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

106 Gisbert Fanselow
focal elements (but more luxurious theories of information structure would
have the same effect). If C-INF plays a role in determining the well-formedness
of partial LFs in multiple questions as well, then (34d) (repeated here
for convenience) is able to block (34e) only if this does not prevent a particular
distribution of focality/topicality among the wh-phrases from being expressed
within the limits imposed by C-INF. If the higher degree of topicality
of wh 2 must be expressed, (34e) can be chosen. Information structure overrides
the MLC.
(34) d.[wh1 [ Σ CompA A - - - [wh1 - - - [ wh2 A - - - ]]]]]
e.[wh 2 [ Σ CompA - - - [wh A A
1 - - - [ wh2 - - - ]]]]]
4. The Nature of Exceptions
While the absence of simple superiority effects in the interest of information
structure is a widespread phenomenon, it is far from being universal, as evidenced,
e.g., by the relevant English data. The contrast between English and
German in the formation of multiple questions might be indicative of the
different importance the languages attribute to C-INF: in German, its effects
are stronger than the MLC, while it is the other way round in English. The
interaction of the MLC and the constrains of information structure would
thus be reminiscent of an optimality theoretic framework (for OT accounts
of MLC-effects, see, e.g., Müller 2001, and the constributions by Hale and
Legendre, Lee, and Vogel, this volume). We will argue, however, that such a
conclusion is not warranted. The MLC is never stronger than C-INF.
4.1. Bulgarian
Roumanian and Bulgarian are languages cited frequently when one wants to
substantiate the claim that superiority effects are not confined to English.
(59) Simple superiority effects in Roumanian and Bulgarian
a. cine ce cumpara
who what buys
b.*ce cine cumpara
c. koj kogo vizda
who whom sees
d.*kogo koj vizda