Back to search

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Composing questions

Abstract

dc:description.abstract

This dissertation motivates a new syntax and semantics for simplex and multiple wh-questions, concentrating on English and German data. The proposed theory combines Cable's (2007; 2010) Q-based syntax for wh-movement and pied-piping with a new and simple semantics that combines ingredients familiar from the literature in a novel way. I model the pair-list reading of the question as denoting a family of questions (Roberts, 1996; Hagstrom, 1998; Krifka, 2001; Buring, 2003; Fox, 2012; Nicolae, 2013, a.o.), and derive the pair-list and single-pair readings of the question from minimally different LFs. This theory naturally fits with existing analyses of the presuppositions of questions and with Beck's (2006) theory of focus intervention effects. The proposed syntax-semantics leads to a new descriptive generalization for focus intervention effects. I present novel data that the previously assumed strict correlation between intervention and superiority in English (Pesetsky, 2000) is incorrect. Instead, intervention occurs whenever the relation between a wh-word and its associated Q-particle is disrupted at LF. This happens in superiority-violating questions, inside overt and covert pied-piping constituents, and in superiority-obeying questions whenever covert wh-movement is restricted to a position below an intervener. Furthermore, intervention can be avoided in superiority-violating questions if the in-situ wh is given wide scope above an intervener through non-interrogative movement. Finally, I present arguments from offline judgments as well as from online sentence processing that in-situ wh-phrases in English superiority-obeying questions undergo covert movement, but in-situ wh-phrases in superiority-violating questions are truly in-situ at LF. I furthermore argue that the covert movement step of the in-situ wh should be modeled as covert scrambling instead of the unbounded movement to the interrogative complementizer that is traditionally assumed. Movement targets the first position where a wh is interpretable, and is only extended in extraordinary cases, for example in order to avoid a structure that would be an intervention effect, or in order to allow for ellipsis resolution. This makes the behavior of English parallel to that of German. I argue that this is advantageous for the acquisition of questions and intervention, and helps to account for our understanding of the cross-linguistic typology of multiple questions.

Degree

thesis:*
Department dc:contributor.department
Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Linguistics and Philosophy.
Grantor dc:publisher
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Year dc:date.issued
2014

Author and committee

dc:creator, dc:contributor.*
Author dc:creator
  • Kotek, Hadas
Advisor dc:contributor.advisor
  • Danny Fox, Martin Hackl, Irene Heim and David Pesetsky.

Subjects

dc:subject × 1

Rights

dc:rights
Statement dc:rights
  • M.I.T. theses are protected by copyright. They may be viewed from this source for any purpose, but reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission. See provided URL for inquiries about permission.
Language dc:language.iso
eng

Identifiers

dc:identifier.*
Handle dc:identifier.uri
http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/93840
OAI identifier oai:identifier
oai:dspace.mit.edu:1721.1/93840

Chain of custody

source
Harvested from
MIT
Base URL
dspace.mit.edu/oai/request
Last updated
2026-07-22
Source record
OAI-PMH GetRecord
citation

Kotek, Hadas. Composing questions. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2014. http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/93840