Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A hybrid categorial approach to question composition

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Linguistics and Philosophy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper revisits two fundamental issues in question semantics—what does a question mean, and how is this meaning compositionally derived? Drawing on observations with the distribution of wh-words in questions and free relatives as well as quantificational variability effects in question-embeddings, I argue that the nominal meanings of short answers must be derivable from question denotations, which therefore calls for a categorial approach to defining questions, including embedded questions. I provide a novel hybrid categorial approach to compose questions. This approach overcomes the problems with traditional categorial approaches in defining bare wh-indefinites, composing multi-wh questions, and accounting for coordinations of questions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abrusán, M. (2007). Contradiction and grammar: The case of weak Islands. Doctoral Dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

  • Abrusán, M., & Spector, B. (2011). A semantics for degree questions based on intervals: Negative islands and their obviation. Journal of Semantics, 28, 107–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, S. (2006). Intervention effects follow from focus interpretation. Natural Language Semantics, 14, 1–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, S., & Rullmann, H. (1999). A flexible approach to exhaustivity in questions. Natural Language Semantics, 7, 249–298.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, S., & Sharvit, Y. (2002). Pluralities of questions. Journal of Semantics, 19, 105–157.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berman, S. R. (1991). On the semantics and logical form of wh-clauses. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.

  • Bittner, M. (1994). Cross-linguistic semantics. Linguistics and Philosophy, 17, 53–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cable, S. (2005). Free relatives in Tlingit and Haida: Evidence that the mover projects. Manuscript, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

  • Caponigro, I. (2003). Free not to ask: On the semantics of free relatives and wh-words cross-linguistically. Doctoral Dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles.

  • Caponigro, I. (2004). The semantic contribution of wh-words and type shifts: Evidence from free relatives cross linguistically. In R. B. Young (Ed.), Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory 14 (pp. 38–55). https://doi.org/10.3765/salt.v14i0.2906.

  • Caponigro, I., & Davidson, K. (2011). Ask, and tell as well: Question-answer clauses in American Sign Language. Natural Language Semantics, 19, 323–371.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caponigro, I., Torrence, H., & Cisneros, C. (2013). Free relative clauses in two Mixtec languages. International Journal of American Linguistics, 79, 61–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cecchetto, C., & Donati, C. (2015). (Re) labeling. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Champollion, L., Ciardelli, I., & Roelofsen, F. (2015). Some questions in typed inquisitive semantics. Presentation at the Workshop of Questions in Logic and Semantics, University of Amsterdam, December 2015.

  • Chierchia, G. (1993). Questions with quantifiers. Natural Language Semantics, 1, 181–234.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chierchia, G., & Caponigro, I. (2013). Questions on questions and free relatives. Presentation at Sinn und Bedeutung 18, University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU) in Vitoria-Gasteiz, September 2013.

  • Church, A. (1940). A formulation of the simple theory of types. The Journal of Symbolic Logic, 5, 56–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ciardelli, I., Groenendijk, J., & Roelofsen, F. (2013). Inquisitive semantics: A new notion of meaning. Language and Linguistics Compass, 7, 459–476.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ciardelli, I., & Roelofsen, F. (2015). Alternatives in Montague grammar. Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung, 19, 161–178. https://ojs.ub.uni-konstanz.de/sub/index.php/sub/article/view/227.

  • Ciardelli, I., & Roelofsen, F. (2018). An inquisitive perspective on modals and quantifiers. Annual Review of Linguistics, 4, 129–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ciardelli, I., Roelofsen, F., & Theiler, N. (2017). Composing alternatives. Linguistics and Philosophy, 40, 1–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, F. S. (1929). What is a question? The Monist, 39, 350–364.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cremers, A. (2016). On the semantics of embedded questions. Doctoral Dissertation, École normale supérieure, Paris.

  • Cremers, A. (2018). Plurality effects in an exhaustification-based theory of embedded questions. Natural Language Semantics, 26, 193–251.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cresti, D. (1995). Extraction and reconstruction. Natural Language Semantics, 3, 79–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidson, K., Caponigro, I., & Mayberry, R. (2008). Clausal question-answer pairs: Evidence from ASL. In N. Abner & J. Bishop (Eds.), Proceedings of the 27th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (pp. 108–115). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.

  • Dayal, V. (1996). Locality in wh-quantification: Questions and relative clauses in Hindi. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dayal, V. (2002). Single-pair versus multiple-pair answers: Wh-in-situ and scope. Linguistic Inquiry, 33, 512–520.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dayal, V. (2016). List answers through higher order questions. Colloquium talk at MIT, February 2016.

  • Dayal, V. (2017). Questions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engdahl, E. (1980). The syntax and semantics of questions in Swedish. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.

  • Engdahl, E. (1986). Constituent questions. Dordrecht: Reidel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fox, D. (2012). Multiple wh-questions: Uniqueness, pair-list and second order questions. Class notes for MIT seminars.

  • Fox, D. (2013). Mention-some readings of questions. MIT seminar notes.

  • Fox, D., & Hackl, M. (2007). The universal density of measurement. Linguistics and Philosophy, 29, 537–586.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallin, D. (1975). Intensional and higher-order modal logic. Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gamut, L. T. F. (1991). Logic, language, and meaning, Vol. 2: Intentional logic and logical grammar. Chicago: Chicago University Press.

  • Gärtner, H.-M. (2009). More on the indefinite-interrogative affinity: The view from embedded non-finite interrogatives. Linguistic Typology, 13, 1–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • George, B. R. (2011). Question embedding and the semantics of answers. Doctoral Dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles.

  • Ginzburg, J. (1992). Questions, queries and facts: A semantics and pragmatics for interrogatives. Doctoral Dissertation, Stanford University.

  • Ginzburg, J., & Sag, I. (2000). Interrogative investigations. Stanford: CSLI Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Groenendijk, J., & Stokhof, M. (1982). Semantic analysis of wh-complements. Linguistics and Philosophy, 5(2), 175–233.

    Google Scholar 

  • Groenendijk, J., & Stokhof, M. (1984). On the semantics of questions and the pragmatics of answers. Varieties of Formal Semantics, 3, 143–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Groenendijk, J., & Stokhof, M. (1989). Type-shifting rules and the semantics of interrogatives. In G. Chierchia, B. H. Partee, & R. Turner (Eds.), Properties, types and meaning (pp. 21–68). Dordrecht: Reidel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Groenendijk, J., & Stokhof, M. (1990). Partitioning logical space. Annotated handout for ESSLLI 2, Leuven, August 1990.

  • Guerzoni, E., & Sharvit, Y. (2007). A question of strength: On NPIs in interrogative clauses. Linguistics and Philosophy, 30, 361–391.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hagstrom, P. A. (1998). Decomposing questions. Doctoral Dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

  • Hamblin, C. L. (1973). Questions in Montague English. Foundations of Language, 10, 41–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haspelmath, M. (1997). Indefinite pronouns. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hausser, R., & Zaefferer, D. (1979). Questions and answers in a context-dependent Montague grammar. In F. Guenthner & S. J. Schmidt (Eds.), Formal semantics and pragmatics for natural languages (pp. 339–358). Dordrecht: Reidel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hausser, R. R. (1983). The syntax and semantics of English mood. In F. Kiefer (Ed.), Questions and answers (pp. 97–158). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heim, I. (1994). Interrogative semantics and Karttunen’s semantics for know. In R. Buchalla & A. Mitwoch (Eds.), The proceedings of the 9th annual conference of the Israel Association for Theoretical Linguistics (IATL) and of the workshop on discourse (Vol. 1, pp. 128–144). https://semanticsarchive.net/Archive/jUzYjk1O/Interrogative%2094.pdf.

  • Heim, I. (1995). Notes on questions. MIT class notes for semantics proseminar.

  • Heim, I., & Kratzer, A. (1998). Semantics in generative grammar. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hendriks, H. (1993). Studied flexibility: Categories and types in syntax and semantics. Doctoral Dissertation, ILLC, University of Amsterdam.

  • Huang, C.-T. J. (1982). Move WH in a language without WH movement. The Linguistic Review, 1, 369–416.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobson, P. (1994). Binding connectivity in copular sentences. In M. Harvey & L. Santelmann (Eds.), Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory 4 (pp. 161–178). https://doi.org/10.3765/salt.v4i0.2456.

  • Jacobson, P. (1995). On the quantificational force of English free relatives. In E. Bach, A. Kratzer, & B. Partee (Eds.), Quantification in natural languages (pp. 451–486). Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobson, P. (1999). Towards a variable-free semantics. Linguistics and Philosophy, 22, 117–185.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobson, P. (2016). The short answer: Implications for Direct Compositionality (and vice versa). Language, 92, 331–375.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kang, J. (2012). Why short-form functional reading answers are not possible in multiple wh-questions. In University of Pennsylvania working papers in linguistics (Vol. 18). https://repository.upenn.edu/pwpl/vol18/iss1/15.

  • Karttunen, L. (1977). Syntax and semantics of questions. Linguistics and Philosophy, 1, 3–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kotek, H. (2014). Composing questions. Doctoral Dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

  • Kotek, H., & Erlewine, M. Y. (2018). Non-interrogative wh-constructions in Chuj (Mayan). Proceedings of the Workshop on the Structure and Constituency of the Languages of the Americas (WSCLA), 21, 101–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kotek, H., & Erlewine, M. Y. (2019). Wh-indeterminates in Chuj (Mayan). Canadian Journal of Linguistics, 64, 62–101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krifka, M. (2001a). For a structured meaning account of questions and answers. In C. Féry & W. Sternefeld (Eds.), Audiatur vox sapientiae. A festschrift for Arnim von Stechow (pp. 287–319). Berlin: Akademie Verlag.

  • Krifka, M. (2001b). Quantifying into question acts. Natural Language Semantics, 9, 1–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krifka, M. (2011). Questions. In C. Maienborn, K. von Heusinger, & P. Portner (Eds.), Semantics: An international handbook of natural language meaning (Vol. 1, pp. 1742–1785). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lahiri, U. (1991). Embedded interrogatives and predicates that embed them. Doctoral Dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

  • Lahiri, U. (2002). Questions and answers in embedded contexts. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Link, G. (1983). The logical analysis of plurals and mass terms: A lattice-theoretical approach. In C. Schwarze, R. Bäuerle, & A. von Stechow (Eds.), Meaning, use, and interpretation of language (pp. 302–323). Berlin: De Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, M. (2017). Mandarin wh-conditionals as interrogative conditionals. In M. Moroney, C.-R. Little, J. Collard, & D. Burgdorf (Eds.), Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory 26 (pp. 814–835). https://doi.org/10.3765/salt.v26i0.3955.

  • Merchant, J. (2005). Fragments and ellipsis. Linguistics and Philosophy, 27, 661–738.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicolae, A. C. (2013). Any questions? Polarity as a window into the structure of questions. Doctoral Dissertation, Harvard University.

  • Partee, B. H. (1986). Noun phrase interpretation and type-shifting principles. In J. Groenendijk, D. de Jongh, & M. Stokhof (Eds.), Studies in discourse representation theory and the theory of generalized quantifiers (pp. 357–381). Dordrecht: Foris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Partee, B., & Rooth, M. (1983). Generalized conjunction and type ambiguity. In R. Bäuerle, C. Schwarze, & A. von Stechow (Eds.), Meaning, use, and interpretation of language (pp. 334–356). Berlin: De Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rullmann, H., & Beck, S. (1998). Presupposition projection and the interpretation of which-questions. In D. Strolovitch & A. Lawson (Eds.), Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory 8 (pp. 215–323). https://doi.org/10.3765/salt.v8i0.2811.

  • Schwarz, B. (1994). Rattling off questions. Manuscript, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.

  • Shan, C., & Barker, C. (2006). Explaining crossover and superiority as left-to-right evaluation. Linguistics and Philosophy, 29, 91–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharvit, Y. (2002). Embedded questions and ‘de dicto’ readings. Natural Language Semantics, 10, 97–123.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharvit, Y., & Kang, J. (2017). Fragment functional answers. In M. Moroney, C.-R. Little, J. Collard, & D. Burgdorf (Eds.), Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory 26 (pp. 1099–1118). https://doi.org/10.3765/salt.v26i0.3792.

  • Sharvy, R. (1980). A more general theory of definite descriptions. The Philosophical Review, 89, 607–624.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shimoyama, J. (2006). Indeterminate phrase quantification in Japanese. Natural Language Semantics, 14, 139–173.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spector, B. (2007). Modalized questions and exhaustivity. In T. Friedman & M. Gibson (Eds.), Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory17 (pp. 282–299). https://doi.org/10.3765/salt.v17i0.2962.

  • Spector, B. (2008). An unnoticed reading for wh-questions: Elided answers and weak islands. Linguistic Inquiry, 39, 677–686.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stainton, R. J. (1998). Quantifier phrases, meaningfulness “in isolation”, and ellipsis. Linguistics and Philosophy, 21, 311–340.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stainton, R. J. (2005). In defense of non-sentential assertion. In Z. Szabo (Ed.), Semantics versus pragmatics (pp. 383–457). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stainton, R. J. (2006). Neither fragments nor ellipsis. In E. Casielles, L. Progovac, K. Paesania, & E. Barton (Eds.), The syntax of nonsententials: Multidisciplinary perspectives (pp. 93–116). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Szabolcsi, A. (1997). Quantifiers in pair-list readings. In A. Szabolcsi (Ed.), Ways of scope taking (pp. 311–347). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Szabolcsi, A. (2016). Direct vs. indirect disjunction of wh-complements, as diagnosed by subordinating complementizers. Manuscript, New York University. https://ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/003090.

  • Uegaki, W. (2015). Interpreting questions under attitudes. Doctoral Dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

  • Uegaki, W. (2018). A unified semantics for the Japanese Q-particle ka in indefinites, questions and disjunctions. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics, 3, 1–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Stechow, A. (1991). Focusing and backgrounding operators. Discourse Particles, 6, 37–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Stechow, A., & Zimmermann, T. E. (1984). Term answers and contextual change. Linguistics, 22, 3–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, A. (2000). Adverbial quantification over (interrogative) complements. In R. Billerey & B. Danielle Lillehaugen (Eds.), Proceedings of the 19th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (pp. 574–587). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.

  • Xiang, Y. (2016). Interpreting questions with non-exhaustive answers. Doctoral Dissertation, Harvard University.

  • Xiang, Y. (2019). Getting quantifying-into questions uniformly: Functionality, domain exhaustivity, and quantificational variability. In K. Blake, F. Davis, K. Lamp, J. Rhyne (Eds.), Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory 29 (pp. 160–179). https://doi.org/10.3765/salt.v29i0.4610.

  • Zimmermann, T. E. (1985). Remarks on Groenendijk and Stokhof’s theory of indirect questions. Linguistics and Philosophy, 8, 431–448.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Linguistics, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey - New Brunswick, 18 Seminary Place, New Brunswick, NJ, 08901-1184, USA

    Yimei Xiang

Authors
  1. Yimei Xiang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yimei Xiang.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Xiang, Y. A hybrid categorial approach to question composition. Linguist and Philos 44, 587–647 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-020-09294-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-020-09294-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation