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

112 Gisbert Fanselow
(67) Absence of superiority effects in certain contexts in English
a. which book did which person read
b. I know what everyone was supposed to do. But what did who
actually do?
However, reference to (67) allone does not explain why (68a) sounds bad to
the English ear, while its one-to-one translation into German (68b) is grammatical.
(68) a.*what will who see
b. was wird wer sehen
The key to an understanding of this contrast lies in the observation that who
is a topic in (68a), while wer can be focal in (68b), and bear focal stress. If
wh-pronouns are inherently indefinite, and constitute bad topics, the different
status of (68a,b) can be understood. A number of facts support this view. First,
the acceptability of a crossing structure depends of the degree to which the
subject wh-phrase can be interpreted as a referential category, as discourselinked,
as a potential topic.
(69) Crossing effects as a function of the potential topicality of the subject
a. what did a friend of who say to Bill?
b. what did whose friends say to Bill?
c.*what did each friend of who say to Bill (Hornstein 1995: 147)
d.*what did how many men buy?
Second, Erteschik-Shir (1997: 190) observes that object initial questions are
in general relatively bad in English when the subject is an indefinite, a weak
quantifier. Obviously, the unacceptability of (70b) (with a non-generic nonspecific
reading of a boy) cannot be explained in terms of the MLC. But if
indefinites are bad as such in the subject position of questions, one does not
need to additionally invoke the MLC.