In minimalist theory of syntax, it is a standard assumption that movement is triggered by feature checking between the attractor (or checker) and the attracted (or moved/checked). Under this assumption, however, the motivation for the intermediate steps in interclausal movements, especially in the so-called "long" wh-movement, does not seem to be very clear. In order to account for the successive cyclicity of wh-movement, Chomsky (2000, 2001a, b) and others assume that the head of every phase-inducing category has some uninterpretable feature, which triggers successive cyclic movement. On the other hand, Boskovie (2002) and others propose that successive cyclicity has no direct relation with feature checking, but that the requirement for intermediate steps in interclausal movement is due to some Subjacency-like locality condition, e.g., the Minimal Chain Condition of Chomsky and Lasnik (1993). Neither of these two approaches, however, is successful in accounting for the successive cyclicity of wh-movement. The feature-based approach of Chomsky (2000, 2001a, b) and others assumes some unmotivated feature, e.g., [uwh]; the constraint-based approach of Bodkovid (2002) and others must assume "look-ahead," which is to be avoided by the phase-by-phase model of the minimalist framework. We suggest two possible directions to pursue: one with top-down structure-building, and the other with Greed-like properties of the extracted element itself, laying more emphasis on the latter approach.

Lee, Jae, Choel. 1998. The Locality on Movement and the Strict Cyclicity. Studies in Modern Grammatical Theories 12, 103-123. In the framework of the Minimalist Approach, as the Government theory is eliminated, the locality on movement is determined by the Checking Domain of Head Chain, the Minimal Link Condition, the Extension Requirement, three processes for the Generalized Transformation, and so on. The purpose of this paper is to examine that the Strict Cyclicity becomes a factor that determine the locality of movement, is to point out the problems of the Extension Requirement(Chomsky 1992), the Minimal Chain Condition(Chomsky 1994) and the Target α (Kitahara 1995) that are suggested to guarantee the Strict Cyclicity, and is to prove the problems to be solved by the Attract-F Theory. When the feature of the checker is strong, the strict cyclicity is automatically guaranteed, because the closest item containing the relevant formal features must move to the SPEC of the checker before the projection of the upper head does occur. There never arise direct movements of lexical items after Spell-Out. The violation of the Strict Cyclicity cannot occur after Spell-Out, either because the relevant formal features only move to the sublabel of the checker and adjoin there.