earticle

영어

In this paper, we discuss the relative positioning of Wh-related English prepositions in a Wh-interrogative construction within the Optimality Theory [1-2]. By employing the two key constraints such as *Prep-Str and Align which are developed for the positioning of Wh-related prepositions from Romance languages such as French and Italian [3] and for the positioning of Wh-related prepositions from the middle English prose from 1500 to 1900 [4-6], and by slightly modifying the constraint hierarchy of *Prep-STR >>Align into **Prep-STR <<>>Align, Choi argues that his new theory can properly explain the unique behaviors of English Wh-related prepositions being able to take two ‘optional’ operations such as pied-piping and stranding to find legitimate landing sites in a Wh-interrogative construction [7]. However, this new analysis again reveals the following critical problems: (1) Unlike the ‘light’ English Wh-related prepositions which can two optional operations for legitimate landing sites in a Wh-interrogative construction, ‘heavy’ Wh-related English prepositions are not allowed to have such two options: they take just one option of pied-piping only. Thus, (2) his argumentation based on the existing constraints and the modified constraint hierarchy is neither general enough nor proper to explain the issue of the relative positioning for all English Wh-related preposition cases. To include such exceptional syntactic property of the ‘heavy’ preposition cases within the Optimality Theory, we suggest a new constraint of *HPrep-STR ranked at the highest position of the constraint hierarchy to disallow a ‘heavy’ or multi-syllabic Wh-related English preposition to stay alone at the end of a sentence. The new final hierarchy of constraints we suggest to explain the exceptional positioning of ‘heavy’ Wh-related prepositions together with the other ‘light’ Wh-related prepositions in English Wh-interrogative construction will be as follows: *HPrep-STR>>Align<<>>*Prep-STR.