%0 Journal Article %A Jayaseelan, K.A. %T Question words in focus positions %D 2003 %J Linguistic Variation Yearbook %V 3 %N 1 %P 69-99 %@ 1568-1483 %R https://doi.org/10.1075/livy.3.05jay %K multiple questions %K scope marking %K Malayalam %K wh-movement %K clausal pied-piping %K clefts %I John Benjamins %X Malayalam, an SOV language, moves its wh-phrases to a Focus position immediately to the left of V (linearly speaking). Multiple wh-phrases are “stacked” in this position. Wh-extraction from an embedded clause is not possible. When a wh-phrase in an embedded clause has matrix scope, scope-marking is done by two movements: the wh-phrase moves to the Focus position in the embedded clause, and the embedded clause is pied-piped to the Focus position in the matrix clause. It is shown that the device of “Attract” by EPP is inadequate (by itself) to describe these movements (or multiple wh-fronting). We suggest a supplementary device. “Association with focus”, the algorithm by which the question operator accesses question words, is (we suggest) a kind of ‘probe’. In languages which employ strong focusing devices, the question operator’s probe “looks at” only Focus positions. In these languages, wh-phrases must cluster in Focus positions in order to be interpreted. %U https://www.jbe-platform.com/content/journals/10.1075/livy.3.05jay