In situ mixed wh -coordination and the argument/adjunct distinction

Bibliographic Data

ID22130602
AuthorsErik Zyman (0000-0001-6960-2630, University of Chicago, corresponding author)
Year2020
Volume5
Issue1
Publication date2020-03-12
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueGlossa a journal of general linguistics (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 2397-1835 • E-ISSN: 2397-1835
PublisherOpen Library of the Humanities (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.5334/gjgl.1070
OpenAlexW3011048524
LanguageEN
References cited12

One of the most important results of syntactic inquiry has been a detailed empirical and, to some extent, theoretical understanding of the argument/adjunct distinction, which underlies a wide array of superficially different phenomena. Therefore, any phenomena that appear to challenge the argument/adjunct distinction deserve scrutiny. This squib investigates an almost unremarked-upon phenomenon of just that type: apparent in situ mixed wh-coordination (ISMW: Mary ate WHAT and WHEN to impress Sue?!), in which argument and adjunct wh-phrases are apparently coordinated in situ. Two analyses of ISMW are compared: the Wh-Coordination Analysis, on which the conjuncts are the wh-phrases, and the VP-Coordination Analysis, on which the conjuncts are VPs whose head Vs undergo across-the-board head movement to v. The squib argues for the VP-Coordination Analysis on conceptual and empirical grounds. Conceptually, the VP- but not the Wh-Coordination Analysis is compatible with our understanding of the argument/adjunct distinction, and involves an unremarkable derivation that it would take a stipulation to rule out; hence, the VP-Coordination Analysis is preferable. Empirically, the VP- but not the Wh-Coordination Analysis makes several correct predictions: (a) that ISMW should be impossible with obligatorily transitive verbs; (b) that adverbs should be able to follow the first wh-phrase in ISMW that cannot follow it in the left periphery; and (c) that there should be apparent in situ coordination of argument wh-phrases with different θ-roles. That ISMW involves VP-coordination rather than wh-coordination indicates that it in fact does not threaten the argument/adjunct distinction, contrary to initial appearances, a theoretically welcome result

Adjunct · Linguistics · Chemistry · Linguistics and Discourse Analysis · Natural Language Processing Techniques · Philosophy · Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access