Presentation Topic: The Syntax of Wh-Subject Questions

Focus: Why "Who called the police?" is correct, but "*Who did call the
police?" is not.

Slide 1: Introduction & The Puzzle

Visuals:

 (42a) Who did the police call? (Object Question - Correct)

 (42c) Who called the police? (Subject Question - Correct)

 (42d) *Who did call the police? (Subject Question - Incorrect)

Script: "Good morning/afternoon everyone. Today, we will explore an

interesting syntactic puzzle in English: Wh-subject questions.

We know that standard English main-clause questions usually require T-

to-C movement. This typically manifests as 'do-support' or auxiliary
inversion. For example, in the object question 'Who did the police
call?', the auxiliary 'did' moves to the front.

However, look at example (42c): 'Who called the police?'. Here, the wh-
subject is 'Who', but there is no auxiliary 'did'. In fact, if we insert 'did'
without emphatic stress, as in 'Who did call the police?', the sentence
becomes ungrammatical.

Our goal today is to answer: Why do wh-subject questions forbid T-

to-C movement?"

Slide 2: Hypothesis 1 - The "In-Situ" Analysis

Visuals:

 Tree diagram showing Who remaining in Spec-TP (from Image 2,

Figure 43).

 Text: "Does the subject stay in place?"

Script: "One early hypothesis suggested that in subject questions, the

wh-word simply stays in its original position (Spec-TP) and does not move
to Spec-CP. If nothing moves to C, perhaps C does not trigger T-to-C
movement.

However, this analysis faces a problem. As Pesetsky and Torrego (2001)

pointed out, we can replace 'who' with aggressive non-D-linked phrases
like 'who the hell' or 'who on earth'.
We know that phrases like 'who the hell' generally must move to Spec-CP
in English. Since we can say 'Who the hell called the police?', it is very
likely that the subject does move to Spec-CP, just like in object questions.
So, we need a better explanation."

Slide 3: Pesetsky & Torrego’s Proposal - The Feature Analysis

Visuals:

 The concept: Subject (Who) = [WH] + [TENSE] features.

 Tree diagram (46) or (48) showing Who moving to Spec-CP.

Script: "This brings us to the solution proposed by Pesetsky and Torrego.

They argue that all wh-questions are CPs, and the subject does move to
Spec-CP.

Their key insight lies in Features. We assume the Head C

(Complementizer) has three features that need to be satisfied:

1. [WH] (Interrogative)

2. [EPP] (Needs a specifier)

3. [TNS] (Tense).

Usually, the [TNS] feature forces the auxiliary (like did) to move to C. But
Pesetsky and Torrego propose that the subject 'who' carries a Tense
feature itself. They argue that Nominative case on a subject is actually a
manifestation of Tense.

Therefore, when the subject 'Who' moves to Spec-CP, it is a 'super-worker'.

It satisfies all three requirements at once: the Wh-feature, the EPP
feature, AND the Tense feature."

Slide 4: Economy Considerations & Conclusion

Visuals:

 Comparison:

o Option A: Move Who (Satisfies everything). 1 Operation.

o Option B: Move Who + Move Did. 2 Operations.

 "Economy Principle: Do less."

Script: "This leads us to the final explanation based on Economy

Considerations.
In a sentence like 'Who called the police?', simply moving 'Who' to the
front satisfies the C-head's Tense requirement. If we were to also move
'did' (T-to-C movement), we would be performing two movement
operations instead of one.

Syntax prefers economy—doing as little as possible to get the job done.

Since moving the subject is sufficient to check the Tense feature, the
secondary movement of 'did' is rendered unnecessary and is therefore
blocked.

In conclusion: 'Who called the police?' has no 'do-support' because the

nominative wh-subject carries a tense feature. Moving it to the front does
all the syntactic work, making the auxiliary redundant.

Thank you for listening."

Vocabulary Notes (Vietnamese context)

If you are asked questions, here are the key terms in Vietnamese:

 T-to-C movement: Di chuyển từ T đến C (đảo ngữ).

 Wh-in-situ: Từ để hỏi đứng yên tại chỗ.

 Spec-CP (Specifier of CP): Vị trí chỉ định của ngữ bổ mẫu.

 Nominative Case: Cách chủ ngữ (Danh cách).

 Economy Considerations: Nguyên lý tiết kiệm (trong ngữ pháp tối

giản).
Based on the linguistic text provided in the images (which appears to be
from a syntax textbook like Radford's "Transformational Grammar"), here
is a detailed, professional, and well-organized PowerPoint presentation
outline.

This outline focuses on the Syntax of Yes-No Questions, specifically the

Null Operator Analysis.

Presentation Title: The Syntax of Yes-No Questions: A Null

Operator Analysis

Target Audience: Linguistics Students/Academic Context Tone:

Professional, Analytical, and Clear

Slide 1: Title Slide

 Main Title: The Syntax of Yes-No Questions

 Subtitle: Deriving Main-Clause CPs and the Null Operator

Hypothesis

 Presenter Name: [Your Name]

Slide 2: Introduction & The Core Assumption

 The Context:

o We know Wh-questions are CPs (Complementizer Phrases).

o What about Yes-No questions (e.g., "Is it raining?")?

 The Claim:

o Main-clause questions are CPs headed by a C

(Complementizer) carrying [TNS, WH, EPP] features.

 The Implication:

o If they are CPs with [WH] features, they must contain an

Interrogative Specifier.
 o Question: Since there is no visible Wh-word (like what or
where), what occupies the Specifier position?

Speaker Notes: "Welcome. Today we are looking at the structure of Yes-

No questions. We are starting with the assumption that, like Wh-questions,
Yes-No questions are Complementizer Phrases. However, unlike 'What are
you eating?', a question like 'Is it raining?' has no visible question word.
Today, we will explore the hypothesis that these questions contain a 'Null
Question Operator'."

Slide 3: The Null Operator Hypothesis

 The Proposed Solution (Grimshaw 1993; Roberts 1993):

o Yes-No questions contain a Null Question Operator.

o This operator is directly generated in Spec-CP (via merger,

not movement).

 Definition:

o Think of it as a silent, invisible version of the word whether.

 Why believe this?

o We have four key arguments supporting this:

1. Historical Evidence

2. Reported Speech

3. Answer Compatibility

4. "Or Not" Tagging

Speaker Notes: "So, if the position is empty, syntax theory suggests

something invisible is filling it. We call this a 'Null Operator.' While this
might sound abstract, we have four strong pieces of evidence to prove
that a silent 'whether' actually exists in that spot."

Slide 4: Argument 1 - Historical Evidence (Elizabethan English)

 The Observation:

o In Early Modern English (Shakespearean times), main-clause

Yes-No questions could use an overt (visible) "Whether".

 Examples:
 o "Whether had you rather lead mine eyes or eye your
master’s heels?" (Merry Wives of Windsor)

o "Whether dost thou profess thyself a knave or a fool?" (All’s

Well That Ends Well)

 Conclusion:

o Modern English has the same structure, but the operator has
become silent (null).

Speaker Notes: "First, let's look at history. In Shakespeare's time, you

could actually say 'Whether had you rather...'. The word 'whether'
occupied the Spec-CP position. Our argument is that the structure hasn't
changed; we just stopped pronouncing the word 'whether' in main
clauses."

Slide 5: Argument 2 - Reported Speech

 The Parallel:

o When we turn a direct Yes-No question into reported speech (a

complement clause), the word whether reappears.

 Example:

o (Direct): "Are you feeling better?" he asked.

o (Indirect): He asked whether I was feeling better.

 Logic:

o The underlying meaning is identical. The presence of whether

in the embedded clause suggests a "null whether" in the main
clause.

Speaker Notes: "Second, consider reported speech. If I ask 'Are you

feeling better?', and you report that later, you say 'He asked WHETHER I
was feeling better.' The emergence of 'whether' in the embedded clause is
strong evidence that the feature exists in the direct question, just in a null
form."

Slide 6: Arguments 3 & 4 - Answers and Tags

 Argument 3: Answer Compatibility

o Both direct questions and whether-clauses accept the exact

same answers (Yes/No).
 o Direct: "Did you vote...?" -> "Yes."

o Indirect: "...whether we voted..." -> "Yes."

 Argument 4: The "Or Not" Tag

o Both structures can be tagged with "or not" in the same way.

o (a) Has he finished or not?

o (b) I can’t say whether he has finished or not.

Speaker Notes: "Finally, look at how we treat these sentences. Both

types accept simple 'Yes' or 'No' answers. Furthermore, we can tag 'or not'
onto both types seamlessly. Syntactically, they are behaving identically."

Slide 7: The Derivation of "Is it raining?" (Step 1 & 2)

 The Goal: Deriving the structure of "Is it raining?"

 Step 1: Merging T-bar

o Present tense auxiliary is merges with verb raining.

o Result: T-bar (is raining).

 Step 2: Merging TP

o T-bar merges with subject it.

o Result: TP (it is raining).

Speaker Notes: "Now, let's look at the technical derivation. We start at

the bottom of the tree. The auxiliary 'is' merges with the verb, and then
the subject 'it' is added. This gives us our Tense Phrase: 'it is raining'."

Slide 8: The Derivation (Step 3 & 4 - The Crucial Part)

 Step 3: Merging C

o The TP merges with a Null C carrying features: [TNS, WH,

EPP].

 Step 4: Satisfaction of Features

o [TNS] Feature: Attracts the auxiliary is to move from T to C

(Inversion).

o [WH, EPP] Features: Requires a specifier.

 o The Merger: A Null Yes-No Operator (symbolized as
~~whether~~) merges into Spec-CP.

Speaker Notes: "Here is where the magic happens. We merge a Null C.

This C has features that act like magnets. The [TNS] feature pulls the
auxiliary 'is' to the front. The [WH] feature demands a question operator.
Since we don't say 'whether' aloud in modern English, we merge the Null
Operator into the Specifier position."

Slide 9: Visualizing the Tree Diagram

(Insert the Tree Diagram from Image 1, Formula (74))

 Top Level: CP (Complementizer Phrase)

o Spec-CP: ADV (~~whether~~ / Null Operator)

o Head C: Is (moved from T) + Null C [TNS, WH, EPP]

 Middle Level: TP (Tense Phrase)

o Subject: PRN (it)

 Bottom Level: T' (T-bar)

o Trace: t (trace of is)

o Verb: raining

Speaker Notes: "This tree diagram summarizes the theory. You can see
the Null Operator (crossed out 'whether') sitting at the top left in Spec-CP.
The auxiliary 'is' has moved to the head C position. This structure unifies
Yes-No questions with Wh-questions—they are all CPs with an
interrogative specifier."

Slide 10: Conclusion

 Unitary Characterisation of Questions:

o All questions (Wh- and Yes-No) are CPs with an

interrogative specifier.

 Lexical Entry for Whether:

o Main clauses: Receives a null spellout.

o Embedded clauses: Spelled out as /wɛðə/.

 Summary:
 o This analysis elegantly explains word order (inversion) and the
semantic similarities between direct questions and reported
speech.

Speaker Notes: "In conclusion, by assuming a Null Operator, we achieve

a 'unitary characterisation.' We don't need separate rules for different
questions. They are all CPs. 'Whether' is simply a word that is silent in
main clauses but audible in embedded clauses. Thank you."