麻豆淫院

In linguistic terms, a question is largely the re-ordering of a statement. Shuffle the words around, make a couple of other changes, and "John rode a horse" becomes "What did John ride?"

Linguists call this re-arranging of words 鈥�wh-movement,鈥� due to the wh-words used in questions (who, when, and so on) and they believe it occurs in two forms. English displays what linguists call 鈥渙vert wh-movement,鈥� in which word order is shuffled heavily, since many questions begin with wh-words. (There are exceptions: 鈥淛ohn rode a what?鈥�) But some languages, like Japanese, deploy 鈥渃overt wh-movement,鈥� in which word order remains largely intact as a statement becomes a question, and the wh-words appear in a variety of locations.

But what determines which of these options a given language uses? In a new book, 鈥淯ttering Trees,鈥� MIT linguistics professor Norvin Richards asserts that if we carefully study prosody 鈥� the way the pitch of our voices goes up and down 鈥� we can determine which kind of wh-movement any language will employ. In turn, Richards believes, this suggests that for all languages, the sound pattern in sentences is more integral to the syntax 鈥� the processes and principles that govern the structure of sentences 鈥� than scholars have generally thought.

鈥淚f you were to ask a syntactician why English forms its questions one way and Japanese forms its questions another way, there isn鈥檛 really an answer,鈥� says Richards. 鈥淏ut I鈥檓 shooting for a deeper explanation in the book. And the idea is that there鈥檚 a universal principle explaining the prosody we observe when we ask questions.鈥�

If the pattern Richards has detected holds up, it could persuade more linguists that the relationship between sound and syntax is a necessity, not a contingency. 鈥淚f what I鈥檓 saying is right,鈥� Richards says, 鈥渢hen I think that as the syntax begins to build the sentence structure, it鈥檚 also making a rough draft of the prosody.鈥� That could alter linguists鈥� views about how the rules of language are laid down, and provide more evidence for the notion of Universal Grammar, the idea that an innate facility for language helps shape the form of languages globally.

Sound system

There are actually two distinct essays in 鈥淯ttering Trees,鈥� published this month by MIT Press. (The title refers to the tree-like sentence diagrams linguists use.) The first essay analyzes how similar elements of sentences must be separated for the sake of comprehension, while the second develops Richards鈥� thesis about sound and questions, surveying English, Japanese, Basque, Bengali, Tagalog, French, Portugese, and more. To get a flavor for his work, consider this second issue.

Recordings of Japanese spoken in Tokyo, when charted by the frequency of the speaker鈥檚 voice, show that the statement 鈥淣aoya-ga nanika-o nomiya-de nonda鈥� (鈥淣aoya drank something at the bar鈥�) maintains a rising-and-falling pitch pattern. But in the question, 鈥淣aoya-ga nani-o nomiya-de nonda no?鈥� (鈥淲hat did Naoya drink at the bar?鈥�), the words 鈥渘omiya-de nonda鈥� have a low, flat frequency, interrupting the rising-and-falling pattern. This flat intonation falls between the wh-word, 鈥渘ani-o,鈥� and the question-indicating complementizer, 鈥渘o,鈥� at the end of the sentence.

鈥淭here鈥檚 this prosodic phenomenon,鈥� says Richards. 鈥淵ou get a big pitched peak on the wh-word, then people mutter, so the prosody is kind of flat between the wh-word and the complementizer, then it goes back up. People squash these words so that they鈥檙e lower than they would be in the corresponding statement. We have nice phonetic evidence that they鈥檙e creating a prosodic domain that starts with the wh-word and ends with the question mark.鈥�

So while there are two kinds of wh-movement, Richards proposes that every language ends up like Japanese, in the sense that wh-words and complementizers exist in a single prosodic domain. In some languages, including Japanese, this is accomplished by direct changes in the prosody, while, others, like English, require a greater transportation of wh-words, so they can be located in the same prosodic domain as question marks. But if we can locate the question mark and understand how prosody is organized, Richards argues, we can predict where the wh-word will be situated in every tongue 鈥� which provides evidence for the common foundations of all languages. In Bengali, Richards has found, the sentence, 鈥渙ra Suneche ke abe鈥� (鈥淭hey have heard who will come鈥�) shifts into a question as, 鈥渙ra ke abe Suneche?鈥� (鈥淲ho have they heard will come?鈥�). In this case, 鈥渒e鈥� serves as the wh-word, with the relevant prosodic domain lying between it and the closing question indicator.

Colleagues have praised 鈥淯ttering Trees.鈥� Answering questions by e-mail, Elena Anagnostopoulou, a professor of linguistics at the University of Crete, says Richards 鈥渁sks a question that has rarely been addressed before, namely why some languages have overt and others covert wh-movement,鈥� and defends his thesis 鈥渧ery convincingly.鈥� The book, she believes, lays out a 鈥渘ovel research agenda, where new proposals are raised and the proposals are highly predictive.鈥� The predictive aspect of Richards鈥� theory is precisely what will be tested by future research. For all the languages he samples, scores more await evaluation in terms of wh-movement. For now, though, Richards鈥� idea is sound.