Direct vs. indirect disjunction of wh-complements, as diagnosed by subordinating complementizers (2016)

Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
Since the early 1980s, there has been a debate in the semantics literature pertaining to whether wh-interrogatives can be directly disjoined, as main clauses and as complements. Those who held that the direct disjunction of wh-interrogatives was in conflict with certain theoretical considerations proposed that they could be disjoined indirectly. Indirect disjunction proceeds by first lifting both wh-interrogatives and then disjoining them; it assigns matrix-level scope to OR. As we will see, the notorious theoretical need for indirect disjunction has disappeared by today. But the factual question remains. Are wh-complements disjoined directly or indirectly? What is the fact of the matter? This paper argues that the case for indirect disjunction remains reasonably strong.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
SZADVI
Upload history
First archival date: 2016-08-26
Latest version: 5 (2017-06-18)
View other versions
Added to PP index
2016-08-26

Total views
213 ( #28,664 of 2,448,343 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
20 ( #31,633 of 2,448,343 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.