reading quiz

1. Wh-expressions in wh-questions can only replace NPs. T/F?
   1. F: They can replace PPs (temporal PP: when, locative PP: where)
2. Wh-expressions in wh-questions can only replace arguments. T/F?
   1. Arguments: Participant in the predicate
   2. F: “when” and “where” can replace adjuncts (which are not arguments)
3. Crosslinguistically, wh-questions always involve a gap. T/F?
   1. F: Wh-in-situ languages do not leave gap.
4. Crosslinguistically, relative clauses always follow the noun that they modify. T/F?
   1. F: RelN is common in OV (head-final) languages
5. Crosslinguistically, relative clauses always involve a gap. T/F?
   1. F: Walpiri, Bambara (adjoined Rel)

Moving phrases around within the clause

Previously, languages were shown to be able change grammatical relations to alter argument structure.

• Promotion/Demotion of arguments
• Argument conversion to oblique
• Deletion

There are ways to shift the phrases within the clause without changing grammatical relations too.

Wh-questions

The phrase that we’re asking a question about is first replaced by a suitable wh-word or wh-phrase. List of wh-words and the replacement type in brackets are below.

• who (NP)
• what (NP)
• which (NP)
• where (PP)
• when (PP)
• why (CP)
• how (CP)

Gaps and the dependency

In wh-word fronting languages, wh-movement occurs and a gap/extraction site is left behind in the original place of the moved phrase that is replaced.

A dependency is then formed between the wh-phrase and the gap. The entity they both refer to is the same: e.g. the below subscript notated sentence shows “Who” and “[__]” refer to the same entity $i$.

[Who]$_i$ did Sam see [__]$_i$ at the bus-stop yesterday?

Note that we can’t fill in “[__]” without making it ungrammatical as a result.

Syntactic category: same as the phrase it replaces (NP/PP/CP)

Wh-movement

“Wh-in-situ” refers to replacing the phrase with the wh-phrase but leaving it in position. Examples of wh-in-situ languages include Chinese, Japanese.

In many languages, wh expression precedes the arg/adj at the start of its parent clause (not necessarily the root!). This is known as wh-fronting.

Some languages like phrase accept both as grammatical in most cases. English also technically does but the in-situ form usually shows incredulity or is the speaker trying to clarify something they couldn’t hear.

Multiple wh-questions

In english, when multiple wh-questions exist, only one is fronted and the rest of the the wh-phrases will not be fronted (in-situ in this case!)

In some languages (e.g. Bulgarian), all the wh-phrases will be fronted.

Koj kogo kakvo e pital? who whom what is asked “Who asked whom what?”

Who, whom, what have to appear in this fixed order in Bulgarian.

However in other languages (even closely related ones) you don’t have to have them in a fixed order.

Relative clauses

The relative clause is a subordinate clause modifying a head noun in the matrix clause.

Function: restricts the possible set of objects the head noun could belong to.

Properties:

1. Relative clause may follow straight after the head noun
2. Rel may follow aftera complementizer (such as a wh-word, “that”, etc.)
3. Contain a gap. is missing the noun phrase in the pos of the the NP it modifies.
   1. That storm (we experienced ___ last night) was amazing.
   2. I wouldn’t want the job (Sam applied for __) the other day.

Typological distinction: order of the relative clause and head noun.

Complex NP from Rel + N (embedded Rel)

• Head-initial: typically NP -> NRel (N is the head).
• Head-final: typically NP -> RelN (N is the head).
• Some languages have both patterns.

Adjoined Relative clauses (Non-embedded Rel)

There are languages which do not embed the relative clause but adjoin them to the matrix clause.

The relative clause may adopt the head noun into itself, with a relative marker $RM$ to signify this is the head noun being modified that belongs to its matrix clause.

Relativization Strategy

1. Gap strategy
   1. the relativized position within the Rel clause is left empty.
2. Resumptive strategy
   1. No gap in the relativized position and
   2. the noun phrase modified is borrowed using a pronoun.

NP accessibility hierarchy

Su > Direct Obj > Obj of adpos > Possessor > Obj of comparison

Each position on the hierarchy is a cut-off point for some Rel formation in some language(s).

• Subjects are most accessible to relativization
• Some languages don’t allow direct objects or anything else below to be relativized
  • e.g. Tagalog
• Different strategies (gap/resumptive) can be used for different layers of the hierarchy
  • Generally the gap is typical in the highest positions
  • the resumptive is more used in the lower positions
  • once the resumptive strategy is used, all positions lower likely to use resumptive too.