View source for Pied-piping with inversion

'''Pied-piping with inversion''' is a special word order phenomenon found in some languages, such as those in the [[Mesoamerican linguistic area]].

==Introduction==

The phenomenon was first named and identified as an areal characteristic of the [[Mesoamerican linguistic area]] in Smith Stark (1988).  Some sources also refer to pied-piping with inversion as "secondary wh-movement".<br />

The phenomenon can be described as follows:
*the language has [[wh-movement]].
*the language has [[pied-piping]]; that is, when certain words undergo wh-movement, the interrogative word and also the rest of the phrase moves.
*the word order within the pied-piped phrase is different from the order of ordinary phrases.

The following examples from [[Zapotec languages|San Dionisio Ocotepec Zapotec]] illustrate the phenomenon.  As the following example shows, a possessor normally follows the noun that is possessed in the language (Broadwell 2001):

{{interlinear|number=1)
|Cù’á Juààny {{Noitalic|[<sub>NP</sub>}} x-pè’cw {Màríí {{Noitalic|]}}.}
|COM:grab Juan {} P-dog Mary
|‘Juan grabbed Mary’s dog.’}}

{{interlinear|indent=3
|{{Noitalic|*}} Cù’á Juààny {{Noitalic|[<sub>NP</sub>}} Màríí {x-pè’cw {{Noitalic|]}}.}
|{} COM:grab Juan {} Mary P-dog
|}}

If the possessor is questioned, the whole noun phrase must pied-pipe to the beginning of the sentence. However, the order of the initial phrase must have the possessor before the possessed:

{{interlinear|number=2)
|{¿ {{Noitalic|[<sub>NP</sub>}}} Túú {x-pèh’cw {{Noitalic|]}}} cù’á Juààny?
|{} who P-dog COM:grab Juan
|‘Whose dog did Juan grab?’}}

{{interlinear|indent=3
|{{{Noitalic|*}} ¿ {{Noitalic|[<sub>NP</sub>}}} X-pèh’cw {túú {{Noitalic|]}}} cù’á Juààny?
|{} P-dog who COM:grab Juan
|}}

The difference in order between the noun phrases in (1) and (2) illustrates pied-piping with inversion. (1) shows the ordinary order in which the noun is the first element of the noun phrase, and (2) shows the inverted order found in the pied-piped noun phrase.

The following examples from [[Tzotzil language|Tzotzil]] (Aissen 1996) show the same process:

{{interlinear|number=3)
|I-cham {{Noitalic|[<sub>NP</sub>}} x-ch’amal li {Xun {{Noitalic|]}}-e}
|COM-die {} {{No gloss|A3}}-child the Xun-{{No gloss|ENC}}
|‘Xun’s child died.’}}

{{interlinear|number=4)
|{{Noitalic|[<sub>NP</sub>}} Buch’u {x-ch’amal {{Noitalic|]}}} i-cham?
|{} who {{No gloss|A3}}-child COM-die
|‘Whose child died?’}}

==Types of phrases that show pied-piping with inversion==
Pied-piping with inversion is most often found in noun phrases (NP), prepositional phrases (PP), and quantifier phrases (QP).  The following example, also from San Dionisio Ocotepec Zapotec, shows pied-piping with inversion in a quantifier phrase (Broadwell 2001):

{{interlinear|number=5a)
|¿[Xhíí tyóp] ù-dàw Juààny?
|what two COM-eat Juan
|‘What did Juan eat two of?}}

{{interlinear|number=5b)
|¿[Tyóp xhíí] ù-dàw Juààny?
|two what COM-eat Juan
|‘What did Juan eat two of?’}}

As the example shows, languages may differ in the degree to which pied-piping with inversion is obligatory in different types of phrases. Therefore, (2) above shows that the interrogative must be initial in a pied-piped noun phrase, but (5) shows that the interrogative is only optionally initial in a pied-piped quantifier phrase.

The following example, from Quiegolani Zapotec (Black 2000), shows pied-piping with inversion in a prepositional phrase:

{{interlinear|number=6a)
|[Txu lo] n-dux xnaa noo?
|who to STAT-angry mother 1.EX
|‘With whom was my mother angry?’}}

{{interlinear|number=6b)
|<sup>*</sup>[Lo txu] n-dux xnaa noo?
|to who STAT-angry mother 1.EX
|}}

==Environments for pied-piping with inversion==
The most frequently-cited type of sentence with pied-piping with inversion is a wh-question. However, a number of Mesoamerican languages also show fronting of negative or indefinite phrases to a position before the verb.

Fronted negative and indefinite phrases may also show pied-piping with inversion in some languages, as in this example from San Dionisio Ocotepec Zapotec:

{{interlinear|number=7a)
|Rú-tè’cà [túú x-pè’cw] ù-dííny Màríí.
|ANIM:NEG anyone p-dog COM-hit Maria
|‘Maria didn't hit anyone’s dog.’}}

{{interlinear|number={{hidden text|7}}b)
|<sup>*</sup>Rú-tè’cà [x-pè’cw túú] ù-dííny Màríí.
|ANIM:NEG p-dog anyone COM-hit Maria
|}}

The noun phrase "anyone's dog" has been fronted to a position before the verb and shows the same pied-piping with inversion that is seen in other syntactic environments.

==Languages that show pied-piping with inversion==
Pied-piping with inversion seems to be found in all Mesoamerican languages. It is documented in many of them, including several [[Zapotec languages]] (San Dionisio Ocotepec Zapotec, Tlacolula de Matamoros Zapotec, and Quiegolani Zapotec), several Mayan languages ([[Kʼicheʼ language|Kʼicheʼ]], [[Kaqchikel language|Kaqchikel]], Chuj, [[Tzotzil language|Tzotzil]]), and several [[Mixtecan languages]] (Ocotepec Mixtec, and [[Copala Triqui]]).

Pied-piping with inversion is unusual outside Mesoamerica but is documented in [[Sasak language|Sasak]], an [[Austronesian language]] of [[Indonesia]](Austin 2001).

A somewhat similar phenomenon is found in a number of [[Germanic languages]] in which certain pronominal objects of prepositions appear before the preposition.<ref>van Riemsdijk 1978.</ref> The following [[Dutch grammar#Personal and possessive pronouns|Dutch]] examples show that ordinary objects follow the preposition ''op'' "on," but the pronouns ''er'' "it," ''daar'' "there," and ''hier'' "here" precede the preposition:

: Ik reken [op je steun]. ("I count on your support.")
: Ik reken '''erop'''/'''daarop'''/'''hierop''' ("I count on it/on that/on this.")

Those examples show inversion of a prepositional phrase, but the inversion does not necessarily occur in contexts of pied-piping.

Possibly related is the phenomenon known as [[swiping (linguistics)|swiping]]<ref>Merchant 2002.</ref> in which a wh-phrase is inverted with a governing preposition in the context of [[sluicing]]:

: Ralph was arguing, but I don't know who with.

Such inversion requires pied-piping but also [[ellipsis (linguistics)|ellipsis]], unlike Meso-American languages.

==See also==
* [[Syntax]]

==Notes==
{{reflist}}

==References==
{{colbegin|colwidth=26em}}
* Aissen, Judith. 1996. Pied-piping, abstract agreement, and functional projections in Tzotzil.  Natural language and linguistic theory 14:447-491.
* Austin, Peter. 2001. Content questions in Sasak, eastern Indonesia: an OT syntax account.  manuscript. University of Melbourne.
* Black, Cheryl. 2000.  Quiegolani Zapotec syntax: A Principles and Parameters Account. Dallas: SIL International and UT Arlington Publications in Linguistics 136.
* Broadwell, George Aaron. 1999.  Focus alignment and optimal order in Zapotec. Proceedings of the 35th Chicago Linguistics Society.
* Broadwell, George Aaron. 2001. Optimal order and pied-piping in San Dionisio Zapotec, in Peter Sells, ed. Formal and empirical issues in optimality theory. Stanford: CSLI.
* Broadwell, George Aaron. 2002.  Constraint symmetry in Optimality-Theoretic Syntax.  In Miriam Butt and Tracy Holloway King, eds. Proceedings of the Lexical Functional Grammar 2000 Conference. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
* Broadwell, George Aaron and Brook Danielle Lillehaugen. 2006.  Pied-piping with inversion in Tlacolula de Matamoros Zapotec.  Presented at the Society for the Study of the Indigenous Languages of the Americas, Albuquerque, Jan 2006.
* Broadwell, George Aaron and Michael Parrish Key. 2004. Pied-piping with inversion in Copala Trique.  Presented at the Society for the Study of the Indigenous Languages of the Americas, San Francisco, Jan 2004.
* Eberhardt, Roy. 1999. Questions and inversion in Ocotepec Mixtec. Work Papers of the Summer Institute of Linguistics, University of North Dakota Session 43. [http://www.und.nodak.edu/dept/linguistics/wp/1999Eberhardt.PDF]
* Heck, Fabian. 2004. A theory of pied-piping. Ph.D. thesis, University of Leipzig.
* Merchant, Jason. 2002. Swiping in Germanic. In C. Jan-Wouter Zwart and Werner Abraham (eds.), Studies in Comparative Germanic Syntax, 289–315. John Benjamins: Amsterdam.
* van Riemsdijk, Henk. 1978. A case study in syntactic markedness: The binding nature of prepositional phrases. Foris: Dordrecht.
* Sells, Peter, ed. 2001a. Formal and Empirical Issues in Optimality Theory. Stanford: CSLI.
* Smith Stark, Thomas. 1988. ‘Pied-piping’ con inversion en preguntas parciales.  Ms. Centro de estudios lingüísticos y literarios, Colegio de México y Seminario de lenguas indígenas.
* Trechsel, Frank. 2000. A CCG Approach to Tzotzil Pied-Piping.  Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 18: 611–63.
{{colend|colwidth=26em}}

[[Category:Mesoamerican languages|P01]]
[[Category:Indigenous languages of Central America]]
[[Category:Indigenous languages of North America]]
[[Category:Syntactic relationships]]
[[Category:Generative syntax]]
[[Category:Syntax]]
[[Category:Syntactic transformation]]