Article published in:
Hispanic Linguistics at the Crossroads: Theoretical linguistics, language acquisition and language contact. Proceedings of the Hispanic Linguistics Symposium 2013
Edited by Rachel Klassen, Juana M. Liceras and Elena Valenzuela
[Issues in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics 4] 2015
► pp. 1–24

No superiority, no intervention effects

The Spanish puzzle

| Florida State University
| Syracuse University
Recent typological approaches (Cable, 2010; Pesetsky, 2000) explain the independently-noticed crosslinguistic differences between Superiority and Intervention Effects as the result of general lexical differences of wh-phrases. A pattern that seems to be recurrent crosslinguistically is that languages that display Superiority do not exhibit Intervention Effects and vice versa. In other words, Superiority and Intervention Effects appear to be in complementary distribution in natural languages. Surprisingly, Spanish lacks both Superiority and Intervention Effects. This paper accounts for this unexpected behavior in Spanish as the result of a lexical property of Spanish that allows some of its wh-phrases to enter the derivation as two dependent elements: a Q-particle and a dependent wh-variable.
Keywords: (un)selective binding, Intervention Effects, Q-particle, Superiority Effects, wh-phrases
Published online: 30 July 2015
https://doi.org/10.1075/ihll.4.01reg
References

References

Adger, D., & Smith, J.
(2005) Variation and the minimalist program. In L. Cornips & K.P. Corrigan (Eds.), Syntax and variation. Reconciling the biological and the social (pp. 149–178). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Aoun, J., & Li, Y.A.
(1993) WH-elements in situ: Syntax or LF? Linguistic Inquiry, 24, 199–238.Google Scholar
Beck, S.
(1996) Quantified structures as barriers for LF movement. Natural Language Semantics, 4, 1–56. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2006) Intervention effects follow from focus interpretation. Natural Language Semantics, 14, 1–56. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bošković, Ž.
(1997) On certain violations of the Superiority Condition, AgrO, and economy of derivation. Journal of Linguistics, 33, 227–254. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cable, S.
(2010) The grammar of Q: Q-particles, wh-movement and pied-piping. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, N.
(1973) Conditions on transformations. In S. Anderson, & P. Kiparsky (Eds.), A festschrift for Morris Halle (pp. 232–286). New York, NY: Holt, Reinhart & Winston.Google Scholar
Fitzpatrick, J.
(2002) On Minimalist approaches to the locality of movement. Linguistic Inquiry, 33 (3), 443–463. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gallego, A.
(2007) Phase theory and parametric variation. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona.
Jaeggli, O.
(1982) Topics in Romance syntax. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Kratzer, A.
(1995) Stage-level and individual-level predicates as inherent generics. In G.N. Carlson & F.J. Pelletier (Eds.), The generic book (pp. 125–75). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Malhotra, S.
(2011) Movement and Intervention Effects: Evidence from Hindi/Urdu. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. University of Maryland.
Munn, A.
(1994) A Minimalist account of reconstruction asymmetries. In M. Gonzalez (Ed.), Proceedings of NELS 24 (pp. 397–410). Amherst, MA: GLSA.Google Scholar
Ormazabal, J.
(1991) Asymmetries on wh-movement and some theoretical consequences. Ms., University of Connecticut: Storrs, CT.Google Scholar
Pesetsky, D.
(2000) Phrasal movement and its kin. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Radford, A.
(2004) Minimalist syntax: Exploring the structure of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Reglero, L.
(2007) Wh-in-situ interrogatives in Spanish. Probus, 19(2), 267–297. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Reglero, L., & Ticio, M.E.
(2013) A unified analysis of wh-in-situ in Spanish. The Linguistic Review, 30(4), 1–47. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
in progress). D-linking in Spanish: A movement analysis. Ms. Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL, and Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY.
Shields, R.
(2008) Intervention and rescue: Arguments for representational constraints on syntactic dependencies. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Ticio, M.E.
(2010) Locality domains in the Spanish determiner phrase. New York, NY: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Torrego, E.
(1987) On empty categories in nominals. Ms. University of Massachusetts, Boston.
Uribe-Etxebarria, M.
(1992) On the nature of Spec/IP and its relevance for scope asymmetries in Spanish and English. In J. Amastae, G. Goodall, M. Montalbetti, & M. Phinney (Eds.), Contemporary research in Romance linguistics (pp. 355–366). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2002) In situ questions and masked movement. Linguistic Variation Yearbook, 2, 259–303. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Zubizarreta, M.L.
(1998) Prosody, focus and word order. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar