書店で探す
目次
全国の図書館の所蔵
国立国会図書館以外の全国の図書館の所蔵状況を表示します。
所蔵のある図書館から取寄せることが可能かなど、資料の利用方法は、ご自身が利用されるお近くの図書館へご相談ください
その他
島根大学学術情報リポジトリ
デジタル連携先のサイトで、学術機関リポジトリデータベース（IRDB）（機関リポジトリ）が連携している機関・データベースの所蔵状況を確認できます。島根大学学術情報リポジトリのサイトで この本を確認
書店で探す
書誌情報
この資料の詳細や典拠（同じ主題の資料を指すキーワード、著者名）等を確認できます。
- 資料種別
- 文書・図像類
- 著者・編者
- Kobayashi, Akiko
- 著者標目
- 出版年月日等
- 2001
- 出版年（W3CDTF）
- 2001
- 本文の言語コード
- eng
- 対象利用者
- 一般
- 一般注記
- The goal of this thesis is to show that there is a syntactic position for an exhaustive interpretation. A constituent that can be interpreted exhaustively bears a [foc(us)]-feature, and enters into an agreement relation with a functional cateory Foc(us). This means that an identificational focus and a nominal wh-phrase bear the same feature, establish the same kind of agreement, and in some languages undergo the same kind of movement. The suggested analysis adopts Chomsky's (1998, 1999) minimalist framework. Chapter 2 reviews several major minimalist concepts, and proposes a new constraint on locality. In Chapter 3, I demonstrate that the suggested analysis accounts for various facts about focus sentences and wh-questions in "focus" languages such as Hungarian, Basque, and Serbo-Croatian. Focus languages are peculiar in that an EPP-feature is obligatorily associatedwith a [foc]-feature of a goal, which induces an obligatory "focus"-movement to SPEC-Foc. Therefore a focus and a nominal wh-phrase, but not an adverbial wh-phrase, undergo the same movement. Chapter 4 considers focus- and wh-phenomena in Japanese. Japanese is slightly different from "focus" languages in that an EPP-feature is optionally associated with a [foc]-feature of a goal, which induces an optional "focus"-movement to SPEC-Foc. Under this assumption, it follows that a nominal wh-phrase optionally moves out of v*P to have an exhaustive interpretation. I also show that the suggested analysis accounts for a strong island effect of a focalized wh-clause and anti-superiority effects. Chapter 5 considers focus- and wh-phenomena in English. In English, an EPP-feature is never associated with a [foc]-feature of a goal, which means that neitehr a focus nor a nominal wh-phrase undergo "focus"-movement. However, they establish the same agreement relation with Foc. It explains why a focus and a nominal wh-phrase cannot cooccur. The suggested analysis also accounts for the facts about multiple wh-questions and weak island phenomena.