Wh-in-situ in English
1
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
초록
Under Chomsky's (2000, 2001a) view, wh-in-situ in multiple wh-questions (e.g., who saw what?) in English does not undergo covert raising to the Spec of CP, since there is no LF movement postulated in his proposal. It is well known that the pair-list reading is obligatory in multiple wh-questions. To explain the pair-list reading in multiple wh-questions, it has been assumed that who-in-situ must move to the Spec of CP. If we follow Chomsky's proposal, however, we cannot capture the correct reading of multiple wh-questions. To resolve this problem, I'll propose that wh-in-situ in English undergo object shift to satisfy the EPP of v* and raise to a higher position, i.e., the adjucntion of v*P, through TH/EX or DISL. By assuming this proposal, we have several advantages to account for the nature of human languages. First, we reduce the computational burden raised in Chomsky's (2000, 2001a) approach to wh-movement constructions. The object shift of wh-element to the outer Spec of v*P gives rise to computational complexity in Chomsky's system since the raising of wh-element is triggered just by the observance of PIC. However, we have no difficulty in raising wh-element to the outer Spec of v*P since wh-element must raise to satisfy the EPP of v*P. Second, we eliminate the asymmetry between the overtly raised wh-element and wh-in-situ under my proposal. Finally, we can derive the object shift property of wh-movement by assuming that the shifted element in the outer Spec of v*P further raises beyond the position through wh-movement (in the case of the overtly raised wh-element) or TH/EX (in the case of wh-in-situ).
Abstract
Under Chomsky's (2000, 2001a) view, wh-in-situ in multiple wh-questions (e.g., who saw what?) in English does not undergo covert raising to the Spec of CP, since there is no LF movement postulated in his proposal. It is well known that the pair-list reading is obligatory in multiple wh-questions. To explain the pair-list reading in multiple wh-questions, it has been assumed that who-in-situ must move to the Spec of CP. If we follow Chomsky's proposal, however, we cannot capture the correct reading of multiple wh-questions. To resolve this problem, I'll propose that wh-in-situ in English undergo object shift to satisfy the EPP of v* and raise to a higher position, i.e., the adjucntion of v*P, through TH/EX or DISL. By assuming this proposal, we have several advantages to account for the nature of human languages. First, we reduce the computational burden raised in Chomsky's (2000, 2001a) approach to wh-movement constructions. The object shift of wh-element to the outer Spec of v*P gives rise to computational complexity in Chomsky's system since the raising of wh-element is triggered just by the observance of PIC. However, we have no difficulty in raising wh-element to the outer Spec of v*P since wh-element must raise to satisfy the EPP of v*P. Second, we eliminate the asymmetry between the overtly raised wh-element and wh-in-situ under my proposal. Finally, we can derive the object shift property of wh-movement by assuming that the shifted element in the outer Spec of v*P further raises beyond the position through wh-movement (in the case of the overtly raised wh-element) or TH/EX (in the case of wh-in-situ).