"This monograph offers an innovative understanding of the mechanisms involved in Romance 'optional' wh-in situ. New supporting evidence in favour of Cable's (2010) Grammar of Q is presented, as well as novel implementations of his original theory. In particular, it is claimed that wh-in situ idioms are characterised not only by language-specific choices between QP-projection and Q-adjunction, and between overt and covert movement of Q, but also in terms of the locus where they check the features relevant to wh-questions: while some languages check both [q] and [focus] in C, others make use of the clause-internal vP-periphery to check [focus]. Thanks to the vast amount of data presented and discussed, along with the predictions and theoretical contributions made, this monograph will be of interest to a wide range of specialists in human language, from typologists to Romance specialists and formal syntacticians, but also to the many experts in languages with overt Q-particles who wonder why Romance specialists have long been so resistant to the implementation of silent Q-particles in their theoretical models"--.

• Romance Interrogative Syntax
• Editorial page
• Title page
• Copyright page
• Dedication page
• Table of contents
• Acknowledgements
• Conventions
  • Abbreviations
  • Projections (and X′-related notations)
• Introduction
  • 0.1 Interrogative wh-movement
  • 0.2 Venetan and novel data from Trevisan
    • 0.2.1 The interrogative syntax of Trevisan
    • 0.2.2 Problems, questions, and preliminary answers
  • 0.3 Central claims of the book
• Chapter 1. Wh-in situ in Northern Italian dialects
  • Organisation of this chapter
  • 1.1 Single wh-in situ
    • 1.1.1 Wh-in situ in matrix questions
    • 1.1.2 Wh-in situ in embedded questions
      • 1.1.2.1 Long-distance construals
      • 1.1.2.2 Wh-in situ in indirect questions
  • 1.2 Different patterns of wh-doubling
    • 1.2.1 Configuration A: Fronted clitic wh-pronoun
      • 1.2.1.1 Matrix wh-questions
      • 1.2.1.2 Embedded wh-questions
    • 1.2.2 Configuration B: Fronted non-clitic wh-pronoun
      • 1.2.2.1 Matrix wh-questions
      • 1.2.2.2 Embedded wh-questions
    • 1.2.3 Configuration C: Fronted invariable wh-operator
      • 1.2.3.1 Matrix wh-questions
    • 1.2.4 Regularities in the distribution of wh-doubling
  • 1.3 Wh-in situ-related patterns in Northern Italian dialects
    • 1.3.1 Distribution of subject-clitic inversion
    • 1.3.2 Distribution of Wh-phrases
      • 1.3.2.1 Wh-in situ: The Bellunese type
      • 1.3.2.2 Wh-in situ: The Trevisan and Lombard types
  • 1.4 Intermediate remarks
• Chapter 2. On short movement of clause-internal wh-elements: Wh-to-Foc
  • Organisation of this chapter
  • 2.1 Characterising Wh-to-Foc
    • 2.1.1 Free subject inversion and the pro-drop parameter
    • 2.1.2 Are clause-internal wh-elements moved?
    • 2.1.3 Which spec is targeted by clause-internally moved wh-elements?
  • 2.2 Checking C in the presence of Wh-to-Foc: Preliminary investigation
    • 2.2.1 On [wh]- and [q]-features
    • 2.2.2 On bipartite wh-words
      • 2.2.2.1 On the illegitimacy of an extension of interrogative ClPs to all Northern Italian dialects
    • 2.2.3 The grammar of Q and consequences for optional wh-in situ
      • 2.2.3.1 Cable’s (2010) ‘Grammar of Q’
      • 2.2.3.2 Extending the theory of Q to Trevisan wh-fronting
      • 2.2.3.3 Legitimacy of sub-extraction out of frozen wh-elements
  • 2.3 Intermediate remarks
• Chapter 3. Wh-to-Foc is focus-driven
  • Organisation of this chapter
  • 3.1 A typologically interesting type between full moving and in situ languages
    • 3.1.1 Malayalam
    • 3.1.2 Bangla and Hindi-Urdu
    • 3.1.3 Bantu languages
    • 3.1.4 Greek (multiple wh-questions)
    • 3.1.5 Persian
  • 3.2 The short movement of clause-internal wh-elements is focus-movement
    • 3.2.1 Kahnemuyipour’s (2001) work on Persian focus-movement
      • 3.2.1.1 Arguments in favour of focus movement
      • 3.2.1.2 Arguments in favour of movement to specvp
    • 3.2.2 The role of [foc] in Trevisan fake wh-in situ
      • 3.2.2.1 The parallelism between contrastive focus and clause-internally moved wh-elements
      • 3.2.2.2 Trevisan wh-in situ and the roles of [foc], [q], and [wh]
  • 3.3 Intermediate conclusions
• Chapter 4. More on Trevisan wh-in situ
  • Organisation of this chapter
  • 4.1 On wh-in situ in indirect wh-questions
    • 4.1.1 Thoughts on the syntax of sewh and wh-doubling
    • 4.1.2 Functional elements in the lower Left Periphery
    • 4.1.3 Sewh licenses an interrogative operator in SpecIntP
    • 4.1.4 Concluding remarks
  • 4.2 On wh-in situ within islands
    • 4.2.1 Trevisan strong islands and the puzzling optionality of subject-clitic inversion
    • 4.2.2 Massive pied-piping of strong islands
      • 4.2.2.1 Application to Trevisan strong islands
    • 4.2.3 Wh-phrases are bare within strong islands, but not within weak islands
    • 4.2.4 English limited pied-piping vs Trevisan tlingit-like syntax
    • 4.2.5 Concluding remarks
• Chapter 5. On the theory of Romance wh-in situ
  • Organisation of this chapter
  • 5.1 Type-specific analyses: Moving further!
    • 5.1.1 Left-peripheral fake wh-in situ
      • 5.1.1.1 Why wh-movement?
      • 5.1.1.2 When the whole ip moves to the Left Periphery
    • 5.1.2 ip-internal real wh-in situ
      • 5.1.2.1 Evidence against wh-movement
      • 5.1.2.2 Northern italian wh-in situ is real wh-in situ
    • 5.1.3 The Trevisan data in the theory of Northern Italian wh-in situ
  • 5.2 Beyond Northern Italian dialects
    • 5.2.1 Sentence final (requirement). Or not?
    • 5.2.2 (Optional) tp-internal wh-movement
    • 5.2.3 Embedded wh-in situ
      • 5.2.3.1 Long-distance questions
      • 5.2.3.2 Indirect questions
    • 5.2.4 Sensitivity to islands
      • 5.2.4.1 Contemporary Spoken French
      • 5.2.4.2 Spanish and Portuguese
  • 5.3 Features responsible for Northern Italian wh-in situ(s)
    • 5.3.1 Pure wh-in situ
    • 5.3.2 Three types of wh-in situ
      • 5.3.2.1 Mixed pictures of wh-movement and wh-scoping
      • 5.3.2.2 Variables and types of Northern Italian in situ/ex situ alternation
    • 5.3.3 Wh-to-Foc and the theory of Northern Italian wh-in situ
      • 5.3.3.1 Trevisan and similar varieties (type I): qp and Q-adjunction, plus focus movement
      • 5.3.3.2 Lombard-like varieties (type II): Mixed languages with different availability of EPP in Foclow
      • 5.3.3.3 Bellunese (type III): A mixed language with a [wh]-feature in QembP…or something else?
  • 5.4 Concluding remarks
• Conclusions
• References
• Index