Wh -in-situ languages have a special role to play in investigating the relation between the wh -syntax of a language and the availability of sluicing-like constructions (SLCs). Van Craenenbroeck and Lipták (2013) propose that whether a language exhibits genuine sluicing should be predictable from the syntax of the language’s wh -questions in nonelliptical contexts. We refine this formulation by considering SLCs in two contrasting wh -in-situ languages, Hindi-Urdu and Uzbek. Hindi-Urdu wh -movement occurs in the narrow syntax, but is obscured by PF processes; in Uzbek, no narrow syntax dependency is involved. Correspondingly, only Hindi-Urdu SLCs involve genuine sluicing; Uzbek SLCs are derived from reduced copular clauses. Thus, narrow syntax wh -movement may be obscured by lower-copy pronunciation in nonelliptical environments; the head of the wh -chain is then pronounced in combination with ellipsis, but not otherwise. Here, we demonstrate that the availability of genuine sluicing in Hindi-Urdu and Uzbek corresponds directly to the specific properties of their wh -systems, but not necessarily to the surface position of wh -material in a typical constituent question.

I point out that the generally accepted theory of single-pair versus pair-list readings for multiple wh -questions in the Slavic family, as instantiated in Bošković 2001a, predicts the wrong result for Russian multiple wh -questions and for coordinated multiple wh -questions in several languages. I suggest a reformulation of the connection between the structure and the interpretation of multiple wh -questions that relies on the structural adjacency of two or more wh -items at LF, and I discuss a number of cases in which this reformulation appears to make the right predictions for multiple wh -questions containing clitics.