From wh to y/n:
The features of C
Elly van Gelderen
Konstanz, 24-25 January 2014
Aims
1. examine sources of certain interrogatives
and look at some stages they go through
2. focus (in keeping with the workshop) on
those that contribute to illocutionary force
in particular the Y/N and Wh-Cycles
3. account for these changes in a featurebased way
Origin of clause markers
1. Argument/Adverb WH > Yes/No and C
2. Relative pronoun > Conjunction
(e.g. Meyer 2010 in Slavic, e.g. čto)
3. Preposition > Complementizer
(for, after, before)
4. VP adverb > Clausal adverb/C
(Swan 1988; Traugott 1995; Lenker 2010)
Theoretical background
+/- Interpretable features:
C needs u-F to function as C to its clause (F could
be phi or T) and needs i-F to be
argument/adjunct to higher clause (F could be
wh or pol) (cf. Lohnstein 2005; Roussou 2010:
582: “dual capacity of being selected by a matrix
predicate and of selecting a clause”; Bayer
2012; Bayer & Brandner 2008, etc)
(1) I wonder
[u-Q]
[what
[i-wh]
C
[she will see]].
[u-Q: wh]
VP
V
wonder
[u-Q]
CP
what
[i-wh]
C
...
[u-Q: wh]
V
see
VP
what
[i-wh]
Semantic and formal overlap:
Chomsky (1995: 230; 381) suggests: "formal
features have semantic correlates and reflect
semantic properties (accusative Case and
transitivity, for example)."
I interpret this: If a language has nouns with
semantic phi-features, the learner will be able to
hypothesize uninterpretable features on another
F (and will be able to bundle them there).
Radford (2000): in acquisition from + > “[S]emantic features ..., are presumably drawn
from a universal ‘alphabet’” (Chomsky 1965:
142), “little is known about this today”.
If semantic features are innate,
we need:
Feature Economy
(a) Utilize semantic features: use them as
for functional categories, i.e. as formal
features (van Gelderen 2008; 2011).
(b) If a specific feature appears more than
once, one of these is interpretable and the
others are uninterpretable (Muysken
2008).
Grammaticalization
Grammaticalization is a unidirectional
change from semantic to formal
(=grammatical) features.
For instance, a verb with semantic features,
such as Old English will with [volition,
expectation, future], can be reanalyzed as
having only the grammatical feature
[future]. And a pronoun can be reanalyzed
as agreement on the verb.
Grammaticalization tells us
which features matter
Subject and Object Agreement (Givón)
demonstrative > third ps pronoun > agreement > zero
noun > first and second person > agreement > zero
noun > noun marker > agreement > zero
Copula (Katz)
demonstrative > copula > zero
third person > copula > zero
verb > aspect > copula
Noun (Greenberg)
demonstrative > definite article > ‘Case’ > zero
noun > number/gender > zero
And about processing/economy
Negative (Gardiner/Jespersen
see van der Auwera)
a negative argument > negative adverb > negative
particle > zero
b verb > aspect > negative > C
(negative polarity cycle: Willis)
CP
Adjunct AP/PP > ... > C
Future and Aspect Auxiliary
A/P > M > T (> C)
V > ASP
Demonstrative
[i-phi]
[i-loc]
article
[u-phi]
pronoun C
[i-phi]
[u-phi]
[u-T]
[i-T]
copula
[i-loc]
Ambiguous wh-elements
Whether from WH-pronoun to Yes/No and C
(1) ond siþðan witig god on
swa hwæþere
hond
and then wise lord to
so
whichever
hand
... mærðo deme swa him gemet
þince.
... glory
grant so
him right
think
`And may the wise lord grant glory to whichever side he
thinks right.'
(Beowulf 686, Klaeber’s edition)
(2)
Hwæðer
þara twe3ra
dyde
Who
of-the two
did
þæs fæder willan?
the
father’s will (Ags. Gosp. Matt. xxi. 31)
Y/N
(3) Hwæðer wæs iohannes fulluht þe of heofonum þe of
mannum?
Whether was John's baptism that of heavens or of man
`Was the baptism of John done by heaven or by man'
(West Saxon Gospel, Corpus, Matthew 21.25).
(4) Hwæðer ic mote lybban oðdæt ic hine geseo?
Whether I might live until I see him
`Might I live until I have seen him?’
(Aelfric Homilies Thorpe edition 136. 30, from Allen
1980: 789)
Spec (moved) vs head (pure Y/N)
(5) Hwæðer wille ge ðæt ic cume to eow, ðe mid gierde ðe
mid monnðwære gæste?
Whether will you that I come to you or with rod or with
gentle spirit
`Do you want that I come to you, with a rod or with
gentleness of spirit?'
(Alfred, Pastoral Care, Sweet’s edition 117.7-8).
(6) Hweðer eni
totilde ancre uondede
euer ðis
Whether any
peering nun found
ever this
`Did any peering nun ever experience this?’ (Ancrene
Riwle 44.18, from Allen 1980: 790; Morton 102.2-3).
Conjunction (Both Selected Embedded
Questions and UEQ; Adger&Quer2001)
(7) þær se snotera bad hwæþer him alwalda
there the wise waited whether him almighty
æfre wille ... wyrpe gefremman.
ever would ... change accomplish
`There the wise one waited whether the almighty would ever
grant him change' (Beowulf 1313-5).
(8) Ne wæs me on mode cuð, hwæðer on Þyssum folce
not was me on soul known whether on these people
frean ælmihtiges egesa wære, Þa ic her ærest com.
free Almighty.GEN.SG fear was.SUBJ then I here first came
'It was not known to me in my soul whether there was fear of
the almighty in these people when I first came here'.
(from Parra-Guinaldo 2013: 92, Genesis 80)
features?
whether:
>
>
>
>
D in vP
specifier in CP
head C
zero Y/N
loss of Y/N
sem polarity/wh
[i-phi] [i-pol] or [i-wh]
[u-phi] [i or u-Q]
[i or u-Q]
The (valued) i or u-Q depends on certain
assumptions (Pesetsky & Torrego)
Old Norse (same stage as OE)
(1)
hvárt grætr
þú nú Skarpheðinn?
Q
cry
you now S
‘Are you crying, Skarphedin’? (Faarlund 2004:
226, Njal’s Saga 303.27)
(2) Njáll spurði
Gunnar
hvárt hann
Njal
asked
Gunnar
whether he
myndi
til
þings
ríða
would
to
assembly ride
‘Njal asked Gunnar whether he was going to ride
to the assembly’
(Faarlund 2004: 256, Njal’s Saga 71.26)
Gothic has only pronominal use and an
ambiguous Y/N (Parra-Guinaldo 2013):
(3) hvaþar
ist
raihtis azetizo qiþan:
which.of.the.two
is
indeed easier say.INF
afletanda
þus frawaurhteis þau qiþan:
forgive.PASS.IND you.DAT sins or say.INF
urreis jah gagg?
arise.IMP and go.IMP
'Which of the two is indeed easier to say: 'your sins
are forgiven' or to say 'arise and walk'?
'Is it indeed easier to say 'your sins are forgiven'
than to say 'arise and walk'?
(Matthew 9:5, Codex Argenteus)
Among the last Y/N:
(4)
"Whether corporeal substance can think," "whether
Matter be infinitely divisible," and "how it operates on
spirit"- these and like inquiries have given infinite
amusement to philosophers in all ages; but depending
on the existence of Matter, they have no longer any
place on our principles. (1710 Berkeley, Principles of
Human Knowledge §85)
(5)
Whether shall the red or the blue be annihilated?
(1739-40, Hume, A Treatise of Human Nature, 1.2.4.6,
http://nothingistic.org/library/hume/treatise/treatise014.ht
ml)
(6)
Whether does Doubting consist in embracing the
Affirmative or Negative Side of a Question? (1713
Berkeley Three Dialogues Hylas & Phil i. 5)
The C use remains:
(7) to know whether it be possible for us to
understand .. or (1734 Berkeley,Treatise XXIV)
but also:
(8) then I put it to her conscience, whether if she
was sure her mother had gone where the worm
dieth (COHA 1822)
and:
(9) Now I would fain know how any thing can
be present to us, which is neither perceivable
(1734 Berkeley A Treatise LXVIII)
(10) ... told them how he had a situation (Dickens
1844, OED, Willis 2007: 434)
The decline of Whether as a C in COHA
Changes
Y/N may arise first (Gothic) and be lost first
(C18 English). Both (if and) whether seem
relatively stable as C although declining
slightly
Features of whether: [either/or] and [wh]
So, wh-disjunction > y/n > loss
> interrog C > Force
50x whether if in COCA
Rizzi’s 2001 left periphery
ForceP
Force
IntP
whether
Int
whether
FocP
Foc
whether
FinP
Fin
...
VP
whether
How interpreted higher up, as y/n
Questions
(1) Which features are relevant?
(2) What are the stages:
kind/manner > degree
> yes/no
=exclamative
(3) Which wh- can be exclamative? needs a
degree, so where/when not good
candidates; why is what used?
(3) Is phrasal function first?
(4) Exclamatives gain something extra:
`only-E’ in Z&P: how very tall.
Manner/kind > Degree
How in Old English (acc. to the OED and
Bosworth & Toller)
-manner adverb modifying a V
(1) Hu sculon wit nu libban oððe on þys lande
wesan, gif her wind cymð?
‘How should we now live or ...?’ (Gen 805)
-subordinate C, both manner and degree
(2) þa angan Thomas his spæce hu he com to
Cantuuarebyri, & hu se arcebiscop axode
hyrsumnesse
(3) Þa axode se casere. þone ænne preost. hu his
nama wære. oððe hu gefyrn he gelyfde (‘how
formerly he believed’, Aelfric Hom 177.105,
B&T)
-kind and degree adverb modifying an Adj/Adv
(4) Hu lange for-bere ic eow?
‘How long endure I you?’ (West Saxon Gospels:
Matt. 17.17)
-exclamation can be kind or degree
(5) Hu god is ece God!
`How good is eternal God!’ (Paris Ps. 72[i]. 1)
(6) Hu þu biswikest monine mon!
‘How you betray many a man!’ (Brut, Caligula
1704)
OE in short
direct question
e.g. how should we live?
exclamation
e.g. how good is God!
how you were with the name rightly named!
dependent clause
e.g. Now wonders everyone how the devil ...
qualifying
e.g. How much do you owe?
MED: (h)ou, hov, hu, he(o)u, hw,
w, hwu, wou, howe, ho, (w)hou3,
who(u), qwou, whov, wou3, haw.
1.(a)In what manner or way; in what respect, with
what meaning, by what criteria; in what situation
or condition; -- also in rhetorical questions; (b)
by what name; (c) with verbs of doing, thinking,
reading, saying: what?
(1) Lauerd, hu hauest þu iuaren toniht? Lay. Cal.
28011
(2) Hou [Ld: 3what] schal ich nou do, Nou ich haue
mi wyf forlore? c1300 SLeg.Kath.(Hrl 2277)
262-8.
(a) By what means, through what agency or
chance, by what sequence of events; (b) from
what source or evidence, by what right, with
what moral justification; (c) how does it happen
that, wherefore, why; ~ is hit (this), why is it; ~
that, why is it that; (d)?in such a way, so.
In combs.: (a) ~ elles, how else; ~ if, how if, what
if; (b) as ~, how so; ~ so, how is it so, how so?
2.(a) To what extent, degree, number, or amount; - also, in rhetorical questions; (b)?very.
(3) Ða axode Petrus, Hu ofte sceal ic for3ifæn?
`How often shall I forgive?’
(c1175 Bod.Hom. 343, 32/28)
3.In exclamations: (a) in what a way!; (b) to
what an extent or degree!
(4) Hu þu biswikest monine mon!
‘How you betray many a man’ (MED, Lay.
Cal 3412 [Otho: ou])
(5) Hou long þe here hongeþ him opan!
(MED, Orfeo 506)
(6) Hou michel þyn werkes ben heried,
Lord! (MED, c1350 MPPsalter (Add
17376) 103.24)
Clausal and phrasal how much
(7) He clepede his spendere and him
acsede hou moche he hedde y-yeue to
þe kniȝte. (OED, 1340 Ayenbite 190)
(8) Þanne told þei hire..at how miche
meschef here men were formest. (OED,
a1375 William of Palerne 1362)
Vangsnes 2008: Degree < manner
(1)
(2)
Hurdan dag?
Swedish
`how day?’ = kind (sunny/*Wednesday)
Hur gammel?
‘how old?’ = degree
Vangsnes connects the D and A use through
Predicate Inversion.
My sense: item is in the lexicon with [way, degree,
wh] and can be used multiple ways.
Adapt basic AP tree (Corver; Wood):
DegP
(how long)
Deg’
Deg
QP
(how much longer)
Q’
Q
(much)
AP
(how good)
A’
A
long
XP (kind)
how/snake-like
structure of how: upward reanalysis
DegP
Deg’
Deg
QP
Q’
Q
(much)
AP
A’
A
how
Manner > degree > y/n
(1) How would you like some tea?
(2) How would you like having a liberal black
man from Kenya as president someday?
(COCA 2012 Fiction)
(3) Paul said, "Starting would be a good
thing to do. How would you like to begin?“
(COCA 2010 Fiction)
(4) " Well, " said the stranger, " you must
find time to go away. You're too noisy .
How would you like to go before the
mayor? " " No, I'd rather not. Stop -- now I
think of it, I've asked him before; but
perhaps if you'd speak a good word, he'd
give me the first vacancy. (COHA, 1838
Charcoal Sketches, Joseph Neal)
(5) “... How would you like to go with us?”
“Lord, Massa, you joking. Go wid you? ...”
(COHA,1836 The Partisan Leader,
Nathaniel Tucker)
Exclamative or degree how?
(6) And hue is hit uoul dede zeþþe hit is
kendelich?
‘how is it a foul deed since it is natural?’
(OED, 1340 Ayenbite, Morris 47)
(7) Hou shulde sich sense be error in man?
(OED, c1380, Wycliffite Serm. Sel. Wks. I. 60)
(8) Howe durst any be so bald to blemysche..Þe
hand-werke of þat hiȝe gode?
(OED, a1400–50, Alexander 4345)
(9) If thou be to ly at the Altar, how wantst thou a
Priest to say thy soule Masse? (OED, 1606
Birnie Blame of Kirk-buriall xi. sig. C4v)
How:
Manner and degree how: reanalysis in
DegreeP; semantic bleaching.
Manner/kind have an inherent grade, so
degree.
Features: [way], [degree], [wh], [Q]
In Y/N, the degree is lost. What is y/n [u-Q]
valued by? [wh]
Or via:
Exclamative includes FACT and exclamative
how is higher (cf Z&P 2003).
wh > Exclamation > Y/N
FocP
> FactP
how
Foc’
how!
Fact’
Foc
TP
Fact
FocP
has
...
Need more data on:
(1) How amazing most of it I could
understand.
Walkden (2013: 481):
OE hwaet is an exclamative
Hwæt modifies the verb frinan `to learn’ in:
(1) Hwæt we Gardena in geardagum þeodcyninga
þrym gefrunon
what we SpearDanes in yeardays nationkings
power heard
‘How much we have heard of the might of the
nation-kings in the ancient times of the SpearDanes’! (Beowulf, 1–2)
Walkden (2013: 483) says that “the loss of the
restriction [+thing] (and thus of the necessity of
argument status), seems to be a ‘natural’
change’”, namely a case of semantic bleaching.
Embedded: interrog/exclamative
(1) The men will wonder how there'll ever be
enough lobsters around this island for
seven more men to ... (COCA)
(2) Susan assured me everything would be
okay. Connie said how nobody could
blame me. (COCA 2012 Fiction)
(3) Dwyer told the players how he wanted to
win (Willis 2007, BNC)
Earliest ambiguous C in COHA
(1) By this sense, or faculty of seeing, they are
enabled to bring events which are yet future, as
well as those otherwise out of sight, present to
their minds; and thus they can behold them with
their mental eye, as clearly as we behold objects
at a distance. "This, you may say, is visionary
indeed. And you may wonder how I can doubt
of the truth of miracles, if I can believe in
such a chimerical idea as this!"
(Ballou, Hosea 1820, A Series of Letters in
Defence of Divine Revelation)
wh > degree > polar
(2) We saw how, in Chapter 2, a biological
system of animals functions like any other
mechanistic system. (BNC C9A 1337)
(3) Susan assured me everything would be
okay. Connie said how nobody could blame me.
(COCA 2012 Fiction)
(4) Your Dad once said how I had legs like Betty
Grable (BNC AC5 2999)
(5) The men will wonder how there'll ever be
enough lobsters around this island for seven
more men to ... (COCA 2000 Fiction)
OE manner and ME emphatic C
(6)
We gehirdon ... hu ge ofslogon ... Seon and Og.
we heard how you slew ... S and O
(OED, c1000, Ælfric Joshua ii. 10)
(7)
Hym thoughte how þt the wynged god Mercurye
Biforn hym stood.
`It seemed to him that the winged god Mercury stood
before him’
(OED, c1385 Chaucer Knight's Tale 527)
(8)
A letter was brought ... certefiyng him how he was
elected to be a Cardinal.
(OED, 1548, Hall's Vnion: Henry VIII f. lvii)
(9)
He..saide to the kyng, How his fadir hette Felip.
‘He said to the king that his father was called Felip.’
(OED, K. Alis. 1565)
Spec or head:
(1) *What did he tell the players how he wanted to
win what.
Frequent doubling (e.g. 222 times how when):
(2) Frankly, I didn't know how whether the
president would play. (COCA 1991 Spoken)
(3) I don't know how when people are watching
me (COCA 2010 Fiction)
(4) You know how if you don't have a DJ, you
don't have a party? (COCA 2012 Mag)
How high?
Zanuttini & Portner (2003: 76): Exclamatives
higher than wh and FACT in lower CP.
Rizzi (2001) has Interrogative below Force
so easy to `confuse’ y/n and exclamative
but how in features?
C, Pol, wh: feature reshuffle/split
Bayer & Brandner (2008); Bayer (2012):
(1) Ik vraag me af wie of dat hij zag.
wh pol T
I ask me PRT who if that he saw
`I wonder who he saw.’
What does this mean for uF/iF?
Wh-cycle = i-phi>uphi
a.
CP
b.
þat
C'
se/þam C
(þe/þat)
CP
C’
TP
C
that

TP

c.
CP
wh-
renewal
C'
C
that
TP
...
How come + SV
(1) For, as we have previously enquired, how
come we at a knowledge of virtue? (COHA,
1829)
older:
(2) Til it com on a fest dai, þat king herod did for to
call þe barnage. (CursorM, Vesp. 13131)
(3) How com'st that you haue holpe To make this
rescue? (Shakespeare Coriolanus iii. i. 275)
Wh vs A/P > C
The change from wh > C is to be expected
because wh has dual function as argument or
adjunct AND wh-marker:
-Wh moves anyway so easy to reanalyze!
-Wh is a D
The other two sources of C involve more lexical
content and are more erratic.
-A and P have lexical content
-They need not move to C but optionally topicalize
Conclusion
Renewal of the C-layer:
whether, how, and relatives
Feature Economy leads to renewal with
something from the VP-layer
Two types of grammaticalization:
-inside the phrase: kind > degree
-inside the clause: or > y/n
manner > degree > y/n
Select references
• Bayer, Josef 2012 Doubly-filled Comp, wh headmovement, and derivational economy.
• Bayer, Josef and Ellen Brandner 2008. On wh-headmovement. WCCFL 26 paper.
• Bayer, Josef and Andreas Trotzke 2012. Ist Emphases
ein Merkmal der Grammatik? ppt.
• Bech, Kristin 2012. The anaphoric status of initial
adjuncts in the history of English. DGfS workshop.
• Berkeley, George
www.maths.tcd.ie/~dwilkins/Berkeley/ETextsTCD.html
• Bolinger, Dwight 1972. Degree Words. Mouton.
• Corver, Norbert 2000. Degree adverbs as displaced
predicates. Rivista di Linguistica 12: 155-191.
• Demske, Ulrike 2010. Subordinationsmarker im
Deutschen. DGfS paper.
• Fischer, Olga 2007. Morphosyntactic Change. OUP.
• Gelderen, Elly van 2008. Where did Late merge go?
Studia Linguistica; 287-300.
• Gelderen, Elly van 2011. The Linguistic Cycle. OUP.
• Gelderen, Elly van 2013. Clause Structure. CUP.
• Grimshaw, Jane 1979. Linguistic Inquiry 10.2.
• Hasselgård, Hilde. 2010. Adjunct Adverbials in English.
Cambridge University Press.
• Komen, Erwin 2013. Finding Focus. LOT Publications.
• Lenker, Ursula 2010. Argument and rhetoric: adverbial
connectors in the history of English. Mouton.
• Lohnstein, Horst 2005. Sentence connection as
quantificational structure. In Maienborn et al (eds) Event
Arguments. Niemeyer.
• Manzini, Rita and L. Savoia. 2003. The nature of
complementizers. Rivista di Grammatica Generativa 28.
87–110.
• Meyer, Roland 2010. The C-system of relatives. DGfS.
• Munaro, Nicola & Hans-Georg Obenauer 1999. On
underspecified wh-elements in pseudo-interrogatives.
University of Venice WPL 9: 181-253.
• Nykiel, Jerzy 2013. Grammaticalization reconciled. Ms.
• Parra Guinaldo, Victor 2013. Reanalysis of OE hwæðer
in the Left Periphery. ASU PhD.
• Pesetsky, David & Esther Torrego 2006. The Syntax of
Valuation and the Interpretability of Features. In Simin
Karimi et al. Phrasal and Clausal Architecture, 262-294.
Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
• Rett, Jessica 2008. Degree Modification in Natural
Language. Rutgers PhD.
• Rizzi, Luigi 1999. On the position ‘Int(errogative)’ in the
left periphery of the clause. In Cinque, G. and G. Salvi
(eds) Current Studies in Italian Syntax. Elsevier, 287-96.
• Roussou, Anna 2010. Selecting complementizers. Lingua 120. 582603.
• Swan, Toril 1988. Sentence adverbials in English: A synchronic and
diachronic investigation. Oslo: Novus.
• Traugott, Elizabeth 1995. Subjectification in grammaticalization, in
Dieter Stein and Susan Wright, eds., Subjectivity and
Subjectivisation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 37-54.
• Traugott, Elizabeth 1997. The role of the development of discourse
markers in a theory of grammaticalization.
• Vangsnes, Øystein 2008, Decomposing manner how in colloquial
Scandinavian. Studia Linguistica 62.1: 119–141.
• Walkden, George. 2013.The status of hwæt in Old English. English
Language and Linguistics 17: 465-488
• Willis, David 2007. `Specifier-to-Head Reanalyses in the
Complementizer domain: evidence from Welsh’, Transactions of the
Philological Society 105.3, 432-480.
• Wood, Johanna 2002. Much about Such. Studia Linguistica 56: 91115.
• Zanuttini, Rafaella & Paul Portner 2003 Exclamative clauses. Lg 79:
39-81.