Publishing Partner: Cambridge University Press CUP Extra Wiley-Blackwell Publisher Login
amazon logo
More Info

New from Oxford University Press!


Language Planning as a Sociolinguistic Experiment

By: Ernst Jahr

Provides richly detailed insight into the uniqueness of the Norwegian language development. Marks the 200th anniversary of the birth of the Norwegian nation following centuries of Danish rule

New from Cambridge University Press!


Acquiring Phonology: A Cross-Generational Case-Study

By Neil Smith

The study also highlights the constructs of current linguistic theory, arguing for distinctive features and the notion 'onset' and against some of the claims of Optimality Theory and Usage-based accounts.

New from Brill!


Language Production and Interpretation: Linguistics meets Cognition

By Henk Zeevat

The importance of Henk Zeevat's new monograph cannot be overstated. [...] I recommend it to anyone who combines interests in language, logic, and computation [...]. David Beaver, University of Texas at Austin

Query Details

Query Subject:   Polar interrogatives without auxiliaries
Author:   Bruno Estigarribia
Submitter Email:  click here to access email
Subject Language(s):  English

Query:   Hello everyone,

I am currently working on acquisition of yes/no questions in English and I need to look at bibliography on questions in adult (or child) English, in particular acceptable polar interrogatives without auxiliaries (or without inversion), like these adult questions from CHILDES:

W/O aux:
“you watching me?”, “want your book Sarah?”, “you like apple ?” [from CHILDES/BROWN/Sarah006]

''that good ?'' (Int: is that good?)
''you want to eat it right there ?''
''gon (t)a have a bite ?''
''gon (t)a eat it ?''
''gon (t)a go see Jonathon today ?''
''gon (t)a eat the bread too ?''
''we gon (t)a go for a walk today ?''
[from CHILDES/Bates/snack28/amy]

W/O inv:
''you don't want any toast ?'' [from CHILDES/Bates/snack28/amy]

I am looking for bibliography explaining why these forms occur and what their function is. It seems to me a priori that there is no contrast between questions with auxiliaries and auxiliary-less ones, but I haven't performed any detailed analysis. So far, the conditions under which such ''reduced''
interrogatives are acceptable have eluded me, but I am sure a lot of people must have written about it.
On the contrary, questions with uninverted auxiliaries seem to contrast with the inverted ones. There is some sort of ''echoic'' feeling to them, or a metalinguistic or
commentary-like feeling sometimes. Mind you, this is just an impression.

Please reply directly to and I'll post a summary.
Thank you
LL Issue: 15.705
Date posted: 26-Feb-2004


Sums main page