Focus, exhaustivity and the syntax 
of Wh-interrogatives

Hungarian wh-interrogatives are reexamined in light of Horvath’s (2007) Exhaustivity operator (EI-Op) analysis for movements earlier (mis)construed as triggered by a syntactically active [Focus] feature. Taking a fresh look at the EI-Op proposal, the paper reexamines what drives obligatory wh-preposing in interrogatives, its potential landing sites and relation to preposed non-­wh-phrases, and analyzes the role played by the syntactic EI-Op, a clausal EI0 head, and the head of CP (Force0) in wh-movement and interpretation. I motivate a variant of the cross-linguistically attested phrasal Q-particle, namely a [Q]-bearing EI-Op heading Hungarian “wh-phrases”, and show the EI0 clausal head to trigger overt “wh-movement”, and the [Q]-feature of the head of CP to only undergo ‘Agree’ with the [Q]-bearing EI-Op phrase (alias wh-phrase).