In:The Ziggurat of Grammar: In honor of Ur Shlonsky
Edited by Lena Baunaz, Giuliano Bocci and Andrew Nevins
[Language Faculty and Beyond 20] 2025
► pp. 495–510
Get fulltext
Chapter 24On ‘why’ in Brazilian Portuguese
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) 4.0 license.
For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at rights@benjamins.nl.
Published online: 13 November 2025
https://doi.org/10.1075/lfab.20.24gue
https://doi.org/10.1075/lfab.20.24gue
Abstract
The present study investigates the syntactic derivation of por que (‘why’) in
Brazilian Portuguese (BP). The syntactic properties of why and its counterparts across languages have
long been a fruitful area of inquiry in theoretical syntax. Bonan and Shlonsky
(2021), for instance, examine the distinct behaviors of parché and
parcossa in Trevisan, arguing for two distinct external merge positions. In BP, por
que can appear in at least three different syntactic positions without altering its interpretation.
Drawing on previous literature on why counterparts and employing precedence and transitivity tests
involving negation and adverbial elements, we argue that a unified syntactic position for BP por que
is viable — specifically, Spec,ReasonP in the left periphery. This analysis aligns with previous cartographic research
that classifies reason wh-phrases as high adverbs across languages (Rizzi,
2001; Shlonsky & Soare, 2011; Shlonsky & Bonan; Tsai,
2008, among others).
Keywords: syntactic cartography, wh-questions, why, negation, syntactic islands, Cinque hierarchy
Article outline
- Introduction
- 1.The literature about why
- 2.BP interrogative syntax
- Conclusion
Note References
References (8)
Bonan, Caterina. 2019. On
clause-internally moved wh-phrases: wh-to-foc, nominative clitics, and the theory of Northern Italian wh-in
situ. PhD dissertation. University of Geneva.
Bonan, Caterina & Ur Shlonsky. 2021. On
‘why’ in situ in Northern Italian dialects: evidence from
Trevisan. In Gabriela Soare (ed.), Why
is ‘why’ unique?: Its syntactic and semantic
properties, 41–61. Berlin: De Gruyter.
Cinque, Guglielmo. 1999. Adverbs
and functional heads: a cross-linguistic
perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Poletto, Cecilia & Jean-Yves Pollock. 2015. Arguing
for remnant movement in Romance. In Günther Grewendorf (ed.), Remnant
movement, 135–178. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
. 2001. On
the position “int(errogative)” in the left periphery of the
clause. In Guglielmo Cinque & Giampaolo Salvi (eds.), Current
studies in Italian syntax: Essays offered to Lorenzo
Renzi, 267–296. Amsterdam: Elsevier.