This study examined subject-auxiliary inversion errors in wh-questions produced by 88 Korean EFL elementary learners, focusing on whether types of wh-words and auxiliaries could affect inversion acquisition and whether explicit instruction on movement rules could facilitate this process. Guided writing tasks were used as a pretest and a posttest to analyze influence of wh-words and auxiliaries on learners’ inversion in the pretest and effects of instruction on movement rules in the posttest. Results showed that both whwords and auxiliaries significantly influenced learners’ inversion acquisition. Learners struggled more with why-questions than with what-questions, which were selected as representatives of adjunct and argument wh-questions, respectively. More inversion errors occurred in wh-questions requiring do-support than in those involving auxiliary be or modal will, although no significant difference was found between be and will. Experimental lessons with brief explicit instruction on auxiliary movement during regular classes significantly improved learners’ inversion accuracy, particularly in dosupport questions, which posed the greatest challenge in the pretest.

English conditional constructions can be realized as inverted ones, but the question remains what trigger the inversion and what kind of differences exist between the canonical and inverted conditional constructions. This paper supports the claim that the constructions are basically motivated by the information structure while inheriting general properties from the more general constructions, SAI (Subject-Aux-Inversion) ones.

From the beginning of the minimalist program, many researchers have sought the key to the Extended Projection Principle. It was treated as the satisfaction of the strong feature checking of T or Agr (Chomsky 1993, 1995), as the universal requirement of thematization of the subject, or as a side effect of Case feature checking (Martin 1999). On the other hand, Collins (1997) claims that the EPP simply requires that some material occupy the position of Spec-T. On the way of his argumentation, he shows that Locative Inversion (henceforth LI) is a representative case of the EPP satisfaction. Since then, LI has been in the center of debate concerning the nature of the EPP. In this paper, we will show that a is driven by defective feature checking/Agree not for the mere EPP satisfaction. Thus, the approach we take in this paper supports the view that the EPP is not an independent requirement but is closely related to feature checking/Agree.

Ki - y ang Kw on . 2002. Loc ativ e Inv ers ion and EPP . S t ud ie s in M od e rn Gramma r 27, 37- 56 . In this paper, we will analyze locative inversion constructions under the framework of Agree theory in Chomsky (1998, 1999). We face two problems in locative inversion constructions with respect to Agree theory . First, the preposed PP does not agree with the verb. Second, what is the activated element of the preposed PP? To solve these problems, we will suggest that PP in locative inversion be moved not by the synt actic requirement but by the phonological requirement of the functional head. Given this, we may assume that EPP - feature is satisfied not by the syntactic move or merge but by the phonetic realization.

Hyang-Soo Kim. 2000. Rule Precursor and Phonological Change in Direction: An analysis of syneresis and metathesis of h in Greek, Sanskrit and Germanic. Studies en Modern Grammar 22, 159-172. In this paper phonological problems associated with the transfer of h are considered in relation to traditional laws in Indo-European languages: Grassmann`s Law, Bartholomae`s Law, and Grimm`s Law. It is shown that when properly interpreted in relation to a phonological process such as syneresis, the various examples of h-metathesis in Greek, Sanskrit, and Germanic reveal a change in direction of a phonological rule. It is argued that syneresis, which applies both in Sanskrit and Germanic albeit in different direction, serves as the precursor to the later rule of h-metathesis, which also exhibits the same phonological change in direction.

Lim, Sang-bong. 1998. Acquisition of Subject-auxiliary Inversion in Child English and Optimality Theory. Studies in Modern Grammar 14, 349-364. The purpose of this paper is to examine whether the patterns of subject-auxiliary inversion in child English questions can be explained by the constraints in Grimshaw`s(1992) Optimality Theory account of inversion patterns in adult English questions. I briefly review the treatment of subject-auxiliary inversion within the Minimalist Theory. The theory claims that subject-auxiliary inversion is a subcase of head movement that moves an auxiliary across the sentence to the head of the presentential complementizer(CP) position in nonselected CPs. In this paper I try to show that the stages of acquisition in subject-auxiliary inversion and the patterns of inversion in child English. And I also show that an Optimality-Theoretic approach can explain several facts regarding the pattern of auxiliary inversion in child English. In addition, this paper argues that the constraints ranking of child English must be different from those of adult English to capture the characteristics of subject-auxiliary inversion in child English.

Lee, Sang-oh. 1998. Auxiliary Inversion of Wh-interrogative Questions and Checking. Studies in Modern Grammatical Theories 12, 125-139. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the auxiliary inversion and its checking relation of wh-interrogative questions in English in the light of various assumptions made by minimalist theory in linguistics. Following the basic hypothesis that the auxiliary inversion in wh-questions depends on the strength of the head C of CP, the requirement that the C of CP be filled by some element fulfills the operation of auxiliary inversion by being attracted (adjoined) to the question affix(Q). Furthermore, the data drawn from Belfast English and the successive cyclic A´-movement of wh-expressions are used to discuss the function of the specifiers of CP containing overt or null elements, which play important roles in explaining the auxiliary inversion in wh-interrogative questions. The constructions such as subject questions, non-interrogative embedded clauses, and non-interrogative questions are also discussed for the aim of suggestion that only the head feature of C of CP containing overt wh-specifiers is strong enough to attract the auxiliary into the question affix.