Skip Nav Destination
Close Modal
Update search
NARROW
Format
Journal
TocHeadingTitle
Date
Availability
1-2 of 2
Charles Clifton
Close
Follow your search
Access your saved searches in your account
Would you like to receive an alert when new items match your search?
Sort by
Journal Articles
Publisher: Journals Gateway
Linguistic Inquiry (2010) 41 (4): 681–689.
Published: 01 October 2010
Journal Articles
Publisher: Journals Gateway
Linguistic Inquiry (2006) 37 (1): 51–68.
Published: 01 January 2006
Abstract
View article
PDF
Two experiments investigated the acceptability of multiple questions. As expected, sentences violating the Superiority Condition were accepted less often than sentences obeying it.The status of the Superiority violations was not improved by the addition of a third wh , regardless of whether the third wh was an adjunct or an argument, though it was improved by the addition of a second question (e.g., and when ).Further, in a small pilot study directly comparing a sentence with adjacent final wh -phrases that may induce a stress clash ( I'd like to know who hid it where when ) with a sentence violating Superiority but avoiding the final adjacent wh -phrases ( I'd like to know where who hid it when ), half the participants indicated that the Superiority violation sentence sounded better.This suggests that the status of some additional- wh sentences may appear to improve simply because the comparison sentence with adjacent final wh -phrases is degraded.Overall, the results of the studies suggest that there is no need to complicate syntactic theory to account for the additional- wh effect, because there is no general additional- wh effect.