Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x24gv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-14T03:09:20.037Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

3 - Two Families of Questions

from Part I - The Computational Component

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 October 2018

By
Howard Lasnik1
Edited by
Ángel J. Gallego  and
Roger Martin
Ángel J. Gallego
Affiliation:
Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona
Roger Martin
Affiliation:
Yokohama National University, Japan
Get access

Summary

It has long been known that clauses without overt subjects (especially infinitival clauses) do not act like full clauses with respect to a wide variety of phenomena, such as WH-island exemption (observed by Ross (1967)). Postal (1974) introduced the notion ‘quasi-clause’ for some such cases and later Rizzi (1982) developed a comprehensive theory of ‘restructuring’. There is now a large literature on this topic. Only sporadically mentioned are situations where a bound pronominal subject makes a complement clause similarly permeable. A hint of this can be found in Sloan (1991) for ‘family of question’ readings and Kayne (1998) for quantifier interactions. I examine these phenomena and suggest an explanation in terms of phase theory..
Type
Chapter
Information
Language, Syntax, and the Natural Sciences , pp. 58 - 76
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2018

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Agüero-Bautista, Calixto. 2007. Diagnosing cyclicity in sluicing. Linguistic Inquiry 38: 413–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aoun, Joseph and Li, Audrey. 1993. The syntax of scope. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Bresnan, Joan W. 1970. On complementizers: Towards a syntactic theory of complement types. Foundations of Language 6: 297–321.Google Scholar
Chierchia, Gennaro. 1993. Questions with quantifiers. Natural Language Semantics 1: 181–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1955. The logical structure of linguistic theory. Ms. Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass. and MIT, Cambridge, Mass. [Revised 1956 version published in part by Plenum, New York, 1975. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1985.]Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1964. Current issues in linguistic theory. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1972. Some empirical issues in the theory of transformational grammar. In Goals of linguistic theory, ed. Peters, Paul Stanley, 63–130. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1973. Conditions on transformations. In A festschrift for Morris Halle, ed. Anderson, Stephen and Kiparsky, Paul, 232–286. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1977. On wh-movement. In Formal syntax, ed. Culicover, Peter, Wasow, Thomas, and Akmajian, Adrian, 71–132. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1982. Some concepts and consequences of the theory of government and binding. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1986. Barriers. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Felser, Claudia. 2004. Wh-copying, phases, and successive cyclicity. Lingua 114: 543–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fukui, Naoki and Speas, Margaret. 1986. Specifiers and projection. In MIT working papers in linguistics 8, 128–172.Google Scholar
Grano, Thomas and Lasnik, Howard. In press. How to neutralize a finite clause boundary: Phase theory and the grammar of bound pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry. 49, 3.Google Scholar
Huang, C.-T. James. 1982. Logical relations in Chinese and the theory of grammar. Doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
Kayne, Richard. 1983. Connectedness. Linguistic Inquiry 14: 223–249. [Reprinted in Kayne, Richard. 1984. Connectedness and binary branching. Dordrecht: Foris.]Google Scholar
Kayne, Richard. 1998. Overt vs. covert movement. Syntax 1: 128–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kratzer, Angelika. 2009. Making a pronoun: Fake indexicals as windows into the properties of pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry 40: 187–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larson, Richard and May, Robert. 1990. Antecedent containment or vacuous movement: Reply to Baltin. Linguistic Inquiry 21: 103–122.Google Scholar
Lasnik, Howard and Saito, Mamoru. 1984. On the nature of proper government. Linguistic Inquiry 15: 235–289. [Reprinted in Lasnik, Howard, Essays on restrictiveness and learnability, 198–255. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 1990.]Google Scholar
Lasnik, Howard and Saito, Mamoru 1992. Move α. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Lasnik, Howard and Uriagereka, Juan (with Cedric Boeckx). 2005. A course in minimalist syntax: Foundations and prospects. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
May, Robert. 1977. The grammar of quantification. Doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
May, Robert. 1985. Logical form: Its structure and derivation. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
May, Robert. 1988. Ambiguities of quantification and wh: A reply to Williams. Linguistic Inquiry 19: 118–135.Google Scholar
Postal, Paul M. 1974. On raising: One rule of English grammar and its theoretical implications. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 1978. A restructuring rule in Italian syntax. In Recent transformational studies in European languages, ed. Jay Keyser, Samuel, 113–158. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 1980. Violations of the wh-island constraint and the Subjacency condition. Journal of Italian Linguistics 5: 157–195.Google Scholar
Ross, John Robert. 1967. Constraints on variables in syntax. Doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, Mass. [Published as Infinite syntax! Norwood, NJ: Ablex, 1986.]Google Scholar
Sloan, Kelly. 1991. Quantifier-wh interaction. In MIT Working Paper in Linguistics 15, 219–237.Google Scholar
Sloan, Kelly and Uriagereka, Juan. 1988. What does “everyone” have scope over? Paper presented at the Generative Linguists in the Old World (GLOW) Conference. Budapest.Google Scholar
Sportiche, Dominique. 1981. Bounding nodes in French. The Linguistic Review 1: 219–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Uriagereka, Juan. 1988. On government. Doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut, Storrs.Google Scholar
Williams, Edwin. 1986. A reassignment of the functions of LF. Linguistic Inquiry 17: 265–299.Google Scholar
Williams, Edwin. 1988. Is LF distinct from S-structure? A reply to May. Linguistic Inquiry 19: 135–146.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×