Movement and Labeling
Kwang-sup Kim(Hankuk Univ. of Foreign Studies)
1 Introduction
The free relative clause is singular in (1), but can be plural if there is a so-callednucleus— the bold faced constituents in (2). The free relative with no nucleus is called astandard free relative (SFR), and the one with a nucleus a transparent free relative(TFR). The SFR is only used as a singular definite DP, but the TFR shares with thenucleus the same values with regard to number, definiteness, semantic type, and manyother grammatical features.
(1) What you ordered was/*were delivered a minute ago.
(2) What John calls pebbles are lying on the lawn.
This paper explores the possibility of providing a uniform account for the two different
types of what.
2 Standard Free Relative Clause
Donati (2006), Chomsky (2008), and Cecchetto and Donati (2010) propose that what
can be a head in the landing site after undergoing A’-movement, since it is an X0. In (1),for instance, what is the label of the whole projection. The most serious problem withthis approach is that even the XPs project their label in the landing site; considering
number agreement, it is clear that what books is a head in (3).
(3) What books she has are in the attic.
This paper claims that the free relative pronoun what and what NP can project theirlabel for semantic reasons. Predicates carry out two functions: predication andmodification, and predicators can project, whereas modifiers cannot. If tall is used as amodifier in (4), it fails to project, and if, on the other hand, it is used as a predicator, itprojects. Notice that branching constituents are heads in (4a-b), which suggests thatlabeling is not dependent on the X’-status but on the semantic relation.
(4) a. [NP tall [handsome boys]], when tall is used as a modifier.
b. [AP [very tall] boys], when tall is used as a predicator.
If A’-movement takes place, the sister of the dislocated constituent is interpreted as apredicate—an <e, t> type (Heim and Kratzer 1998). The predicate can be used as apredicator or a modifier. Suppose that CP is interpreted as a modifier in (5). If so, what
projects its label.
(5) [DP whati [CP C he says ti]] is non-sense
That is, the label of the whole projection is determined on the basis of the relation

between what and C’ or CP.
(6) a. I wonder [CP what [C John proposed what]] (Predication)b. I like [DP what [C John proposed]] (Modification)
If they form a predication relation, the label is CP, and if they form a modification
relation, it is DP.
3 Transparent Free Relative Clause
The TFR is characterized by the matching effect between the nucleus and the freerelative: the grammatical features of the nucleus determine those of free relatives. I
propose that this is related to the fact that that is ambiguous as a result ofgrammaticalization. Pesetsky (2000) proposes that wh-words consist of two parts: wh +pronominal. For instance, what is made up of wh and that, and when is a combination of
wh and then. It is well-known that that is ambiguous between a pronoun and acomplementizer. The complementizer that has no features related with reference, since
it is an output of semantic bleaching. I propose that the that of the TFR what maintains
the features of the pronoun what but has no specified values for those features as aresult of partial semantic bleaching.
(7)
pronoun that
Grammatical
Category
NumberDefiniteness

Determinerthat of transparent comp that
whatU(nderspecified)Complementizer-pl+definite

U if it is D/N.
U if it is D/N

N/A
N/A

The underspecified features are specified via AGREE with the Nucleus—pebbles in thecase of (2).
(8) a. [TP … what[α category, α pl, α definite, …] pebbles[NP, +pl, -definite, …]]]]: wh-movement|_________________________|AGREE
b. [NP what[NP, +pl, -definite, …]] [CP … what[NP, +pl, -definite, …] pebbles[NP, +pl, -definite, …]]]
If the CP is interpreted as a modifier, what projects its label: the TFR is treated just likethe SFR in that what is a host for a clausal modifier. Now it is not surprising that theSFR is taken to be a singular definite DP, whereas the features of TFR are dependent on
those of the Nucleus; what is the head of both constructions, and the what of the SFR
consists of wh and pronoun that, which is singular and definite, whereas the what of theTFR consists of wh and underspecified that, which is specified by the Nucleus via
AGREE.
To conclude, the free relative what can be a head in the landing site, since it can be
the host of a clausal modifier that is produced via its own A’-movement.