Abstract
I argue for a reanalysis of "wh-the-hell" questions as restrictions on the domain of alternatives, rather than polarity items or domain extensions. This analysis returns to their original characterization as "aggressively non-D-linked" by specifying what it means to be D-linked, and in doing so captures a number of otherwise unconnected properties of such questions without positing extraneous features. Consequences of the proposal include a new notion of question-specific contextuality, evidence for an inquisitive semantic condition on sluicing, and a potential general discourse restriction on wh-movement.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callSimilar Papers
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
