Skip to main content
Log in

Extraction and reconstruction

  • Published:
Natural Language Semantics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The possibility of extraction across awh-island is usually assumed to be dependent on whether or not the constituent in question can undergo “long” (i.e., nonlocal) Ā-movement across the island. However, the question of how to make a principled distinction between those elements which can violate locality and those which cannot is still rather controversial. I will propose that there are no well-formed locality violations in these cases, and that the grammaticality patterns observed derive from a semantic filter on the escape hatch used to bypass the island. In other words, if a phrase is extracted across awh-island, it must adjoin to the island in order to get by. This adjunction site is restricted by the interpretive component: only traces which are interpreted as variables of typee can occur in this position, while higher-order variables are not allowed. This restriction is shown to capture the known facts aboutwh-island violations, as well as some less known phenomena, such as the absence of functional (and pair-list) readings acrosswh-islands.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aoun, Joseph, Norbert Hornstein, David Lightfoot, and Amy Weinberg: 1987, ‘Two Types of Locality’,Linguistic Inquiry 18, 537–577.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barss, Andrew: 1986,Chains and Anaphoric Dependence, Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.

  • Bittner, Maria: 1993,Cross-Linguistic Semantics, ms., Rutgers University.

  • Chierchia, Gennaro: 1993, ‘Questions with Quantifiers’,Natural Language Semantics 1, 181–234.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, Noam: 1986,Barriers, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, Noam: 1991, ‘Some Notes on Economy of Derivation and Representation’, in Robert Freidin (ed.),Principles and Parameters in Comparative Grammar, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., pp. 417–454.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, Noam: 1993, ‘A Minimalist Program for Linguistic Theory’, in Kenneth Hale and Samuel Jay Keyser (eds.),The View from Building 20: Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., pp. 1–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cinque, Guglielmo: 1990,Types of Ā-Dependencies, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diesing, Molly: 1992,Indefinites, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dobrovie-Sorin, Carmen: 1993, ‘What Does QR Raise?’, in Jan Koster and Henk van Riemsdijk (eds.),The Syntax of Romanian: Comparative Studies in Romance, Studies in Generative Grammar 40, Mouton de Gruyter Berlin, pp. 242–277.

  • Engdahl, Elisabet: 1986,Constituent Questions, Kluwer, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fodor, Janet Dean, and Ivan Sag: 1982, ‘Referential and Quantificational Indefinites’,Linguistics and Philosophy 5, 355–398.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frampton, John: 1990,The Fine Structure of Wh-Movement and the Proper Formulation of the ECP, ms., Northeastern University.

  • Groenendijk, Jeroen, and Martin Stokhof: 1984,Studies on the Semantics of Questions and the Pragmatics of Answers, Academisch Proefschrift, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamblin, C. L.: 1971, ‘Questions in Montague English’,Foundations of Language 10, 41–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heim, Irene: 1987, ‘Where Does the Definiteness Restriction Apply? Evidence from the Definiteness of Variables’, in Eric Reuland and Alice ter Meulen (eds.),The Representation of (In)definiteness, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., pp. 21–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heim, Irene: 1993, ‘Anaphora and Semantic Interpretation: A Reinterpretation of Reinhart's Approach’, SfS-Report 07-93,Tübingen Working Papers, University of Tübingen.

  • Higginbotham, James: 1993, ‘Interrogatives’, in Kenneth Hale and Samuel Jay Keyser (eds.),The View from Building 20: Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., pp. 195–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huang, C.-T. James: 1982,Logical Relations in Chinese and the Theory of Grammar, Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.

  • Iatridou, Sabine: 1991,Clitics and Island Effects, ms., MIT.

  • Iatridou, Sabine, and Anthony Kroch: 1992, ‘The Licensing of CP-recursion and its Relevance to the Germanic Verb-Second Phenomenon’,Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 50, 1–24, Lund, Sweden.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, David: 1989, ‘Demonstratives’, in J. Almog et al. (eds.),Themes from Kaplan, Oxford University Press, Oxford., pp. 481–563.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karttunen, Lauri: 1977, ‘The Syntax and Semantics of Questions’,Linguistics and Philosophy 1, 3–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kayne, Richard: 1983, ‘Connectedness’,Linguistic Inquiry 14, 223–249.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koopman, Hilda, and Dominique Sportiche: 1985, ‘Theta-Theory and Extraction’,GLOW Newsletter 14 (paper presented at the 1985 GLOW Colloquium in Brussels).

  • Kroch, Anthony: 1989,Amount Quantification, Referentiality, and Long Wh-Movement, ms., University of Pennsylvania.

  • Lasnik, Howard, and Mamoru Saito: 1984, ‘On the Nature of Proper Government’,Linguistic Inquiry 15, 235–289.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lasnik, Howard, and Mamoru Saito: 1991,Move α, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Longobardi, Giuseppe: 1987, ‘Extraction from NP and the Proper Notion of Head Government’, in Alessandra Giorgi and Giuseppe Longobardi (eds.),The Syntax of Noun Phrases, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 57–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ludlow, Peter, and Stephen Neale: 1991, ‘Indefinite Descriptions: In Defense of Russell’,Linguistics and Philosophy 14, 171–202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manzini, Maria Rita: 1991,Locality, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milsark, Gary: 1977, ‘Toward an Explanation of Certain Peculiarities in the Existential Construction in English’,Linguistic Analysis 3, 1–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pesetsky, David: 1987, ‘Wh-in-situ: Movement and Unselective Binding’, in Eric Reuland and Alice ter Meulen (eds.),The Representation of (In)definiteness, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., pp. 98–129.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinhart, Tanya: 1979, ‘A Second COMP Position’, in Adriana Belletti et al. (eds.) (1981),Theory of Markedness in Generative Grammar: Proceedings of the 1979 GLOW Conference, Scuola Normale Superiore, Pisa, pp. 517–557.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinhart, Tanya: 1983,Anaphora and Semantic Interpretation, Croom Helm, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rizzi, Luigi: 1990,Relativized Minimality, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rizzi, Luigi: 1992, ‘Argument/Adjunct (A)symmetries’, in K. Broderick (ed.),Proceedings of NELS 22, GLSA, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rooth, Mats: 1985,Association with Focus, Ph.D. dissertation, GLSA, University of Masschusetts, Amherst.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rullman, Hotze: 1993,Scope Ambiguities in How Many-Questions, paper presented at the 1993 LSA meeting, Los Angeles.

  • Sloan, Kelly: 1991, ‘Quantifier-Wh Interaction’,MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 15, pp. 219–227. Cambridge, Mass.

  • von Stechow, Arnim: 1991, ‘Syntax und Semantik’, Article III.7 in Arnim von Stechow and Dieter Wunderlich (eds.),Semantik/Semantics: An International Handbook of Contemporary Research, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Szabolcsi, Anna, and Frans Zwarts: 1993, ‘Weak Islands and an Algebraic Semantics for Scope Taking’,Natural Language Semantics 1, 235–284.

    Google Scholar 

  • Viker, Sten: 1990,Verb Movement and the Licensing of NP-positions in the Germanic Languages, Ph.D. dissertation, Université de Genève.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

I am particularly indebted to Irene Heim for her thorough comments and technical suggestions during various stages of this work. I would also like to thank Jim Higginbotham, Alec Marantz, and Luigi Rizzi for many stimulating and helpful comments. Versions of this paper have been presented, between February and June 1993, at the XIX Convegno di Grammatica Generativa in Trento, and at the universities of Köln and Tübingen. I would like to thank those audiences, in particular Sigrid Beck, Daniel Büring, Gennaro Chierchia, and Arnim von Stechow. I am also grateful to Hotze Rullmann, who independently arrived at much the same conclusion as I did, for sharing his work with me. Thanks also to the two anonymous reviewers for thoughtful comments and criticism. This work was supported by an NSF Graduate Fellowship.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cresti, D. Extraction and reconstruction. Nat Lang Seman 3, 79–122 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01252885

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01252885

Keywords

Navigation