Adverbial and Argument-Doubling Clauses in Cree - MSpace

to-object does not appear to be free, but shows restrictions that stand in need of an
explanation. In section 6.2, I will show that the copying-to-object construction is not
restncted to subordinate subjects, and that its occurrence (and non-restrictiveness) follows
quite naturally fiom an argument-doubling analysis.
In this section, we look at the other type of argument-doubling clause; argument-doubling
Wh-clauses. It is this clause type that provides the clue to the analysis of the relationship
between an A-doubling clause (declarative and Wh-) and the matrix verbal cornplex.
Wh-questions in Cree can occur as matrix questions or as indirect questions.
Indirect questions are A-doubling clauses. which are introduced by transitive verbs. The
significant difference between an A-doubling Wh-clause and a declarative A-doubling
clause is the presence (or absence) of a pre-verbal Wh-phrase.
A-doubling Wh-clauses look identical to matrix Wh-questions. An example of a
matrix Wh-question is provided in (50).
(50) thêhki kâ-ohci-sipwèhtêt mèriy?
why cj-away-1eave.N-3 Mary
'Why did Mary Ieave?'
In a matrix construction, the Wh-phrase always occurs pre-verbally at the
beginning of the clause. In argument-doubling Wh-clauses, the Wh-phrase usually occurs
at the beginning of the subordinate clause. This demonstrates that argument-doubiing