Licensing long-distance wh-in-situ in Malayalam

It is generally thought that wh-in-situ, like overt movement, is potentially unbounded. At the same time, certain languages have been argued to disallow long-distance wh-in-situ. This paper argues that even in languages that show apparent clause-boundedness effects, wh-in-situ, like wh-movement, can in principle cross an arbitrary number of clauses. Failure to license a wh-phrase across a clause boundary, when it occurs, can be shown to result from the interaction between wh-agreement and independent operations affecting embedded clauses. Evidence will be drawn primarily from Malayalam (Dravidian), which has been argued to disallow long-distance wh-in-situ with finite embedded clauses. I will show that the relevant factor for wh-licensing is not finiteness, but Ā-movement of embedded clauses, an operation that is common with finite CPs. The core of the problem lies in the fact that interrogative C is a generalized [Ā]-probe that can interact with a number of featurally more specific goals, including the [Ā]-features on the head of the moving clause. It will be shown that this approach can account for a number of facts about Malayalam wh-question formation, including selective transparency of certain finite clauses for long-distance wh-licensing.

[2]  Gereon Müller,et al.  Shape Conservation and Remnant Movement , 2000 .

[3]  Noam Chomsky,et al.  WH-Movement: Moving On , 2006 .

[4]  D. Pesetsky Phrasal Movement and Its Kin , 2000 .

[5]  Noam Chomsky,et al.  The Minimalist Program , 1992 .

[6]  James McCloskey,et al.  Resumption, Successive Cyclicity, and the Locality of Operations , 2008 .

[7]  K. A. Jayaseelan Question Movement in Some SOV Languages and the Theory of Feature Checking , 2004 .

[8]  Seth Cable The Grammar of Q , 2010 .

[9]  D. Kandzari,et al.  Double negatives. , 2003, American heart journal.

[10]  Seth Cable,et al.  The Grammar of Q: Q-Particles, Wh-Movement, and Pied-Piping , 2010 .

[11]  Josef Bayer CP-Extraposition as Argument Shift , 1997 .

[12]  Keir Moulton CPs: Copies and Compositionality , 2015, Linguistic Inquiry.

[13]  Association Focus , 1999 .

[14]  K. A. Jayaseelan Questions and Question‐word Incorporating Quantifiers in Malayalam , 2001 .

[15]  C. Huang On the distribution and reference of empty pronouns , 1984 .

[16]  Anna Szabolcsi COMPOSITIONALITY IN FOCUS , 1981 .

[17]  Omer Preminger Agreement as a fallible operation , 2011 .

[18]  Dominique Sportiche Assessing Unaccusativity and Reflexivity: Using Focus Alternatives to Decide What Gets Which θ-Role , 2014, Linguistic Inquiry.

[19]  David Pesetsky,et al.  Paths and categories , 1982 .

[20]  Zeljko Boskovic,et al.  On the locality of left branch extraction and the structure of NP , 2005 .

[21]  Kenneth Wexler,et al.  Formal Principles of Language Acquisition , 1980 .

[22]  David Adger,et al.  Merge and Move: Wh-Dependencies Revisited , 2005, Linguistic Inquiry.

[23]  B. Hayes Precompiled Phrasal Phonology , 2022 .

[24]  A. Kratzer,et al.  Indeterminate Pronouns: The View from Japanese , 2017 .

[25]  Fabian Beijer,et al.  Michal Starke's Move Dissolves into Merge: A Theory of Locality , 2001 .

[26]  Uli Sauerland,et al.  Interfaces + Recursion = Language?: Chomsky's Minimalism and the View from Syntax-Semantics , 2007 .

[27]  Rosmin Mathew The Syntactic Effect of Head Movement:Wh and Verb movement in Malayalam , 2014 .

[28]  Gert Webelhuth,et al.  Rightward movement in a comparative perspective , 2013 .

[29]  Cheng-Teh James Huang,et al.  Logical Relations in Chinese and the Theory of Grammar , 1998 .

[30]  Anoop Mahajan,et al.  The A/A-bar distinction and movement theory , 1990 .

[31]  Matthew S. Dryer,et al.  SVO languages and the OV: VO typology , 1991, Journal of Linguistics.

[32]  Ž. Bošković Now I’m a Phase, Now I’m Not a Phase: On the Variability of Phases with Extraction and Ellipsis , 2014, Linguistic Inquiry.

[33]  Michael Bennett,et al.  Questions in Montague grammar , 1979 .

[34]  H. Harley,et al.  Person and Number in Pronouns: A Feature-Geometric Analysis , 2002 .

[35]  Andrew Simpson,et al.  The Nonuniform Syntax of Postverbal Elements in SOV Languages: Hindi, Bangla, and the Rightward Scrambling Debate , 2015, Linguistic Inquiry.

[36]  K. A. Jayaseelan,et al.  Finiteness and Negation in Dravidian , 2008 .

[37]  Gisbert Fanselow,et al.  The Restricted Access of Information Structure to Syntax - A Minority Report , 2007 .

[38]  Andrew Barss,et al.  Chains and anaphoric dependence : on reconstruction and its implications , 1986 .

[39]  T. Reinhart Wh-in-situ in the Framework of the Minimalist Program , 1998 .

[40]  Luigi Rizzi,et al.  Locality and Left Periphery , 2004 .

[41]  Noam Chomsky Derivation by phase , 1999 .

[42]  Irene Heim,et al.  Semantics in generative grammar , 1998 .

[43]  Noam Chomsky,et al.  On Wh-Movement , 1977 .

[44]  Emily Manetta,et al.  Reconsidering Rightward Scrambling: Postverbal Constituents in Hindi-Urdu , 2012, Linguistic Inquiry.

[45]  Elisabeth Selkirk,et al.  Phonology and Syntax: The Relation between Sound and Structure , 1984 .

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

[47]  DAVID BASILICO Wh-movement in Iraqi Arabic and Slave , 1998 .

[48]  Sigrid Beck,et al.  Intervention Effects Follow from Focus Interpretation* , 2006 .

[49]  Veneeta Dayal Locality in WH Quantification: Questions and Relative Clauses in Hindi , 2010 .

[50]  Shigeru Miyagawa Against Optional Scrambling , 2008 .

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

[52]  David Lebeaux,et al.  Language acquisition and the form of the grammar , 2000 .

[53]  Hisatsugu Kitahara,et al.  Elementary operations and optimal derivations , 1997 .

[54]  Klaus Abels,et al.  The Italian Left Periphery: A View from Locality , 2012, Linguistic Inquiry.

[55]  Noam Chomsky,et al.  Conditions on transformations , 1971 .

[56]  Wolfgang Sternefeld,et al.  Improper movement and unambiguous binding , 1993 .

[57]  Günther Grewendorf,et al.  Scrambling in German and Japanese: Adjunction Versus Multiple Specifiers , 1999 .

[58]  Mara Frascarelli,et al.  ‘Phasing’ Contrast at the Interfaces: A feature-compositional approach to Topics , 2013 .

[59]  Shigeru Miyagawa Against optinonal scrambling , 1997 .

[60]  A. Simpson,et al.  Obligatory Overt Wh-Movement in a Wh-in-Situ Language , 2003, Linguistic Inquiry.

[61]  Punnapurath Madhavan Multiple Wh-questions and the cleft construction in Malayalam , 2013 .

[62]  W. Wahba LF Movement in Iraqi Arabic , 1992 .

[63]  Veneeta Dayal,et al.  Rightward Scrambling as Rightward Remnant Movement , 2007, Linguistic Inquiry.

[64]  K. Kiss Identificational focus versus information focus , 1998 .

[65]  Andrew Simpson Wh- Movement and the Theory of Feature-Checking , 2000 .

[66]  Ivan A. Sag,et al.  On parasitic gaps , 1983 .

[67]  Caroline Féry,et al.  German sentence accents and embedded prosodic phrases , 2011 .

[68]  Milan Rezac,et al.  Cyclic Agree , 2009, Linguistic Inquiry.

[69]  Elisabeth Selkirk The Syntax‐Phonology Interface , 2011 .

[70]  J. Ouhalla Remarks on the binding properties of wh-pronoums , 1996 .