Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 1

IBRAHIM ALSALMAN

Auxiliary inversion

Like complementizers, auxiliaries can precede the subject of the whole clause in inversion structures. In yes-no questions (e.g. Can you help me?), auxiliaries move from their original place in the head I position within the IP to precede the subject of the overall clause in the head C position within the CP. This movement is known as head-tohead movement (or head movement for short). In fact, since complementizers and inverted auxiliaries can occupy the same position (the presubject position), it seems logical to say that they are mutually exclusive (only one word is allowed in the head C position). Accordingly, structure B is disallowed in the :following ?A: what do you want to ask me B:*If will you marry me The previous ungrammatical example is strong empirical evidence that both inverted .auxiliaries and complementizers occupy the head COMP position of the CP ?Now the question to ask is: why should auxiliaries undergo inversion in questions According to Chomsky, COMP in interrogative clauses is a strong head and has to be filled, unlike the INFL head, which is weak and can be left empty. Another interesting question to ask is: how is the strong head COMP filled if there is no auxiliary in the clause, given that complementizers cannot occupy main clauses in English. To tackle this issue, the dummy auxiliary do is inserted. For example, to form a question from the sentence: They know him, we insert the auxiliary do (which originates in the head I position within the IP and is subsequently moved into the head C position within the :CP), resulting in the structure below

It is important here to say that, as Chomsky recommends, the use of the dummy do is only allowed as a last resort, and when there is no other way of filling a strong .interrogative COMP

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi