Minimality Effects in Syntax · The MLC and Derivational Economy ...

102 Gisbert Fanselow
3.3. The absence of simple superiority effects: caused by scrambling?
A second attempt of capturing (35) assumes that the object in fact c-commands
the subject at the point of derivation when movement to Spec, CP is
carried out. Under this circumstance, the MLC does not have to be relaxed
in order to explain (35): Given that the order object > subject is in principle
always grammatical in a German (53a,b), the question arises whether (53c)
really is not in line with even the strictest version of the MLC. After all,
(53c) might be derived from (53d) rather than (53e). In the former case, the
highest wh-phrase is moved to Spec,CP in (53c), as predicted by the MLC.
(53) Object-subject order in German and the MLC
a. dass fast jeden jemand angerufen hatte
that nearly everyone.acc someone.nom called had
“that someone had called nearly everyone”
b. dass fast jeden wer angerufen hatte
that nearly everone.acc someone.nom called had
“that someone had called nearly everyone”
c. wen hat wer eingeladen
who.acc has who.nom invited
“who has invited whom?”
d. hat [wen [wer eingeladen]]
e. hat [wer [wen eingeladen]]
In other words, (53c) might be grammatical because additional movement
operations (scrambling) can change the c-command relations established by
Merge. 6 If the object can in general be placed in front of the subject, structures
such as (53d) can be derived in which the wh-object c-commands the
wh-subject. Even in its strictest version, the MLC cannot block the subsequent
movement of the wh-object to Spec, CP. See, e.g., Fanselow (1998,
2001), Haider (1986), Wiltschko (1998), among others, for different versions
of this account.
According to Fanselow (1998), the contrasts in (54) corroborate the view
that apparent violations of superiority are licensed by scrambling. Certain
wh-phrases such as wen von den Studenten (54a) or was für Frauen (54d)
can either move to Spec,CP as a whole, or be split up in simple and multiple
questions (54b,e). In the latter case, only the wh-part of the phrase under-