<html><head><meta name="Generator" content="PocoMail 3 HTML/CSS Generator"/>
<style type="text/css"><!--
p{display:block;font-family:"Arial";font-size:13pt;color:black;margin:0.00in;text-align:left;}
LI{display:list-item;font-family:"Arial";font-size:0pt;color:black;margin-top:0.00in;margin-bottom:0.00in;text-align:left;}
td{display:block;font-family:"Arial";font-size:0pt;color:black;margin-left:000in;margin-right:0.00in;text-align:left;}
body{}
--></style>
</head><BODY BGCOLOR="#F0F0F0"><p><SPAN style="font-family:'Arial';">Dear LFG list readers,</SPAN></p>
<p> </p>
<p><SPAN style="font-family:'Arial';">I'm working with a language (Copala Trique) where extraction in wh-questions shows the following schematic pattern. For a transitive, extracting the possessor of the object is good, but extracting the possessor of the subject is bad:</SPAN></p>
<p> </p>
<p><SPAN style="font-family:'Arial';">OK Whose did John see [__ dog]?</SPAN></p>
<p><SPAN style="font-family:'Arial';">*Whose [__ dog] bit John?<br/></SPAN></p>
<p><SPAN style="font-family:'Arial';">For intransitives, extracting the possessor of an unaccusative subject is good, but extraction from an unergative is bad:</SPAN></p>
<p> </p>
<p><SPAN style="font-family:'Arial';">OKWhose [__ sister] died/fell?</SPAN></p>
<p><SPAN style="font-family:'Arial';">*Whose [__ sister] ran/sang?</SPAN></p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p><SPAN style="font-family:'Arial';">The language is VSO, and the interrogative is to the left of the verb, with the remaining arguments to the right, so it's pretty clear where the extraction has taken place and where it has not.</SPAN></p>
<p> </p>
<p><SPAN style="font-family:'Arial';">My question is how to account for this pattern in LFG. I can see that one possibility is that the unaccusatives actually have their sole argument bearing the OBJ role, while unergatives have their argument in the SUBJ role. In that case, the analysis is relatively simple -- the path for the interrogative may not include a SUBJ. </SPAN></p>
<p> </p>
<p><SPAN style="font-family:'Arial';">But suppose the sole argument in an unaccusative is really the SUBJ. Is there a good way to express the generalization that extraction is good from transitive objects and unaccusative subjects? Could we use the [+/- r], [+/-o] features from the mapping theory and say that the extracted element is GF [-r]?</SPAN></p>
<p> </p>
<p><SPAN style="font-family:'Arial';">Thoughts and comments welcome,</SPAN></p>
<p> </p>
<p><SPAN style="font-family:'Arial';"> Aaron Broadwell</SPAN></p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p><SPAN style="font-family:'Arial';"></SPAN></p>
</body></html>