Conclusion6 Conclusion
In this chapter we have introduced the final part of the clause structure of the English
sentence. This part of the structure, built on top of the IP serves a number of purposes,
but collectively seems to be to do with the syntactic arrangement of operators of one
type or another. With wh-movement, both in interrogative clauses and relative clauses,
the wh-element is an operator with either quantifier-like or anaphoric function. The
interpretation of this element is dependent on movement which has a dual role, both to
mark the clause as having a special interpretation (as an interrogative or relative) and
to establish a relationship between that interpretation and a position in the clause itself.
Hence, questions can be seen to be ‘about’ the subject or the clause, etc. and relatives
can relate the modified noun to the object of the clause, etc. Focus and negative
fronting may also have a similar function in that their interpretation is quantifier-like.
Topicalisation, although not quantificational, may be seen as anaphoric in that the
topic refers to some element established in the discourse.
In connection with the movements of these operator-like elements, we also have
seen a series of head movements to various positions. These appear to provide the
operators with something to agree with and so they play a supporting role in allowing
the operators to fulfil their function.
With the end of this chapter we come to the end of the clause, so to speak. In the
next chapter we will concentrate on the relationship between elements in different
clauses and in particular across non-finite clauses which appear to more readily allow
such relationships to be established.
Check Questions
1 What are complementizers in English? How is it possible to argue that
complementizers act like heads?
2 Which type of clauses must be introduced by a complementizer and which need
not, i.e. what is the distribution of overt versus covert complementizers?
3 What are canonical structural realisation principles?
4 What runs counter to the claim that complementizers determine the force of a
clause?
5 What does it suggest that complementizers and inverted auxiliaries are in
complementary distribution?
6 What motivates wh-movement?
7 What are operators?
8 How can A-movement and A-bar movement be distinguished?
9 What are the two sets of assumptions proposed to underlie I-to-C movement?
10 How can it be shown that ’whether’ is not a complementizer?
11 What is the Doubly-Filled COMP Filter?