rightward movement review ii editor s note follow second part review beerman et al righward movement first part previous issue linguist most frank drijkoningen s paper morphological strength np position french pp devote clever account relative order subject verb part thereof french especially focus inversion construction demonstrate datum describe manner consistent kayne s antisymmetry theory provide one adopt certain amount occam stretch multiplication functional head resultant multiple spec position home subject drijkoningen argue fairly convincingly follow hierarchical order functional head french c t agr s agr o agr vp identify participial agreement agr o agr checkingsite predicate adjective agreement offer hypothesis regard trigger french stylistic inversion subject np follow verbal complex hbe assumption both french english spec head agr feature infl strong while head feature infl strong french weak english however overt saturation spec head agr feature cp e g front overt whexpression significantly reduce strength spec head agr feature ip obviate need subject np rise spec agr s check paper characterize heavy reliance float strand tous e quantifier separate superficially np modify reviewer little evidence awareness possibility q movement independent movement modify np many star string actually derive assume kayne approach q allow move own sign argument movement impossible perhap rule lack motivation paper thick rather strong argument underlie svo exclusively leftward movement french course few linguist contest french svo evidence rightward movement language alway best peripheral pun intend given strong argument rm headfinality language present bayer bure hartmann paper seem lot sound fury erik hoekstra s paper analyse linear asymmetry verb cluster dutch frisian dialect pp present analysis term kayne s lca hypothesis syntax complex verb cluster especially characteristic language course discussion gradually become clear basis order element within cluster distinguish between dutch frisian respectively headinitial headfinal clear reviewer why label appropriate specifically regard internal syntax verb cluster describe dutch headinitial likely surprise many otherwise discuss feasibility lack thereof insert non verbal material include particle between member verb cluster hoekstra demonstrate follow reasonably lca account propose claim p rigidity headfinal cluster e intolerance insertion mystery approach incorporate asymmetry fact perfect sense assume underlie headfinal order derivation alternative order rm verbal projection reviewer necessarily suggest better approach hoekstra s lca account certainly quite feasible contrary apparent belief section hoekstra spend fair amount interest discussion infinitivum pro participio ipp effect whereby germanic language e g dutch perfective participle infinitive verb complement must itself surface form infinitive primary question issue hoekstra formal grammatical nature ipp effect why characteristic germanic language hoekstra argue ipp effect occur language perfective participle mark prefix e g germanic prefix ge reflex thereof prefix occupy spec position verb morphologically attach since under circumstance spec position already occupy impossible infinitive complement move position must derivation crash loophole exploit dutch ipp language fact traditional analysis germanic scholarship substitution alternative form participle morphophonologically identical infinitive therefore hoekstra s view obstructionist prefix fact frisian exhibit ipp effect accord analysis directly relate fact frisian perfective participle mark suffix reviewer admit familiar scholarly literature subject ipp note curiosity hoekstra s claim p ipp effect systematically absent head final germanic dialect square fact german clearly headfinal sense hoekstra term typically mark perfective participle prefix indeed exhibit ipp few page paper devote nice little discussion recent evolution ipp couple frisian dialect hoekstra argue due both case remarkably heavy contact dutch reviewer s opinion section represent desirable conjunction scholarship concern sociolinguistic linguistic evolution one hand formal grammatical theory paper movement japanese relative clause pp satoshus stanley koike argue relative clause japanese include externallyhead one whose head apparently extract right account term kayne lca type analysis allow spec head comp base structure leftward movement note certain problem result adopt kayne s analysis koike clear almost certainly obviate interest proposal discoursebase motivation leftward movement adoption kayne s lca approach force assume koike s hypothesis movement ip japanese case essentially stylistic movement e motivate pragmatic discourse consideration rather purely syntactic one least imply pf movement account fact order analysis right prediction follow movement semantic head np latter proper syntactic movement invisible far bind theory concern bind theory relevant primarily lf totally irrelevant pf subject relativize minimality either paper rightward wh movement american sign language pp carol neidle judy kegl benjamin bahan debra aaron dawn maclaughlin argue americal sign language asl exhibit headfinal cp rightmarginal spec landingsite wh movement note p proposal partially consistent kayne s claim universal order place spec complement opposite side head however proposal differ kayne s universal antisymmetry approach posit headfinal structure cp while assume headinitial structure complementdaughter neidle et al base much anti lca argument fact certain syntactic feature include polarity wh etc asl express nonmanual marker e g facial expression frequently spread over certain portion clause associate plausible notion those portion define ccommand domain functional head associate feature thus possibility lack thereof spread asl symptomatic presence absence ccommand relation p basis spread argue landingsite wh movement asl clearly right clause nevertheless ccommand latter demonstrate ccommand fact incompatible kayne type analysis briefly entertain analysis consistent kayne s lca hypothesis involve raise c ip higher position note must nevertheless below position e g landingsite topicalization above cp asl point evidence functional nature position independent motivation existence evident motivation movement discuss paper language type generative grammar review consequence univeral vo hypothesis pp caterina donatus alessandra tomasellus address repercussion kayne s antisymmetry hypothesis constituentorder typological study demonstrate neatly elegantly manifold empirical problem kayne s approach language represent variety type include ov language v german dutch svo language without prodrop english french svo language prodrop italian vso language irish repeatedly demonstrate traditional analysis provide accurate result analysis assume kayne s antisymmetry hypothesis note donatus tomasellus throughout address specifically relative order verb nominal ordinary gardenvariety clause detail extrapose structure those discuss bayer bure hartmann haider address paper while already note half papers collection understandably discuss extraposition unfortunate papers focus pun intend adverbal focusmovement serious alternative candidate rm analysis cf schaufele neidle et al s paper relate focus indirect commonly assume whelement priorus focus therefore s structure location especially anything remarkable consider least possible landingsite focusmovement sort appendix koike offer short discussion rightward focusmovement turkish suggest same kind discourseanalysis motivation propose movement leftward background relative clause away semantic head japanese motivate movement leftward nonfocuss argument turkish leave focus subject strand immediately preverbal position least term superficial order reviewer note however koike reference single turkish example simple clause involve three constituent object np subject np verb doubt much account propose able much sense much complex example subjectfocuss discuss schaufele complaint muller s hoekstra s papers expository level both assume part reader high degree familiarity language discuss muller provide english translation german example sentence matter one hindus example sentence while reviewer little trouble read interpret example sentence language facility cannot expect most reader collection likewise hoekstra offer translation example sentence many case reviewer unfamiliar wide variety germanic language quite unable sense furthermore frequently clear language example question mean represent since paper whole depend crucially distinction between dutch frisian source serious obscurity p th page fairly short paper hoekstra finally tell us gloss mp stand modal particle after abbreviation freely several earlier example abbreviation familiar specialist netherlandic nt lot interest reader koike s paper inclusion japanese word midst english language text without typographical highlight either quote italics especially book many typographical error prove little unsettle problem muller s paper where particularly confuse one section discuss extraposition english book whole plague typographical error two example drijkoningen s paper haider s a star fact ok string s obvious context haider regards ok bure hartmann s paper ex a a b b diagram nowhere refer text though s pretty obvious refer bayer press refer several bayer s paper nt appear anywhere reference perhap s represent bayer statement wiltschko s locality constraint misprint p nonsensical koike s paper alignment gloss a impossible sense study while before realize although literally dp ip d cp np qp c ip those biliteral dp cp ip instance mean label immediately precede bracket leftdaughter constituent enclose within bracket mahajan s paper particularly plague typographical error mention merely most egregious example entire direct object np miss hindus string render example s relevance discussion completely opaque already note here many substantive flaw collection due primarily entirely lack space present relevant argument fulfil preface s promise openmindedness book bring together papers several different viewpoint both support undermine kayne s antisymmetry hypothesis while many contributor obviously hold rather strongly whatever side controversy espouse many commend skill seriousness nevertheless necessary task consider possible alternative analysis support side while many papers focus language construction within those language already much discuss generative literature admirable exception especially mention papers bayer hoekstra neidle et al regard typological interest behind paper donatus tomasellus although restrict themselve primarily western european language anyone concern understand debate arise kayne s antisymmetry hypothesis grounds both seriously reject cannot afford ignore collection reference bayer josef directionality logical form scope focus particle wh situ dordrecht kluwer gould stephen j earful jaw eight little piggy pp york norton heim semantic definite indefinite noun phrase university massachusett ph d dissertation hock han henrich principle historical linguistic berlin mouton de gruyter kayne richard antisymmetry syntax cambridge ma mit press rochemont michael s peter w culicover english focus construction theory grammar cambridge cambridge university press schaufele steven focus position subject within vedic vp south asian language roundtable xii university californium berkeley june rightward ho typology structural focus complement head order critical discussion antisymmetry rightward movement syntax pragmatic interface glow hyderabad jan steven schaufele s research interest during past dozen include most significantly typology constituentorder freedom repercussion thereof formal syntactic theory critical comparison various approach syntactic theory currently teach linguistics english department soochow university taipeus taiwan steven schaufele ph d asst prof linguistic english department soochow university waishuanghsus campus taipeus taiwan roc ext fcosw mbm scu edu tw http www prairienet org fcosw homepage html 