Much debate in recent years has focused on whether postverbal elements (PVEs) in SOV Hindi are derived via leftward movement compatible with the Linear Correspondence Axiom ( Mahajan 1997a , b , 2003 ) or whether they must be assumed to result from some kind of rightward non-antisymmetric movement ( Bhatt and Dayal 2007 , Manetta 2012 ). A second phenomenon, scope restrictions on wh -in- situ elements in postverbal CPs, is often linked to the syntactic analysis of PVEs. Comparing Hindi with Bangla, this article shows that PVEs in Indic languages are not derived in a uniform way and that the wh- scope restriction needs to be considered independently of the syntax of nonclausal PVEs.

Bangla has commonly been assumed to be an SOV wh -in-situ language. Here it is suggested that both of these characterizations are incorrect and that Bangla actually has obligatory overt wh -movement from a basic SVO word order. This is disguised by a conspiracy of factors but revealed in restrictions on wh -scope and certain apparently optional word order possibilities with complement clauses. Adopting a different perspective on the SOV status of Bangla allows for a simple explanation of the patterns observed and raises the possibility that other “ wh -in-situ” languages may also have (obligatory) overt wh -movement.