CAS LX 500 Topics in Linguistics: Questions Spring 2006 March 2, b: Prosody and Japanese wh-questions

Similar documents
CAS LX 500 Topics in Linguistics: Focus October 15, 2009 Prosody, focus, and Japanese wh-questions

CAS LX 522 Syntax I Fall 2000 October 10, 2000 Week 5: Case Theory and θ Theory. θ-theory continued

(1) Agreement and Non-agreement Languages: Focus, broadly conceived, is computationally equivalent to agreement.

CAS LX 523 Syntax II Spring 2001 March 13, (1) A qp. Kayne, Richard (1995). The antisymmetry of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

X-bar theory. X-bar :

Control and Tough- Movement

Final Exam Theory Quiz Answer Page

Control and Tough- Movement

Spring 2017 Ling 620 The Semantics of Control Infinitives: A First Introduction to De Se Attitudes

Introduction to Algebra: The First Week

Ling 98a: The Meaning of Negation (Week 5)

Ch. 2: Phrase Structure Syntactic Structure (basic concepts) A tree diagram marks constituents hierarchically

Other types of Movement

What is proof? Lesson 1

Uniformity of Theta- Assignment Hypothesis. Transit i ve s. Unaccusatives. Unergatives. Double object constructions. Previously... Bill lied.

Semantics and Generative Grammar. Quantificational DPs, Part 3: Covert Movement vs. Type Shifting 1

Outline. Darou as an entertain modal with a shiftable deictic agent. Rising Declaratives: darou. Falling Declaratives: darou. an inquisitive approach

Spring 2017 Ling 620. An Introduction to the Semantics of Tense 1

Section 20: Arrow Diagrams on the Integers

Proseminar on Semantic Theory Fall 2010 Ling 720 The Basics of Plurals: Part 1 1 The Meaning of Plural NPs and the Nature of Predication Over Plurals

Good Hours. We all have our good hours. Whether it be in the early morning on a hot summer

Pragmatic Inference with Conditionals and Concessives in Japanese

CS 124 Math Review Section January 29, 2018

MITOCW ocw-18_02-f07-lec02_220k

START: Read 1 Guide for Repeated Interactive Read-Alouds

Sharpening the empirical claims of generative syntax through formalization

An Introduction to Electricity and Circuits

EXAMPLE 7: EIGENVALUE PROBLEM EXAMPLE. x ks1. ks2. fs1. fs2 !!! +!!! =!!!!! 4) State variables:!!!,!!!,!!!,!!! (Four SV s here!) =!!!

Proseminar on Semantic Theory Fall 2010 Ling 720. Remko Scha (1981/1984): Distributive, Collective and Cumulative Quantification

Appendix A. Jargon. A.1 Strange technical terms

Past-as-Past in Japanese Counterfactuals

Movement and alternatives don t mix: Evidence from Japanese

Quantifier Interaction in GB and Minimalism (II)

Contingency Tables. Safety equipment in use Fatal Non-fatal Total. None 1, , ,128 Seat belt , ,878

(7) a. [ PP to John], Mary gave the book t [PP]. b. [ VP fix the car], I wonder whether she will t [VP].

Solving with Absolute Value

Some binding facts. Binding in HPSG. The three basic principles. Binding theory of Chomsky

CHAPTER 1. Introduction

Linear Algebra Basics

Descriptive Statistics (And a little bit on rounding and significant digits)

(5) Ú who á = people context = {John, Mary, } cf. Ú John á = John. knowing who bought what Syntax/Semantics of Questions, March 23, 1999

Quantification: Quantifiers and the Rest of the Sentence

MATH 310, REVIEW SHEET 2

Introduction to Computational Complexity

Testing a Hash Function using Probability

MIT BLOSSOMS INITIATIVE

A Multi-Modal Combinatory Categorial Grammar. A MMCCG Analysis of Japanese Nonconstituent Clefting

Grade 8 Chapter 7: Rational and Irrational Numbers

Steve Smith Tuition: Maths Notes

Generalized Quantifiers Logical and Linguistic Aspects

Lecture 11: Extrema. Nathan Pflueger. 2 October 2013

Section 1.x: The Variety of Asymptotic Experiences

MATH240: Linear Algebra Review for exam #1 6/10/2015 Page 1

The Semantics of Definite DPs 1. b. Argument Position: (i) [ A politician ] arrived from Washington. (ii) Joe likes [ the politician ].

Example. How to Guess What to Prove

Complex Numbers: A Brief Introduction. By: Neal Dempsey. History of Mathematics. Prof. Jennifer McCarthy. July 16, 2010

irst we need to know that there are many ways to indicate multiplication; for example the product of 5 and 7 can be written in a variety of ways:

Basics of Proofs. 1 The Basics. 2 Proof Strategies. 2.1 Understand What s Going On

MA 1125 Lecture 15 - The Standard Normal Distribution. Friday, October 6, Objectives: Introduce the standard normal distribution and table.

Chapter 7. Bound Systems are perhaps the most interesting cases for us to consider. We see much of the interesting features of quantum mechanics.

PHIL12A Section answers, 14 February 2011

Class Notes: Tsujimura (2007), Ch. 5. Syntax (1), pp (3) a. [[akai hon]-no hyooshi] b. [akai [hon-no hyooshi]]

Continuation. Lecture 24: Continuations, continued. Computations. What is a continuation?

Regression, part II. I. What does it all mean? A) Notice that so far all we ve done is math.

Discrete Mathematics and Probability Theory Spring 2014 Anant Sahai Note 10

MI 4 Mathematical Induction Name. Mathematical Induction

Math 31 Lesson Plan. Day 5: Intro to Groups. Elizabeth Gillaspy. September 28, 2011

Introducing Proof 1. hsn.uk.net. Contents

Andrew Carnie, Structural Relations. The mathematical properties of phrase structure trees

HAMPSHIRE COLLEGE: YOU CAN T GET THERE FROM HERE : WHY YOU CAN T TRISECT AN ANGLE, DOUBLE THE CUBE, OR SQUARE THE CIRCLE. Contents. 1.

An Intuitive Introduction to Motivic Homotopy Theory Vladimir Voevodsky

CSC 5170: Theory of Computational Complexity Lecture 9 The Chinese University of Hong Kong 15 March 2010

= 5 2 and = 13 2 and = (1) = 10 2 and = 15 2 and = 25 2

Figure 1: Doing work on a block by pushing it across the floor.

Semantics and Generative Grammar. The Semantics of Adjectival Modification 1. (1) Our Current Assumptions Regarding Adjectives and Common Ns

Discrete Structures Proofwriting Checklist

PART ONE. Once upon a time there was a very special baby. who grew up to be very wise. and to tell us how to be kind. His name was Jesus.

Logic. Propositional Logic: Syntax

DEVELOPING MATH INTUITION

Chapter 5. Piece of Wisdom #2: A statistician drowned crossing a stream with an average depth of 6 inches. (Anonymous)

Algebra. Here are a couple of warnings to my students who may be here to get a copy of what happened on a day that you missed.

Contingency Tables. Contingency tables are used when we want to looking at two (or more) factors. Each factor might have two more or levels.

Ling 240 Lecture #15. Syntax 4

Hamblin Semantics & Focus

DIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONS

Grundlagenmodul Semantik All Exercises

The following are generally referred to as the laws or rules of exponents. x a x b = x a+b (5.1) 1 x b a (5.2) (x a ) b = x ab (5.

Lecture 10: Powers of Matrices, Difference Equations

Interpreting quotations

MATLAB Project 2: MATH240, Spring 2013

Lesson 19. Jesus Walks on Water. John 6:16-21

Spring 2018 Ling 620 Introduction to Semantics of Questions: Questions as Sets of Propositions (Hamblin 1973, Karttunen 1977)

The Formal Architecture of. Lexical-Functional Grammar. Ronald M. Kaplan and Mary Dalrymple

12. Perturbed Matrices

[Disclaimer: This is not a complete list of everything you need to know, just some of the topics that gave people difficulty.]

SECTION 9.2: ARITHMETIC SEQUENCES and PARTIAL SUMS

MA 1128: Lecture 08 03/02/2018. Linear Equations from Graphs And Linear Inequalities

Lecture 4: Training a Classifier

Semantics and Generative Grammar. Expanding Our Formalism, Part 1 1

The Shunammite Woman s Land Restored 2 Kings 8:1-6

Transcription:

CAS LX 500 Topics in Linguistics: Questions Spring 2006 March 2, 2006 Paul Hagstrom 7b: Prosody and Japanese wh-questions Prosody by phase Prosody and syntax seem to fit quite tightly together. Ishihara, Shinichiro (2004). Prosody by phase: Evidence from focus intonation wh-scope correspondence in Japanese. In Ishihara, Schmitz, and Schwarz (eds.), Interdisciplinary studies on information structure 1: 77 119. As we saw last time, there is a prosodic depression between the wh-word and the ka with which it takes scope. (1) a. Náoya-ga nánika-o nomíya-de nónda. Naoya-NOM something-acc bar-loc drank Naoya drank something at the bar. b. Náoya-ga náni-o nomíya-de nónda no? Naoya-NOM what-acc bar-loc drank Q What did Naoya drink at the bar?

(2) a. Náoya-wa [ Mári-ga nánika-o nomíya-de nónda to ] ímademo omótteiru. Naoya-TOP Mari-NOM something-acc bar-loc drank that even.now think Naoya still thinks that Mari drank something at the bar. b. Náoya-wa [ Mári-ga náni-o nomíya-de nónda to ] ímademo omótteiru no? Naoya-TOP Mari-NOM what-acc bar-loc drank that even.now think Q What did Naoya still think that Mari drank at the bar? c. Náoya-wa [ Mári-ga náni-o nomíya-de nónda ka ] ímademo obóeteiru. Naoya-TOP Mari-NOM what-acc bar-loc drank Q even.now remember Naoya still remembers what Mari drank at the bar. So, it seems like it s kind of obvious what s going on. Depress from a wh-phrase to its ka.

Yet, how does this work? One relatively common type of story is based on the idea that the phonological string is divided into prosodic units, creating a hierarchical structure not unlike the syntactic structure (but not directly matching it either). (3) a. This is the cat that killed the rat that ate the malt that lay in the house that Jack built. b. [ CP This is [ DP the cat [ CP that killed [ DP the rat [ CP that ate [ DP the malt [ CP that ]]]]]]] c. ( IP Thís is the cát)( IP that kílled the rát)( IP that áte the mált)( IP that láy in the house) (4) Grèen bambóo gròws in the nórth. But I thought it was the red kind. No (5) Gréen bámboo gròws in the nórth. (6) (Green bamboo)(grows in the north) (7) (Green)(bamboo)(grows in the north) (8) a. Don t clash (two stresses in a row within a phrase) b. Assign stress to each edge of a phrase (left, then right) (\ doesn t count) c. A focus terminates the phrase. d. Subjects form their own phrase. (9) Three mathematicians in ten derive a lemma. (10) Three mathematicians intend to rival Emma. (11) Bìg garáges scáre me. Don t they all scare you? No (12) Bíg garáges scáre me. Back to Japanese: A wh-word wipes out all phrase boundaries until the associated Q? (13) Náoya-wa [ Mári-ga nánika-o nomíya-de nónda to ] ímademo omótteiru. ( )( ) ( )( ) (14) Náoya-wa [ Mári-ga náni-o nomíya-de nónda to ] ímademo omótteiru no? ( ) ( )( ) (Although there probably still needs to be something additional said: the pitch in that long phrase is still reduced.) Ok, sensible enough.

But Ishihara did a more precise experiment and discovered a couple of things. (15) A. [ X [ WH X X Q ] X C ] B. [ X [ X X X Q ] X C ] C. [ WH [ WH X X Q ] X Q ] D. [ WH [ X X X C ] X Q ] P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 Notice: P3 is (statistically significantly) lower for C than for D. P5 is the same for C and D, but lower than for A and B. What s different between C and D with respect to P3? And the same with respect to P5?

Ah it s cumulative. (16) A. [ X [ WH X X Q ] X C ] B. [ X [ X X X Q ] X C ] C. [ WH [ WH X X Q ] X Q ] D. [ WH [ X X X C ] X Q ] P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 Assuming: a. Pitch peaks decline over time within a constituent (downstep) b. Pitch is reset when leaving an embedded constituent (P5) There are complications, surely (like why did A land between C and D in P5?), but this does suggest that one depression is overlaid on the other in C, which is why P3 is even lower in C than it is in D. It s as if we compute the innermost prosody first, then add to it the outermost prosody. Simple versions of the wipe out phrases story don t work easily, or at least would also need to assume that there are two passes and something is determined in the embedded clause before the main clause is processed. Well, we have independently an idea of why the computation might proceed in these chunks. They re phases. You compute one, spell it out, move on to the next one up. (17) a. Náoya-wa [ Mári-ga rámu-o nomíya-de nónda to] ímademo omótteiru. Naoya-TOP Mari-NOM rum-acc bar-loc drank that even.now think Naoya still thinks that Mari drank rum at the bar. b. Náoya-wa [ Mári-ga náni-o nomíya-de nónda ka] ímademo obóeteiru. Naoya-TOP Mari-NOM what-acc bar-loc Q that even.now remember Naoya still remembers what Mari drank at the bar. c. rámu-o Náoya-wa [ Mári-ga t nomíya-de nónda to] ímademo omótteiru. rum-acc Naoya-TOP Mari-NOM bar-loc drank that even.now think Naoya still thinks that Mari drank rum at the bar. d. náni-o Náoya-wa [ Mári-ga t nomíya-de nónda ka] ímademo obóeteiru. what-acc Naoya-TOP Mari-NOM bar-loc Q that even.now remember Naoya still remembers what Mari drank at the bar.

In D, the wh-word scrambled beyond its Q, so it will have to go back for interpretation. We ll look at nonda and imademo to see what pitches they get. What do we expect? One reasonable expectation might be: a. = = b. Lo = c. = = d. Lo = So far, as expected. A difference between A and B at P1, none at P2. But C vs. D shows a difference at both. In particular, P2 in D is still depressed.

Schematically, what this tells us is this: (18) a. Top [ Subj Obj V C] V C. b. Top [ Subj WH V Q] V C. c. Obj Top [ Subj t V C] V C. d. WH Top [ Subj t V Q] V C. Why would the depression continue beyond the ka associated with the scrambled wh? Suppose we re building this from the bottom up (19) a. WH V b. Subj WH V c. [ TP Subj WH V ] Q d. [ CP WH [ TP Subj t V ] Q ] spellout e. [ CP WH [ TP Subj t V ] Q] V f. [ CP [ TP WH Top [ CP t! [ TP Subj t V ] Q ] V ] C ] spellout. g. [ CP [ TP WH Top [ CP t! [ TP Subj t V ] Q ] V ] C ] It s subtle, but it s (with a couple of assumptions) what we d expect if the prosody (not just the syntax) is computed in phases too It s nice as far as it goes, but it makes a couple of further predictions that it would be nice to test. One of them has to do with the fact that vp is supposed to be a phase too. Another one would be: (20) Top [ WH Subj [ Subj Obj V Q] V C] V C It would be nice to know whether it holds up here too that is, whether the middle verb is depressed, but the outer verb is reset. Returning briefly to mo, creating NPIs or universal quantifiers from wh-words: (21) dáre-mo-ga kita. who-mo-nom came Everyone came. (22) dare-mo kó-nakat-ta. who-mo come-neg-past No one came.

(23) Náoya-wa dóno-wáin-mo nomá-nakat-ta Naoya-TOP which-wine-mo drink-neg-past Naoya didn t drink any kind of wine. (24) Náoya-wa [ Mári-ga náni-o nomíya-de nónda to]-mo iwa-nakat-ta Naoya-TOP Mari-NOM what-acc bar-loc drank that mo say-neg-past Naoya didn t say Mari drank anything at the bar. One thing I don t see here is any evidence of that purported sustained high tone between mo and nai perhaps this is only for daremo and not for [ dare ]-mo? (25) áru nyúusu-wa [ Nómo-ga dáre-ni nákkuru-o nágeta to]-mo óokiku hoozi-nákat-ta certain news-top N.-NOM who-dat kn ball-acc pitched C mo widely broadcasted One news program did not broadcast widely for any person x that Nomo pitched a knuckleball to x. Also, Ishihara (2003) notes that there is a another way this can come out, removing the lexical accents between dare and mo which he suggests is connected to the contrast between dáremo-ga everyone and daremo anyone.

What you re supposed to see here is no accent on dare (but seemingly one on ni), and a pretty much linear decline until reaching mo. It seems like a way we could describe this is as an impossibility of focusing anything between the wh-word and its binder. (Another wh-word, maybe, but perhaps that counts as the same kind of thing if it is focused, after all, it has to share the same binder. You want it to have a different binder, you have to leave the wh-word unstressed.) Still, it doesn t seem like syntax the downstressed area is c-commanded by the wh-word. It s not the area in which you can t have intervenors, for example. It must be operating on independent principles.