Cover not available
Article published In:
Syntactic Variation and Change
Edited by David Håkansson, Ida Larsson and Erik Magnusson Petzell
[Linguistic Variation 17:1] 2017
► pp. 111–148

On prosodic variation and the distribution of wh- in-situ

| The Graduate Center, City University of New York
Wh- in-situ is a pervasive feature of Tano interrogative syntax, yet the Tano languages differ from one another in subtle ways with respect to the distribution of in-situ interrogatives. Languages like Krachi and Bono allow wh- in-situ in both main and embedded complement clauses, whereas closely related languages like Wasa and Asante Twi only allow wh- in-situ in main clauses. In this article, I argue that the generalization underpinning this variation in Tano concerns a prohibition on wh- items phrasing with C0 at the level of Intonational Phrase (ιP). I show that the ability of a wh- item to appear in-situ correlates with the prosodic status of its immediately containing clause. Embedded complement clauses are parsed as independent ιP units in Krachi and Bono, but not in Wasa and Asante Twi. Thus, ιP boundaries divide C0 from embedded interrogatives in Krachi and Bono, preventing the items from forming a prosodic constituent at the level of ιP. Conversely, no such boundaries intervene between embedded C0 and wh- in Wasa and Asante Twi, yielding prosodic mappings in which the items phrase together. Consequently, embedded wh- in-situ is prosodically licit in Krachi and Bono, but not in Wasa and Asante Twi. In this way, the Tano pattern of wh- in-situ variation described above reduces to a difference in how syntactic structures are externalized via prosodic mapping.
Keywords: prosodic mapping, prosodic variation, wh- in-situ, partial wh- movement, intonational phrase, embedded clause, Krachi, Bono, Wasa, Asante Twi
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The distributional variation of wh- in-situ in Tano
    • 2.1The distribution of wh- in-situ in Krachi
    • 2.2The distribution of wh- in-situ in Bono
    • 2.3The distribution of wh- in-situ in Wasa
    • 2.4The Distribution of wh- in-situ in Asante Twi
    • 2.5Delimiting the empirical scope of the article
  • 3.Motivating a prosodic approach to Tano in-situ interrogative distribution
  • 4.Prosodic analysis of Tano in-situ interrogatives
    • 4.1Methodology
    • 4.2Prosodic status of Krachi embedded complement clauses
    • 4.3Prosodic status of Bono embedded complement clauses
    • 4.4Prosodic status of Wasa embedded complement clauses
    • 4.5Prosodic status of Asante Twi embedded complement clauses
    • 4.6Analysis
    • 4.7Extending the analysis: Deriving the distribution of partial wh- movement in Tano
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 29 June 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lv.17.1.06kan
References (39)
References
Adonae, Daniels Ananey. 2005. Aspects of Kaakyi Tonology. M.Phil. dissertation, University of Ghana, Legon.Google Scholar
Beck, Sigrid. 1996. Quantified Structures as Barriers for LF Movement. Natural Language Semantics 41: 1–56. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bokamba, Eyamba G. 1976. Question Formation in Some Bantu Languages. Ph.D. thesis, Indiana University.Google Scholar
Boersma, Paul and David Weenink. 2014. Praat: Doing Phonetics by Computer (Version 5.4.01). Available from: [URL].
Cable, Seth. 2010. The Grammar of Q: Q-Particles, Wh- Movement and Pied Piping. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cheng, Lisa Lai-Shen. 1991. On the Typology of Wh- Questions. Ph.D. thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2001. Derivation by Phase. In Michael Kenstowicz (ed.), Ken Hale: A Life in Language, 1–52. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Crystal, Thomas H. and Arthur S. House. 1988. Segmental Durations in Connected-speech Signals: Current Results. Journal of the Acoustic Society of America 831: 1553–1573. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Downing, Bruce. 1970. Syntactic Structure and Phonological Phrasing in English. Ph.D. thesis, University of Texas at Austin.Google Scholar
Dundaa, Mark. 2007. Transitional Primer: Can you read and write in Kaakyi? Tamale, Ghana: Ghana Insitute of Linguitics, Literacy, and Bible Translation.Google Scholar
Fanselow, Gisbert. 2006. Partial Movement. In Martin Everaert, Henk van Riemsdijk, Rob Goedemans and Bart Hollebrandse (eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Syntax (Volume 31), 437–492. London: Blackwell Publishing. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Green, Melanie and Philip J. Jaggar. 2003. Ex-situ and In-situ Focus in Hausa: Syntax, Semantics and Discourse. In Jacqueline Lecarme (ed.), Research in Afroasiatic Grammar II [CILT 241], 187–213. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hagstrom, Paul. 1998. Decomposing Questions. Ph.D. thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Kandybowicz, Jason and Harold Torrence. 2011. How Why is Different: Wh- in-situ in Krachi. Snippets 231: 5–6.Google Scholar
. 2012. Krachi Wh- In-situ: A Question of Prosody. In Jaehoon Choi, E. Alan Hogue, Jeffrey Punske, Deniz Tat, Jessamyn Schertz and Alex Trueman (eds.), Proceedings of the 29th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, 362–370. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
. 2013. Unweaving the Interrogative Rainbow: the Interplay between Syntax, Semantics, and Prosody in Four Tano Languages. Talk presented at the 44th Annual Conference on African Linguistics, Georgetown University.Google Scholar
2015. Are Syntax and Prosody Entangled? Insights from Krachi In-situ Interrogatives. Ms. The Graduate Center, City University of New York and University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Maxwell, Edith. 1981. Question Strategies and Hierarchies of Grammatical Relations in Kinyarwanda. In Proceedings of the 7th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 166–177. Berkley, CA: University of California.Google Scholar
Muriungi, Peter Kinyua. 2005. Wh- Questions in Kitharaka. Studies in African Linguistics 341: 43–104.Google Scholar
Nespor, Marina and Irene Vogel. 1986. Prosodic Phonology. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Pak, Marjorie. 2008. The Postsyntactic Derivation and its Phonological Reflexes. Ph.D. thesis, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Pesetsky, David. 2000. Phrasal Movement and its Kin. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Potsdam, Eric. 2006. More Concealed Pseudoclefts in Malagasy and the Clausal Typing Hypothesis. Lingua 1161: 2154–2182. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Reinhart, Tanya. 1998. Wh-in-situ in the Framework of the Minimalist Program. Natural Language Semantics 61: 29–56. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Richards, Norvin. 2010. Uttering Trees. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 2001. On the Position Int(errogative) in the Left Periphery of the Clause. In Guglielmo Cinque and Giampaolo Salvi (eds.), Current Studies in Italian Syntax: Essays Offered to Lorenzo Renzi, 287–296. Amsterdam: Elsevier North-Holland.Google Scholar
Saah, Kofi. 1988. Wh- Questions in Akan. Journal of West African Languages 181: 17–28.Google Scholar
Sabel, Joachim and Jochen Zeller. 2006. Wh-Question Formation in Nguni. In John Mugane, John P. Hutchinson and Dee A. Worman (eds.), Selected Proceedings of the 35th Annual Conference on African Linguistics, 271–283. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar
Selkirk, Elisabeth. 1984. Phonology and Syntax: the Relation between Sound and Structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
. 2009. On Clause and Intonational Phrase in Japanese: the Syntactic Grounding of Prosodic Constituent Structure. Gengo Kenkyu 1361: 35–73.Google Scholar
. 2011. The Syntax-Phonology Interface. In John Goldsmith, Jason Riggle and Alan Yu (eds.), The Handbook of Phonological Theory (2nd edition), 435–484. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shlonsky, Ur and Gabriela Soare. 2011. Where’s ‘why’?. Linguistic Inquiry 421: 651–669. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Snider, Keith. 1990. Tonal Upstep in Krachi: Evidence for Register Tier. Language 661: 453–474. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Torrence, Harold and Jason Kandybowicz. 2012. Comparative Tano Interrogative Syntax: Typological and Genetic Implications. Paper presented at the 43rd Annual Conference on African Linguistics, Tulane University.
. 2013. Comparative Tano Interrogative Syntax: The View from Krachi and Bono. In Olanike Ola Orie and Karen W. Sanders (eds.), Selected Proceedings of the 43rd Annual Conference on African Linguistics, 222–234. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
. 2015. Wh- Question Formation in Krachi. Journal of African Languages and Linguistics 36.2: 253–286. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Truckenbrodt, Hubert. 2005. A Short Report on Intonation Phrase Boundaries in German. Linguistiche Berichte 2031: 273–296.Google Scholar
Williamson, Kay and Roger Blench. 2000. Niger-Congo. In Bernd Heine and Derek Nurse (eds.), African Languages: An Introduction, 11–42. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Zentz, Jason. 2015. Wh-question Formation Strategies in Bantu. Ph.D. thesis, Yale University.Google Scholar
Cited by (4)

Cited by four other publications

Kandybowicz, Jason, Bertille Baron Obi, Philip T. Duncan & Hironori Katsuda
2021. Documenting the Ikpana interrogative system. Journal of African Languages and Linguistics 42:1 ► pp. 63 ff. DOI logo
Hsiao, Yuchau E.
2020. The syntax-prosody competition: Evidence from adjunct prosodic parsing in iGeneration Taiwanese. Lingua 237 ► pp. 102805 ff. DOI logo
Korsah, Sampson & Andrew Murphy
2020. Tonal reflexes of movement in Asante Twi. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 38:3 ► pp. 827 ff. DOI logo
Bennett, Ryan & Emily Elfner
2019. The Syntax–Prosody Interface. Annual Review of Linguistics 5:1 ► pp. 151 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 8 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.