The Syntax of Wh-Questions in Gichuka

This study investigated wh-question formation in Gichuka, an SVO Bantu language spoken in Kenya. The study established that Gichuka forms wh-question using the four strategies, namely: wh-in situ, full wh-movement, partial wh-movement, and intermediate strategy. In wh-in situ, the wh-phrase does not move. In full wh-movement, the wh-phrase moves to the beginning of the sentence. In partial wh-movement, the wh-phrase moves to an intermediate Spec, CP. In the intermediate strategy, the wh-phrase moves to an intermediate Spec, CP, or a Spec of the matrix CP, followed by movement of the subject to position above CP, a Topic position. These findings are similar to those of Muriungi (2003) who established that Kitharaka, a related Bantu language forms questions using the four strategies. As in Muriungi (2003), the study established that subjects cannot be questioned in situ.


Background to the Study
According to Fromkin, Robert, Neil, & Harry (2001), one of the linguistic universals is that all languages have a way of asking questions.Different languages have various ways of forming wh-questions which include full wh-movement, partial wh-movement and wh-in situ.
In English, the wh-word moves from the underlying object position to the beginning of the question as shown in (1) below: 1.(a) You bought a bicycle (object).
(b) *You bought what?(c) What did you buy? (Full wh-movement) (Anisa, 2009;Kristin, 2000;Puskas, 1997;Sabel & Zeller, 2004;Norberto, 2004).1(b) is ungrammatical because the wh-word has remained in the position of the object that is the position after the verb.This is not allowed in English.However, (1b) is grammatical as an echo question.
To formulate questions on adjuncts in English, the wh-word moves from the underlying position of adjuncts, the position after the verb, to the beginning of the question as shown below: (full wh-movement in English is described and analyzed in Chomsky's seminar paper on wh-movement) (Chomsky, 1977).
In some languages, the wh-word can remain in situ, that is, it is not moved at all.It remains in the position where we find the corresponding non-wh-phrase.This is evident in Kiswahili and Kikuyu.
When forming object wh-questions in Kiswahili, the wh-word can remain in the canonical position of the object.It appears after the verb, the position where we also find the object.This is wh-in situ.
Child beat what?"What did the child beat" When forming adjunct wh-questions in Kiswahili, the wh-word can remain in the canonical position of the adjunct as shown in (7): 7. (a) Mtoto alienda shuleni (statement with a locative adjunct) Child went school "The child went to school" (b) Mtoto alienda wapi?(wh-in situ) Child went where? "Where did the child go?" 8. (a) Mtoto alienda asubuhi (statement with a time adjunct) Child went morning "The child went in the morning" (b) Mtoto alienda lini?
Child went school how? "How did the child go to school?" 10.(a) Mtoto alienda shuleni kusoma (statement with a reason adjunct).
Child went school to read "The child went school to read." (b) Mtoto alienda shuleni kwa nini?(wh-in situ).Child went school why? "Why did the child go to school?"In addition to Kiswahili's allowing wh-in situ, it also allows full wh-movement.This is where the wh-word moves from its canonical position to the beginning of the sentence.The moved wh-phrases in Kiswahili typically contain the particle ni in Bantu, which is referred to as the focus marker as shown in (11b) and (12b): 11.(a) Mtoto alienda shuleni (adjunct).
What child beat "What did the child beat?"In Kikuyu, wh-in situ is allowed.The wh-word remains in the underlying position of objects, adjuncts and subjects.According to Clements and Ford (1979) Kikuyu wh-phrases stay in their base position in the overt syntax as shown in ( 13) and ( 14 Wangari went where? "Where did Wangari go?"According to Bergvall (1987), Kikuyu also allows partial wh-movement where the underlying wh-word moves from its canonical position to some intermediate position of the sentence as shown in (15).15.Maria etikitie nindui John agurire?
Maria believes what John bought?"What does Maria believe John bought?"According to Clements (1984), Kikuyu also allows full wh-movement where the wh-word moves to the front of the sentence as shown in (16): 16.Nikũ Ngugi augire atiKamau nĩonire Kaanake?
Where Ngugi said that Kamau saw Kaanake?"Where did Ngugi say that Kamau saw Kaanake?" Typically Kikuyu uses three strategies in forming wh-questions that is, full wh-movement, wh-in situ and partial wh-movement.Moved wh-phrases bear the focus marker morpheme ni.wh-phrases, that are in situ not bearing ni.The particle ni is therefore diagnostic of movement in Kikuyu and Bantu languages in general German allows partial wh-movement where the wh-word moves to the middle of the sentence.According to McDaniel (1986) the scope of wh-phrase moved to the middle of the sentence is marked by a wh-expletive which appears in initial position of the sentence, (17): 17.Was glaubst du welchen Mantel Jakob heute angezogen hat?
What do you think which coat Jacob put on today?In example (20a) "was" in German is "what" in English.It is a wh-expletive, that is, it carries no meaning; it is only a requirement when constructing wh-questions in German for reasons of scope.The contentive wh-phrase "which coat has been partially moved."

Statement of the Problem
It is a linguistic universal that all languages have strategies of questioning.These strategies include full whmovement, wh-in situ and partial movement.While it is documented that English only allows full wh-movement; German allows partial wh-movement and full-wh movement; Kikuyu, Dholuo, Kitharaka, Zulu and Babine Witsuwiten allow full-wh movement, partial wh movement and wh in situ, the strategies of forming wh-questions in Gichuka are not known and have not been documented.Therefore, the study investigated and documented these strategies and located these strategies in the general cross-linguistic wh-question formation strategies.

Objectives
i) To discuss the strategies of formulating object, subject and adjunct wh-questions in Gichuka.ii) To describe the structural representations of objects, subjects and adjunct wh-questions in Gichuka.

Results and Discussion
The presentation in this section is guided by the two research objectives.
The first objective was to establish and discuss the strategies of formulating object, subject and adjunct wh questions in Gichuka.From the literature review, it was stated that cross linguistically, there are three strategies of forming wh questions.They include full wh movement/ex situ, wh in situ and partial wh movement.In full wh movement the wh phrase moves to the specifier of CP of the matrix clause while in partial wh movement, the wh phrase moves to the specifier of CP of an embedded clause.Wh in situ does not involve any movement.

Objects
Objects in English are questioned by two whphrases; what and who.The equivalents of these in Gichuka are 'mbi' and 'uu' Consider the affirmative sentence in 18(a): 18(a) kairitu karugire irio Girl cooked food S V O "The girl cooked food" To question the object "irio", the wh phrase can move to the initial position of the sentence.This strategy is full wh movement/ex situ as in 18(b).
18(b) Nimbi kairitu karugire?(full wh movement) f-what girl cooked "What did the girl cook?"As evident in 18(b), the focus marker "ni" is added to wh phrase to form "nimbi". However if the focus marker is not added the sentence becomes ungrammatical as shown in 18(c): *18(c) Mbi kairitu karugire?What girl cooked The object "irio" can also be questioned by moving the wh phrase to the middle of the sentence as shown in 18(d).
18(d) Kairitu nimbi karugire?(intermediate wh movement) Girl f-what cooked "What did the girl cook?"In 18(d), The wh phrase appears in the intermediate position.This is the intermediate strategy.In this strategy, the wh phrase moves to a position immediately after the subject of the sentence.The focus marker "ni" is added just as in the case of full wh movement.However, if the focus marker is not added to the wh phrase after the movement, the question becomes ungrammatical as shown 18(e).
*18(e) Kairitu mbi karugire?Girl what cooked The wh phrase can also remain in the canonical position of the object.This means that the wh phrase does not move at all.

18(f) Kairitu karugire mbi? (wh in situ)
Girl cooked what "What did the girl cook?"As shown in (4f), the wh phrase remains in the position of the object but no focus marker is added.However if the focus marker added the sentence becomes ungrammatical as in 18(g): *18(g) Kairitu karugire nimbi?The other object wh-phrase which is "uu" is seen to behave the same as "mbi" in different constructions.There is the addition of a focus marker whenever the wh phrase moves.However, in the case of the wh phrase "uu"(who) the focus marker "ni" is added even if in most cases "i" is usually omitted and becomes optional.Therefore, the wh phrase becomes "n(i)uu" or "nuu".Murimi who beat? "Who did Murimi beat?"In case the wh phrase does not move at all, then no focus marker is needed.19(r) Murimi aringire uu (wh in situ) Murimi beat who? "Who did Murimi beat?" Therefore it is ungrammatical to add a focus marker if the wh phrase has not moved.*19(s) Murimi aringire nuu? (wh in situ) Murimi beat f-who "Who did Murimi beat?" From the data in ( 18) and ( 19) above, the following observations can be made.i) There are four strategies involved in forming object wh questions in Gichuka.These are, wh full movement, partial wh movement, intermediate wh-movement and wh in situ.ii) Whenever the object wh-phrases "mbi" and "uu" move, the focus marker 'ni' must be added to them.iii) If the wh phrase remains in situ, no focus markers are needed.

Subjects
Subjects wh questions are formed by wh phrases "what" and "who" which are "mbi" and "uu" in Gichuka respectively.
Consider the sentence in 20(a).The subject of the sentence is 'Kairitu'-girl.20(a) Kairitu karugire irio.Girl cooked food.S V O "The girl cooked food."To question the subject "girl", full wh movement is possible, as in 20(b).20(b) Nuu arugire irio?(full wh movement) f-who cooked food.'Who cooked the food?' 20(b), Shows that it is possible that the wh phrase "uu" has moved.This is because of the addition of a focus marker 'ni'.This movement is evident as the sentence is ungrammatical if a focus marker is not added, as shown in 20(c).
*20(c) Uu arugire irio?Who cooked food.Wh in situ is not possible when constructing subject wh questions.This explains the ungrammaticality of 20(f): *20(f) Uu arugire irio?(wh in situ) who cooked food "Who cooked the food?"In a complex sentence the subject wh phrase can move to the beginning of the sentenceas in 21(a): 21(a) Nuu John etikitie Mwende augire niarugire irio?(full wh movement) F-who John believes Mwende, said cooked food?"Who does John believes Mwende said cooked food?"The focus marker "n"is added however if it is left out the sentence becomes ungrammatical.*21(b) Uu John etiikitie Mwende augire niarugire irio?
Who John believe Mwende said cooked food?Partial wh movement is also evident in a subject wh question as shown in 21(c).21(c) John etikitienuu mwende augire niarugire irio?(partial wh movement) John believes f-who Mwende said cooked food."Who does John believe Mwende said cooked the food?"In 21(c), the wh phrase moves to a position after the second embedded clause.The focus marker "n" is added to the subject wh phrase when it moves.If the focus marker is left out, the sentence becomes ungrammatical as in 21(d).
*21(d) John etikitie uu Mwende augire niarugire irio?John believes who Mwende said cooked food?The subject wh phrase can also move to a position that immediately follows the subject as in 21(e) and 21(f) 21(e) Johnnuuetikitie Mwende augire niarugire irio?(intermediate wh movement) John f-who believe Mwende said cooked food."Who does John believe Mwende said cooked food?" 21(f) John etikitie Mwende nuu augire niarugire irio?(intermediate wh movement) John believe Mwende f-who said cooked food."Who does John believe Mwende said cooked food?"In both movements,the focus marker "n" is added to the wh phrase.However if it is left out, again the sentence becomes ungrammatical as in 21(i) and 21(j).
John who believe mwende said cooked food.Wh in situ is not possible in subject wh questions.*21(k) John etikitie Mwende augire uu arugire irio?(wh in situ) John believe Mwende said who cooked food?The wh "phrase mbi" (what) has the same distribution as "uu"(who).When moved, a focus marker is added to the wh phrase.We add focus markers "ni" to "mbi" and "n" to "uu".In both wh phrases, wh in situ is imposible when forming subject wh-questions.
From the data in ( 20) and ( 21) above the following observations are made.
(i) In order to form a subject wh question, movement is compulsory.Therefore, full wh movement, partial wh movement and intermediate wh movement are involved.
(ii) It is impossible to form a subject wh question when the wh phrase is in situ.
(iii) Focus markers are added to the wh phrases."ni" is added to the subject wh phrase "mbi" while "n" is added to the subject wh phrase "uu".
Table 1 is showing the strategies for objects and subjects.
From Table 1, the object wh questions allow all the strategies of formulating wh question while the subjects allow full, partial and intermediate wh movement.
The subjects do not allow wh in situ."What did the girl cook?" Figure 3 shows the movement of the wh phrase "mbi"to the specifier of CP of the matrix clause.In a complex sentence the same distribution is evident as in (31).F-when John believe Mwende said girl cooked food.'When does John believe Mwende said the girl cooked food?' Figure 6 shows full movement of an adjuncts wh-phrase.

Partial Wh Movement
This strategie involves the wh phrase moving to the specifier of CP of the most embedded clause or the second embedded clause.This strategy is allowed when forming object, subject and adjunct wh question in Gichuka.
In a complex sentence as in (34), the wh phrase moves from the position of the subject to the specifier of CP of the second embedded clause.
(34) John etikitie nuu Mwende augire niarugire irio?(subject wh question) John believe who Mwende said cooked food?'Who does Mwende believe cooked food?'This movement is shown in Figure 7.This movement can be seen in adjuncts as in ( 35).( 35) John etikitie nikuMwende augire kairitu nikarugire irio?(adjunct partial wh movement) John believe f-where Mwende said girl cooked food.'Where does John believe Mwende said the girl cooked food?' Adjunct partial wh movement can be shown syntactically as in Figure 8.

Intermediate Wh Movement
This strategy involves the movement of the wh phrase to the specifier of CP I while the subject is topicalized, and moves to the specifier of topic phrase.Therefore in this strategy, there is topicalization in addition to the wh movement.Consider (36).
(36) John nimbi etikitie Mwende augire kairitu nikarugire?(object wh question) John f-what believe Mwende said girl cooked.'What does John believe Mwende said the girl cooked?'In the example in (36), the wh-phrase 'nimbi' has moved to the specifier of CP, while the subject has been moved to the specifier of Topic phrase as shown in Figure 9.

Wh in Situ
This strategy does not allow any movement of the wh phrase.This means that the wh phrase remains in the underlying position of the objects, subjects and adjuncts during the formation of the wh question.However, this   strategy is not allowed in subject wh questions as discussed earlier.
In a simple sentence (37), object wh in situ question can be represented as in  As shown in Figure 12, the wh phrase is not moving at all, therefore the focus marker is not added.

Conclusion
(1) Awha phrase in Gichuka can move from its canonical position to a position in the specifier of CP of the matrix clause (full wh movement), it can also land in a position of the specifier of CP of the most embedded or 2. (a) He writes quickly (adjunct) (b) *He writes how?(c) How does he write?3. (a) He writes everyday (adjunct) (b) *He writes when?(c) When does he write?4. (a) He writes for fun? (adjunct) (b) *He writes why?(c) Why does he write?(full wh-movement).5. (a) He writes on a paper (adjunct) (b) *He writes where?(c) Where does he write?(full wh-movement).

Figure 1 .
Figure 1.The structure of phrases in X-bar theory.

Figure 2 .
Figure 2. The structure of a sentence.
(31) Nimbi John etikitie Mwende augire kairitu nikarugire?f-what John believe Mwende said girl cooked."What does John believe Mwende said the girl cooked?"The structure is shown in Figure 4.The wh phrase "mbi" moves to the specifier of CP of matrix clause.The focus marker "ni" is added to it to form the object wh question.For the subjects, the wh phrase moves from the position of the subject to the specifier of CP of matrix clause as shown in (32).(32)Nuu John etikitie Mwende augire niarugire irio?F-who John believe Mwende said cooked food."Who does John believe Mwende said cooked the food?"The structure is shown in Figure5.The adjuncts wh full movement can be represented as in (33) (33) NIri John etikitie Mwende augire kairitu nikarugire irio?

Figure 4 .
Figure 4. Full wh-movement in a complex sentence.

Figure 5 .
Figure 5. Full wh-movement of a subject in a complex sentence.

Figure 8 .
Figure 8. Partial wh-movement of an adjunct wh-phrase.John believe Mwende said girl cooked what "What does Mwende believe the girl cooked?"The same distribution is shown in adjunct wh in situ.Consider (39).(39) John etikitie Mwende augire kairitu karugire irio ku?" John believe Mwende said girl cooked food where."Where does John believe Mwende said the girl cooked food?"The structure is shown in Figure 12.As shown in Figure12, the wh phrase is not moving at all, therefore the focus marker is not added.

Figure 10 .
Figure 10.Wh-in situ in a simple sentence.

Figure 11 .
Figure 11.Wh-in situ in a complex sentence.

Figure 12 .
Figure 12.Adjunct wh-in situ in a complex sentence.
Girl cooked f-whatFull wh movement, intermediate strategy and wh in situ are also possible in complex sentences.Consider the complex affirmative sentence in 19(a).19(a)Johnetikitiemwendeaugirekairitu karugire irio.(complexsentence)JohnbelieveMwende said girl cooked food "John believes Mwende said the girl cooked food" To question the object "irio", the wh phrase can move to the initial position of the sentence.A focus marker "ni" is added.19(b)NimbiJohnetikitieMwende augire kairitu nikarugire?f-what John believe Mwende said girl cooked 'What does John believe Mwende said the girl cooked food?'If the focus marker "ni" is not added, an ungrammatical construction is made as shown in 19(c).*19(c)MbiJohnetikitie Mwende augire kairitu nikarugire?What John believe Mwende said girl cooked The object "irio" can also be questioned by moving the wh phrase to the specifier of CP of the second embedded clause.In 19(d), the movement of the wh phrase to the second embedded clause.It's evident that the focus marker "ni" is added to it.The wh phrase can also move to the specifier of CP of the most embedded clause having the focus marker "ni" as shown in 19(e).If the wh phrase moves to a position after any of the embedded clauses, a focus marker must be added to it.However, if it is not added, the question becomes ungrammatical as shown in 19(f) and 19(g).Mwende said girl cooked *19(g) John etikitie Mwende augire mbi kairitu karugire?John believes Mwende said what girl cooked It is also possible to move the wh phrase to a position that immediately follows the subject.This is the inter-Wh in situ is also possible in a complex sentence.The wh phrase remains in the position where we find the object 'irio'.19(l) John etikitie Mwende augire kairitu karugire mbi? (wh in situ) John believes Mwende said girl l cooked what?'What does John believe Mwende said the girl cooked?'The focus marker is not present in 19(l) as the wh phrase has not moved.However, if we add a focus marker 'ni' to the wh phrase the sentence is ungrammatical.Consider 19(m).