Divide and Conquer: Split CP Hypothesis in Rhetorical Questions, the Case of SFPs in RQs

  • Maxime Tulling Leiden University


Sentence final particles (SFPs) like Dutch hè and hoor add speaker-related information to sentences. Despite the fact that SFPs are not typically allowed in content-questions, particles like hè occur in rhetorical questions (RQs), while SFPs like hoor cannot. Here I propose that this is due to two factors: (i) RQs are different from ordinary questions, with the former only allowing for the answer the speaker believes is true, and (ii) SFPs operate at different ‘structural levels’. Particles like hè convey a similar meaning as RQs, making them compatible, while SFPs like hoor function at a different level, incompatible with RQs.


1. Hurford, J.R. Grammar: a student's guide. Cambridge University Press, 1994.

2. Fung, R.S.Y-. Final particles in standard Cantonese: semantic extension and pragmatic inference. Doctoral dissertation. Ohio State University, 2000.

3. Kirsner, R.S. & van Heuven, V.J.J.P. Boundary tones and the semantics of the Dutch final particles hè, hoor, zeg and joh. In: Linguistics in the Netherlands 1996, M. den Dikken, C. Cremers, (eds.), Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins (1996), 132-146.

4. Law, A. Sentence-final focus particles in Cantonese. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, University College, London, 2004.

5. Sybesma, R.P.E. & Li, B. The dissection and structural mapping of Cantonese sentence final particles. Lingua, an International Review of General Linguistics, 117 (2007), 1739-1783.

6. Sadock, J.M. Toward a linguistic theory of speech acts, Academic Press, New York, San Francisco, London, 1974.

7. Han, C. Interpreting interrogatives as rhetorical questions. Lingua, 112, 3 (2002), 201-229.

8. Linebarger, M.C. The grammar of negative polarity. Doctoral dissertation, MIT, 1980.

9. Han, C. & Siegel, L. Syntactic and semantic conditions on NPI licensing in questions. In: Proceedings of West Coast Conference in Formal Linguistics, 15, Stanford: CSLI Publications, (1997), 177-191.

10. Obenauer, H-G. & Poletto, C. “Rhetorical" wh-phrases in the left periphery of the sentence, Working Papers in Linguistics, 10, 1 (2000), 121-151.

11. Rizzi, L. The fine structure of the left periphery. In: Elements of grammar: A handbook of generative syntax, ed. Haegeman, L., Dordrecht: Kluwer (1997), 281-327.

12. Hill, V. Vocatives: How syntax meets with pragmatics. Leiden: Brill, 2013
How to Cite
TULLING, Maxime. Divide and Conquer: Split CP Hypothesis in Rhetorical Questions, the Case of SFPs in RQs. Student Undergraduate Research E-journal!, [S.l.], v. 1, nov. 2015. ISSN 2468-0443. Available at: <https://journals.open.tudelft.nl/index.php/sure/article/view/1057>. Date accessed: 23 mar. 2019.