith.  Fukuoka Japanese wh prosody in production and perception , 2013 .

[9]  Howard Lasnik,et al.  Multiple Sluicing in English , 2014 .

[10]  Yoshihisa Kitagawa.  Decomposing Overt Syntax * , 2011 .

[11]  Bruce Hayes,et al.  Bengali intonational phonology , 1991 .

[12]  E. Selkirk,et al.  Syntax and Downstep in Japanese , 1991 .

[13]  L. Rizzi.  The Fine Structure of the Left Periphery , 1997 .

[14]  Shigeto Kawahara,et al.  On the WH-Question Intonational Domain in Fukuoka Japanese: Some Implications for the Syntax-Prosody Interface , 2005 .

[15]  David Pesetsky,et al.  Some optimality principles of sentence pronunciation , 1998 .

[16]  V. Déprez,et al.  The interaction of syntax, prosody, and discourse in licensing French wh-in-situ questions § , 2013 .

[17]  Taisuke Nishigauchi,et al.  Quantification in the theory of grammar , 1990 .

[18]  Carlo Geraci,et al.  Another Way to Mark Syntactic Dependencies: The Case for Right-Peripheral Specifiers in Sign Languages , 2009 .

[19]  Yoshihisa Kitagawa,et al.  PROSODY, SYNTAX AND PRAGMATICS OF WH-QUESTIONS IN JAPANESE , 2005 .

[20]  Morris Halle,et al.  Distributed morphology and the pieces of inflection , 1993 .

[21]  Junghyoe Yoon,et al.  Case drop in Korean---Its empirical and theoretical investigation , 2012 .

[22]  A. Watanabe.  Subjacency and S-structure movement of wh-in-situ , 1992 .

[23]  Hee-Don Ahn.  Unpronounced Case Markers and Apparent Subject-Object Asymmetry , 2012 .

[24]  Karlos Arregui-Urbina,et al.  Focus on Basque movements , 2002 .

[25]  Hubert Truckenbrodt,et al.  On the Relation between Syntactic Phrases and Phonological Phrases , 1999, Linguistic Inquiry.

[26]  Howard Lasnik,et al.  On the nature of proper government , 1990 .

[27]  Rolf Noyer,et al.  Movement Operations after Syntax , 2001, Linguistic Inquiry.

[28]  Acrisio Pires,et al.  THE SYNTAX OF WH-IN-SITU AND COMMON GROUND 1 , 2007 .

[29]  Richard S. Kayne.  The Antisymmetry of Syntax , 1994 .

[30]  Yoshihisa Kitagawa.  SYMPOSIUM ON PROSODY AND SYNTAX:AN OVERVIEW , 2005 .

[31]  Janet Dean Fodor,et al.  Learning To Parse? , 1998 .

[32]  Jonathan W. Nissenbaum,et al.  Investigations of covert phrase movement , 2000 .

[33]  Danny Fox,et al.  Cyclic Linearization of Syntactic Structure , 2005 .

[34]  J. Pierrehumbert,et al.  Japanese Tone Structure , 1988 .

[35]  Yoshihisa Kitagawa.  When We Fail to Question in Japanese , 2007 .

[36]  eljko Bokovi.  On the Locality and Motivation of Move and Agree: An Even More Minimal Theory , 2007, Linguistic Inquiry.

[37]  Krystyna Wachowicz,et al.  Q-Morpheme Hypothesis, Performative Analysis and An Alternative , 1978 .

[38]  B. Pompino-Marschall,et al.  The focus prosody of Chichewa and the Stress-Focus constraint: a response to Samek-Lodovici (2005) , 2013 .

[39]  Samuel David Epstein,et al.  A Derivational Approach to Syntactic Relations , 1998 .

[40]  Kikuo Maekawa.  Is there dephrasing' of the accentual phrase in Japanese? , 1994 .

[41]  Robert Kluender,et al.  Subjacency as a processing phenomenon , 1993 .

[42]  T. Reinhart.  Quantifier Scope: How labor is Divided Between QR and Choice Functions , 1997 .

[43]  Noam Chomsky,et al.  Minimalist inquiries : the framework , 1998 .

[44]  B. Pompino-Marschall,et al.  Prosody and Information Structure in Chichewa , 2004 .