| ROA: | 187 |
|---|---|
| Title: | Anti-*That-Trace Effects in Norwegian |
| Authors: | Edward Keer |
| Comment: | |
| Length: | 58 |
| Abstract: | Anti-*That-Trace Effects in Norwegian Edward W. Keer Rutgers University In Norwegian a complementizer is obligatory when a subject is wh-extracted locally from an embedded question as in (1). 1. a. Jeg vet hvem som t vant. I know who Comp t won b. *Jeg vet hvem t vant. I know who t won 'I know who won.' This phenomenon has been labled the Anti-*that-trace effect by Taraldsen (1986). In contrast, when a subject is wh-extracted long distance from an embedded clause, the complementizer is obligatorily absent - *that-trace effects - as in (2). 2. a. *Jeg vet hvem du tror som t vant. I know who you think Comp t won b. Jeg vet hvem du tror t vant. I know who you think t won 'I know who you think won.' In this paper I argue that the distribution of the complementizer in Norwegian follows from the OT syntax system proposed in Grimshaw (to appear) with the assumption that wh-phrases cannot remain in situ in Norwegian. Specifically, the complementizer is obligatory when it is the best available governor for a subject trace and absent when it blocks government of a subject trace from a better governor. In Grimshaw's system, traces are subject to two head government constraints. The general constraint T-Gov requires traces to be head governed. The specific constraint, T-Lex-Gov requires traces to be lexically governed. In configurations which exhibit *that-trace effects, the complementizer is obligatorily absent because having it violates T-Lex-Gov. In constructions showing Anti-*that-trace effects however, T-Lex-Gov cannot be satisfied. Therefore, Norwegian must settle for satisfaction of the less strict T-Gov. Other issues raised in the paper include: a definition of head government which differs from that in Grimshaw (to appear) based on multiple wh-extractions in Norwegian, the hypothesis that the forced movement of wh-phrases is a result of verb second in Norwegian, and an exploration of the consequences of my analysis for empty operator constructions (relative clauses, clefts and comparatives). |
| Type: | Paper/tech report |
| Area/Keywords: | |
| Article: | Version 1 |