the syntax and semantics of relativization and quantification

132
allowing an external interpretation of tukuilla ‘all’ but the last was deemed degraded
(or, to quote the consultant directly “understandable, but not perfect”). The first
was the preferred construction for this meaning.
(4.49) [Tukuilla [Paul feria-pi ranti-shka] waka]-ka yana-mi.
all Paul market-loc buy-nm cow-top black-evid
‘All the cows that Paul bought in the market were black.’
(4.50) [[Paul
Paul
feria-pi
market-loc
tukilla
all
waka-ta
cow-acc
ranti-shka]]-ka
buy-nm-top
yana-mi.
black-evid
(4.51) [[Paul
Paul
feria-pi
market-loc
tukuilla
all
ranti-shka]
buy-nm
waka]-ka
cow-top
yana-mi.
black-evid
(4.52) ?[[Paul
Paul
feria-pi
market-loc
ranti-shka]
buy-nm
tukuilla
all
waka]-ka
cow-top
yana-mi.
black-evid
Judgments like these make it appear that in IQ, like CQ, the head can raise to
an external position. 9 This movement is not linked to lack of overt Case marking,
as seen in (4.50).
The quantifier evidence therefore suggests that head-raising is possible in IQ,
but it is not directly related to Case-marking and in most cases the most prominent
reading matches an in-situ analysis of the head.
4.5.3 Evidence from arguments vs. adjuncts in headless
relatives
The previous section suggested that perhaps head-raising is possible in IQ after all.
In this section I show further evidence for head-raising in certain cases of relative
9 I note in passing that quantified external heads like (4.52) in CQ did not give
consultants any trouble, although IQ consultants often hesitated over them, as mentioned
above. I do not know the reason for this difference, although it seems likely
to be related to the difficulty with determiner incorporation in IQ.