Adding a Third Wh-Phrase Does Not Increase the Acceptability of Object-Initial Multiple-Wh-Questions
This paper quantitatively evaluates the empirical claim that adding a third wh-phrase to object-initial multiple-wh-questions increases their acceptability (e.g., Bolinger 1978, Kayne 1983)—a claim that posed a problem for accounts of the subject/object asymmetry in multiple-wh-questions (e.g., Chom...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Other Authors: | |
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | en_US |
| Published: |
John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
2011
|
| Online Access: | http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/64657 https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3823-514X https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5912-883X |
| _version_ | 1826198559402229760 |
|---|---|
| author | Fedorenko, Evelina G. Gibson, Edward A. |
| author2 | Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences |
| author_facet | Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences Fedorenko, Evelina G. Gibson, Edward A. |
| author_sort | Fedorenko, Evelina G. |
| collection | MIT |
| description | This paper quantitatively evaluates the empirical claim that adding a third wh-phrase to object-initial multiple-wh-questions increases their acceptability (e.g., Bolinger 1978, Kayne 1983)—a claim that posed a problem for accounts of the subject/object asymmetry in multiple-wh-questions (e.g., Chomsky 1973, 1993; Lasnik & Saito 1984; Pesetsky 1987, 2000; Richards 2001). Recently, Clifton et al. (2006) evaluated this claim using quantitative methods and failed to find support for it. However, a potential concern with Clifton et al.’s results was insufficient power to detect the effect of the third wh-phrase, possibly because of variance associated with several potential interpretations of multiple-wh-questions in null contexts. The goal of this paper is to extend the findings of Clifton et al. to cases where the critical sentences are presented in supportive contexts, so that the pair-list reading—the reading that has been argued to result in Superiority effects—is unambiguously supported. The results of the current study were similar to those of Clifton et al. and therefore provide further evidence against the claim that adding a third wh-phrase to object-initial multiple-wh-questions increases their acceptability. |
| first_indexed | 2024-09-23T11:06:46Z |
| format | Article |
| id | mit-1721.1/64657 |
| institution | Massachusetts Institute of Technology |
| language | en_US |
| last_indexed | 2024-09-23T11:06:46Z |
| publishDate | 2011 |
| publisher | John Wiley & Sons, Inc. |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | mit-1721.1/646572022-09-27T17:11:54Z Adding a Third Wh-Phrase Does Not Increase the Acceptability of Object-Initial Multiple-Wh-Questions Fedorenko, Evelina G. Gibson, Edward A. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences McGovern Institute for Brain Research at MIT Gibson, Edward A. Fedorenko, Evelina G. Gibson, Edward A. This paper quantitatively evaluates the empirical claim that adding a third wh-phrase to object-initial multiple-wh-questions increases their acceptability (e.g., Bolinger 1978, Kayne 1983)—a claim that posed a problem for accounts of the subject/object asymmetry in multiple-wh-questions (e.g., Chomsky 1973, 1993; Lasnik & Saito 1984; Pesetsky 1987, 2000; Richards 2001). Recently, Clifton et al. (2006) evaluated this claim using quantitative methods and failed to find support for it. However, a potential concern with Clifton et al.’s results was insufficient power to detect the effect of the third wh-phrase, possibly because of variance associated with several potential interpretations of multiple-wh-questions in null contexts. The goal of this paper is to extend the findings of Clifton et al. to cases where the critical sentences are presented in supportive contexts, so that the pair-list reading—the reading that has been argued to result in Superiority effects—is unambiguously supported. The results of the current study were similar to those of Clifton et al. and therefore provide further evidence against the claim that adding a third wh-phrase to object-initial multiple-wh-questions increases their acceptability. 2011-06-22T20:38:11Z 2011-06-22T20:38:11Z 2010-04 Article http://purl.org/eprint/type/JournalArticle 1467-9612 1368-0005 http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/64657 Fedorenko, Evelina, and Edward Gibson. “Adding a Third Wh-phrase Does Not Increase the Acceptability of Object-initial Multiple-wh-questions.” Syntax 13.3 (2010) : 183-195. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3823-514X https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5912-883X en_US http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9612.2010.00138.x Syntax Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/ application/pdf John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Prof. Gibson via Lisa Horowitz |
| spellingShingle | Fedorenko, Evelina G. Gibson, Edward A. Adding a Third Wh-Phrase Does Not Increase the Acceptability of Object-Initial Multiple-Wh-Questions |
| title | Adding a Third Wh-Phrase Does Not Increase the Acceptability of Object-Initial Multiple-Wh-Questions |
| title_full | Adding a Third Wh-Phrase Does Not Increase the Acceptability of Object-Initial Multiple-Wh-Questions |
| title_fullStr | Adding a Third Wh-Phrase Does Not Increase the Acceptability of Object-Initial Multiple-Wh-Questions |
| title_full_unstemmed | Adding a Third Wh-Phrase Does Not Increase the Acceptability of Object-Initial Multiple-Wh-Questions |
| title_short | Adding a Third Wh-Phrase Does Not Increase the Acceptability of Object-Initial Multiple-Wh-Questions |
| title_sort | adding a third wh phrase does not increase the acceptability of object initial multiple wh questions |
| url | http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/64657 https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3823-514X https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5912-883X |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT fedorenkoevelinag addingathirdwhphrasedoesnotincreasetheacceptabilityofobjectinitialmultiplewhquestions AT gibsonedwarda addingathirdwhphrasedoesnotincreasetheacceptabilityofobjectinitialmultiplewhquestions |