WEKO3
アイテム
A Note on Conjoined Wh-Questions
http://hdl.handle.net/2237/00030164
http://hdl.handle.net/2237/00030164b6a159c9-8535-4a96-9fb5-ab0322cd9fd7
| 名前 / ファイル | ライセンス | アクション |
|---|---|---|
ivy_31_61.pdf (975.1 kB)
|
|
| Item type | 紀要論文 / Departmental Bulletin Paper(1) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 公開日 | 2019-05-10 | |||||
| タイトル | ||||||
| タイトル | A Note on Conjoined Wh-Questions | |||||
| 言語 | en | |||||
| 著者 |
Takekoshi, Atsushi
× Takekoshi, Atsushi |
|||||
| アクセス権 | ||||||
| アクセス権 | open access | |||||
| アクセス権URI | http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2 | |||||
| 抄録 | ||||||
| 内容記述タイプ | Abstract | |||||
| 内容記述 | This paper discusses the syntactic structure of the sentences that include conjoined wh-phrases, as given in (1). I call these sentences conjoined wh-questions. (1) a. When and where did you see them? b. When and with what did John hit Bill? Browne (1972) and Grimshaw (1978) observes that conjoined wh-questions are acceptable only when both of the wh-phrases are optional elements, that is, adjuncts. The examples in (2) show that the conjunction of an argument wh-phrase and an adjunct wh-phrase is not allowed. The example in (3) shows that the conjunction of two argument wh-phrases that do not originate in the same syntactic position are not allowed. (2) a. *What and how hard did John kick? b. *What and when did he give you? (3) *John asked who and what bought. If two argument wh-phrases originate in the same syntactic position, they can be conjoined, as in (4). (4) a. Who and whose brother did you like? b. Who and what did you see? In (4) both who and whose brother are the objects of the same verb. In this paper, I propose that examples like (1) are Right Node Raising (RNR) constructions, while examples like (4) are questions in which conjoined wh-phrases are fronted. In other words, (1) and (4）ere different constructions, though they have a superficial resemblance. The ungrammaticality of (2-3) is derived from constraints on RNR. If we analyze (1) as questions in which conjoined wh-phrases are fronted, we must admit the conjunction of elements that do not belong to the same semantic category. In (1), for example, where is a locative, and when is a temporal. But there is evidence to show that the conjunction of elements that do not belong to the same semantic category is not allowed. The RNR approach can explain the behavior of the conjoined wh-questions in (1) without using such conjunctions. On the other hand, in (4) the conjoined wh-phrases belong to the same semantic category. Thus, nothing forces us to analyze (4) as RNR. | |||||
| 言語 | en | |||||
| 出版者 | ||||||
| 出版者 | 名古屋大学英文学会 | |||||
| 言語 | ja | |||||
| 出版者 | ||||||
| 出版者 | The society of english literature and linguistics Nagoya University | |||||
| 言語 | en | |||||
| 言語 | ||||||
| 言語 | eng | |||||
| 資源タイプ | ||||||
| 資源タイプ識別子 | http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501 | |||||
| 資源タイプ | departmental bulletin paper | |||||
| 出版タイプ | ||||||
| 出版タイプ | VoR | |||||
| 出版タイプResource | http://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85 | |||||
| ISSN（print） | ||||||
| 収録物識別子タイプ | PISSN | |||||
| 収録物識別子 | 0914-2266 | |||||
| 書誌情報 |
en : IVY 巻 31, p. 61-86, 発行日 1998-10-31 |
|||||
| 著者版フラグ | ||||||
| 値 | publisher | |||||
