Hubbry Logo
QuestionQuestionMain
Open search
Question
Community hub
Question
logo
8 pages, 1 posts
0 subscribers
author image
ladensitae478in generalToday at 10:01

hair transplant kerala

Contribute something
Question
Question
Question
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
A question mark made of smaller question marks
A question mark made of smaller question marks

A question is an utterance which serves as a request for information. Questions are sometimes distinguished from interrogatives, which are the grammatical forms, typically used to express them. Rhetorical questions, for instance, are interrogative in form but may not be considered bona fide questions, as they are not expected to be answered.

Questions come in a number of varieties. For instance; Polar questions are those such as the English example "Is this a polar question?", which can be answered with "yes" or "no". Alternative questions such as "Is this a polar question, or an alternative question?" present a list of possibilities to choose from. Open questions such as "What kind of question is this?" allow many possible resolutions.

Questions are widely studied in linguistics and philosophy of language. In the subfield of pragmatics, questions are regarded as illocutionary acts which raise an issue to be resolved in discourse. In approaches to formal semantics such as alternative semantics or inquisitive semantics, questions are regarded as the denotations of interrogatives, and are typically identified as sets of the propositions which answer them.

Definitions

[edit]

Linguistically, a question may be defined on three levels.

At the level of semantics, a question is defined by its ability to establish a set of logically possible answers.[1]

At the level of pragmatics, a question is an illocutionary category of speech act which seeks to obtain information from the addressee.[1]

At the level of syntax, the interrogative is a type of clause which is characteristically associated with questions, and defined by certain grammatical rules (such as subject–auxiliary inversion in English) which vary by language.

Some authors conflate these definitions. While prototypical questions (such as "What is your name?") will satisfy all three definitions, their overlap is not complete. For example "I would like to know your name." satisfies the pragmatic definition, but not the semantic or syntactic ones. Such mismatches of form and function are called indirect speech acts.

Uses

[edit]
A man asking a woman a question
A man asking a woman a question

The principal use of questions is to elicit information from the person being addressed by indicating the information which the speaker (or writer) desires.[2]

A slight variant is the display question, where the addressee is asked to produce information which is already known to the speaker.[3] For example, a teacher or game show host might ask "What is the capital of Australia?" to test the knowledge of a student or contestant.

A direction question is one that seeks an instruction rather than factual information. It differs from a typical ("information") question in that the characteristic response is a directive rather than a declarative statement.[1] For example:

A: When should I open your gift?
B: Open it now.

Questions may also be used as the basis for a number of indirect speech acts. For example, the imperative sentence "Pass the salt." can be reformulated (somewhat more politely) as:

Would you pass the salt?

Which has the form of an interrogative, but the illocutionary force of a directive.

The term rhetorical question may be colloquially applied to a number of uses of questions where the speaker does not seek or expect an answer (perhaps because the answer is implied or obvious), such as:

Has he lost his mind?
Why have I brought you all here? Let me explain...
They're closed? But the website said it was open until 10 o'clock.

Loaded questions (a special case of complex questions), such as "Have you stopped beating your wife?" may be used as a joke or to embarrass an audience, because any answer a person could give would imply more information than he was willing to affirm.

Semantic classification

[edit]

The main semantic classification of questions is according to the set of logically possible answers that they admit. An open question, such as "What is your name?", allows indefinitely many possible answers. A closed question admits a finite number of possible answers. Closed questions may be further subdivided into yes–no questions (such as "Are you hungry?") and alternative questions (such as "Do you want jam or marmalade?").

The distinction between these classes tends to be grammaticalized. In English, open and closed interrogatives are distinct clause types characteristically associated with open and closed questions, respectively.

Yes–no questions

[edit]
Main article: Yes–no question

A yes–no question (also called a polar question,[1] or general question[4]) asks whether some statement is true. They can, in principle be answered by a "yes" or "no" (or similar words or expressions in other languages). Examples include "Do you take sugar?", "Should they be believed?" and "Am I the loneliest person in the world?"

Alternative questions

[edit]

An alternative question[5] presents two or more discrete choices as possible answers in an assumption that only one of them is true. For example:

Are you supporting England, Ireland or Wales?

The canonical expected answer to such a question would be either "England", "Ireland", or "Wales". Such an alternative question presupposes that the addressee supports one of these three teams. The addressee may cancel this presupposition with an answer like "None of them".

In English, alternative questions are not syntactically distinguished from yes–no questions. Depending on context, the same question may have either interpretation:

  • Do these muffins have butter or margarine? [I'm on a low fat diet.]
  • Do these muffins have butter or margarine? [I saw that the recipe said you could use either.]

In speech, these are distinguishable by intonation, i.e., the question is interpreted as an alternative question when uttered with a rising contour on "butter" and a falling contour on "margarine".

Open questions

[edit]

An open question (also called a variable question,[1] non-polar question, or special question[4]) admits indefinitely many possible answers. For example:

Where should we go for lunch?

In English, these are typically embodied in a closed interrogative clause, which uses an interrogative word such as when, who, or what. These are also called wh-words, and for this reason open questions may also be called wh-questions.

Question formation

[edit]

Questions may be marked by some combination of word order, morphology, interrogative words, and intonation. Where languages have one or more clause type characteristically used to form questions, they are called interrogative clauses. Open and closed questions are generally distinguished grammatically, with the former identified by the use of interrogative words.

In English, German, French and various other (mostly European) languages, both forms of interrogative are subject to an inversion of word order between verb and subject. In English, the inversion is limited to auxiliary verbs, which sometimes necessitates the addition of the auxiliary do, as in:

a. Sam reads the newspaper. - Statement
b. Does Sam read the newspaper? - Yes–no question formed using inversion and do-support

Open questions

[edit]

Open questions are formed by the use of interrogative words such as, in English, when, what, or which. These stand in as variables representing the unknown information being sought. They may also combine with other words to form interrogative phrases, such as which shoes in:

Which shoes should I wear to the party?

In many languages, including English and most other European languages, the interrogative phrase must (with certain exceptions such as echo questions) appear at the beginning of the sentence, a phenomenon known as wh-fronting. In other languages, the interrogative appears in the same position as it would in a corresponding declarative sentence (in situ).[6]

A question may include multiple variables as in:

Whose gifts are in which boxes?

Polar questions

[edit]

Different languages may use different mechanisms to distinguish polar ("yes-no") questions from declarative statements (in addition to the question mark). English is one of a small number of languages which use word order. Another example is French:

French Translation
Declarative Vous avez tué un oiseau. You have killed a bird.
Polar question Avez-vous tué un oiseau? Have you killed a bird?

Cross-linguistically, the most common method of marking a polar question is with an interrogative particle,[7] such as the Japanese か ka, Mandarin 吗 ma and Polish czy.

Other languages use verbal morphology, such as the -n verbal postfix in the Tunica language.

Of the languages examined in the World Atlas of Language Structures, only one, Atatláhuca–San Miguel Mixtec, was found to have no distinction between declaratives and polar questions.[7]

Intonation

[edit]

Most languages have an intonational pattern which is characteristic of questions (often involving a raised pitch at the end, as in English).

In some languages, such as English, or Russian, a rising declarative is a sentence which is syntactically declarative but is understood as a question by the use of a rising intonation. For example, "You're not using this?"

On the other hand, there are English dialects (Southern Californian English, New Zealand English) in which rising declaratives (the "uptalk") do not constitute questions.[8] However it is established that in English there is a distinction between assertive rising declaratives and inquisitive rising declaratives, distinguished by their prosody.

Request for confirmation and speaker presupposition

[edit]

Questions may be phrased as a request for confirmation for a statement the interrogator already believes to be true.

A tag question is a polar question formed by the addition of an interrogative fragment (the "tag") to a (typically declarative) clause. For example:

You're John, aren't you?
Let's have a drink, shall we?
You remembered the eggs, right?

This form may incorporate speaker's presupposition when it constitutes a complex question. Consider a statement

(A) Somebody killed the cat

and several questions related to it.

(B) John killed the cat, did he? (tag question)
(C) Was it John who killed the cat?

As compared with:

(D) Who killed the cat?

Unlike (B), questions (C) and (D) incorporate a presupposition that somebody killed the cat.

Question (C) indicates speaker's commitment to the truth of the statement that somebody killed the cat, but no commitment as to whether John did it or did not.[9]

Punctuation

[edit]

In languages written in Latin, Cyrillic or certain other scripts, a question mark at the end of a sentence identifies questions in writing. As with intonation, this feature is not restricted to sentences having the grammatical form of questions – it may also indicate a sentence's pragmatic function.

In Spanish an additional inverted mark is placed at the beginning: ¿Cómo está usted? "How are you?". An uncommon variant of the question mark is the interrobang (‽), which combines the function of the question mark and the exclamation mark.

Responses and answers

[edit]
See also: Yes–no question § Answers, and Answer ellipsis

The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language distinguishes between an answer (being a member of the set of logically possible answers, as delineated in § Semantic classification) and a response (any statement made by the addressee in reply to the question).[1] For example, the following are all possible responses to the question "Is Alice ready to leave?" 

i.  (a) Yes.
    (b) She's ready.
    (c) No, she's not.
ii. (a) I don't know.
    (b) Why do you ask?
    (c) She might be.
iii.(a) She's still looking for her wallet.
    (b) She wasn't expecting you before 5 o'clock.
    (c) I'll let you know when she's ready.

Only the [i] responses are answers in the Cambridge sense. The responses in [ii] avoid committing to a yes or no answer. The responses in [iii] all implicate an answer of no, but are not logically equivalent to no. (For example, in [iiib], the respondent can cancel the implicature by adding a statement like: "Fortunately, she packed everything up early.")

Along similar lines, Belnap and Steel (1976) define the concept of a direct answer:

A direct answer to a given question is a piece of language that completely, but just completely, answers the question...What is crucial is that it be effectively decidable whether a piece of language is a direct answer to a specific question... To each clear question there corresponds a set of statements which are directly responsive. ... A direct answer must provide an unarguably final resolution of the question.[10]

Answering negative questions

[edit]
Main article: Yes and no

"Negative questions" are interrogative sentences which contain negation in their phrasing, such as "Shouldn't you be working?" These can have different ways of expressing affirmation and denial from the standard form of question, and they can be confusing, since it is sometimes unclear whether the answer should be the opposite of the answer to the non-negated question. For example, if one does not have a passport, both "Do you have a passport?" and "Don't you have a passport?" are properly answered with "No", despite apparently asking opposite questions. The Japanese and Korean languages avoid this ambiguity. Answering "No" to the second of these in Japanese or Korean would mean, "I do have a passport".

A similar ambiguous question in English is "Do you mind if...?" The responder may reply unambiguously "Yes, I do mind," if they do mind, or "No, I don't mind," if they do not, but a simple "No" or "Yes" answer can lead to confusion, as a single "No" can seem like a "Yes, I do mind" (as in "No, please don't do that"), and a "Yes" can seem like a "No, I don't mind" (as in "Yes, go ahead"). An easy way to bypass this confusion would be to ask a non-negative question, such as "Is it all right with you if...?"

Some languages have different particles (for example the French "si", the German "doch" or the Swedish, Danish, and Norwegian "jo") to answer negative questions (or negative statements) in an affirmative way; they provide a means to express contradiction.

Indirect questions

[edit]

As well as direct questions (such as Where are my keys?), there also exist indirect questions (also called interrogative content clauses), such as where my keys are. These are used as subordinate clauses in sentences such as "I wonder where my keys are" and "Ask him where my keys are." Indirect questions do not necessarily follow the same rules of grammar as direct questions.[11] For example, in English and some other languages, indirect questions are formed without inversion of subject and verb (compare the word order in "where are they?" and "(I wonder) where they are"). Indirect questions may also be subject to the changes of tense and other changes that apply generally to indirect speech.

Learning

[edit]

Questions are used from the most elementary stage of learning to original research. In the scientific method, a question often forms the basis of the investigation and can be considered a transition between the observation and hypothesis stages. Students of all ages use questions in their learning of topics, and the skill of having learners creating "investigatable" questions is a central part of inquiry education. The Socratic method of questioning student responses may be used by a teacher to lead the student towards the truth without direct instruction, and also helps students to form logical conclusions.

A widespread and accepted use of questions in an educational context is the assessment of students' knowledge through exams.

Origins

[edit]

Enculturated apes Kanzi, Washoe, Sarah and a few others who underwent extensive language training programs (with the use of gestures and other visual forms of communications) successfully learned to answer quite complex questions and requests (including question words "who", "what", "where"), although so far they have failed to learn how to ask questions themselves. For example, David and Anne Premack wrote: "Though she [Sarah] understood the question, she did not herself ask any questions — unlike the child who asks interminable questions, such as What that? Who making noise? When Daddy come home? Me go Granny's house? Where puppy? Sarah never delayed the departure of her trainer after her lessons by asking where the trainer was going, when she was returning, or anything else".[12] The ability to ask questions is often assessed in relation to comprehension of syntactic structures. It is widely accepted that the first questions are asked by humans during their early infancy, at the pre-syntactic, one word stage of language development, with the use of question intonation.[13]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Question

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
A question is a linguistic utterance or sentence type that functions to seek information, clarification, or confirmation from an addressee, typically through an interrogative form that carries a directive illocutionary . In natural languages, questions are distinguished from other sentence types—such as declaratives (which assert facts), imperatives (which issue commands), and exclamatives (which express emotions)—by syntactic markers like inversion, interrogative particles, or pro-forms (e.g., "what," "who," "how"). Linguists identify primary categories including polar questions, which probe the truth of a and elicit yes/no responses (e.g., "Is it raining?"), and content questions (or wh-questions), which target specific constituents like agents, objects, or reasons (e.g., "Who left the door open?"). A third type, alternative questions, presents options for selection (e.g., "Tea or coffee?"), while rhetorical questions may superficially seek answers but primarily assert or persuade. Philosophically, questions underpin human and epistemic progress, serving not only as prompts for answers but as autonomous cognitive and social acts that structure thought and . The field of erotetic logic, pioneered by Nuel D. Belnap Jr. in his 1966 essay and expanded in The Logic of Questions and Answers (1976), analyzes questions as logical objects that presuppose background and generate partitions of possible worlds, where complete answers resolve the inquiry by excluding all but one possibility. This formal approach highlights questions' semantic content as sets of potential direct answers, influencing theories in semantics and . Beyond logic, phenomenological perspectives, such as those of and Johannes Daubert, characterize questions as subjective acts of directed toward states of affairs, bridging inner experience with objective judgment and social exchange. In broader contexts, questions facilitate learning, debate, and , with empirical studies revealing their role in everyday —such as a survey of over 6,000 respondents defining questions primarily as information-seeking behaviors rather than strictly linguistic forms. Their study spans disciplines, from computational models in that simulate question-answering systems to cross-linguistic analyses showing universal yet varied encoding of interrogatives worldwide.

Core Concepts

Definitions

A question is an or expression designed to seek , confirmation, or clarification from the listener. In linguistic terms, it functions as a type of sentence that requires or appears to require an answer, distinguishing it from declarative statements through its form. This distinction arises primarily from the illocutionary force of the , which, according to speech act theory, conveys the speaker's intent to inquire rather than assert or direct. Key linguistic properties of questions include the use of the mood, where the verb form signals questioning, often through syntactic mechanisms such as subject-auxiliary inversion (e.g., "Do you know?" rather than "You know") or fronting of auxiliary verbs and interrogative words. In , questions are typically marked prosodically by rising intonation, particularly at the end of yes-no questions, which helps convey the interrogative intent even without explicit syntactic markers. These features collectively differentiate questions from other sentence types in both structure and delivery. Questions must be distinguished from imperatives, which express commands or requests (e.g., "Tell me your name"), and exclamations, which convey strong emotion or surprise (e.g., "What a surprise!"). For instance, "What is your name?" functions as a question by eliciting a response, whereas "Tell me your name" directs action without seeking new information, and an exclamatory form like "What a name!" merely expresses reaction. This separation is rooted in their differing communicative purposes and grammatical indicators, such as ending punctuation: questions with a query mark, imperatives with a period or exclamation mark, and exclamations with an exclamation mark. In formal semantics, a foundational approach defines questions as sets of propositions—specifically, the non-empty sets of mutually exclusive propositions that represent possible complete answers—contrasting with singletons that denote statements. This semantic treatment, originally proposed by Hamblin in , underscores questions as entities that partition possibilities rather than affirm a single .

Functions and Uses

Questions serve several primary pragmatic functions in communication. Primarily, they facilitate information-seeking by prompting the addressee to provide details unknown to the questioner, assuming the respondent possesses the necessary . This function is evident in everyday exchanges where speakers use questions to fill informational gaps, such as inquiring about events or opinions to advance mutual understanding. Additionally, questions often function as strategies, particularly through indirect requests that soften demands and preserve the respondent's autonomy, as in asking "Could you open the window?" to imply a need without direct imposition. Such formulations mitigate face-threatening acts by allowing the hearer to interpret and respond voluntarily, enhancing relational harmony. Furthermore, questions promote social bonding by inviting participation and demonstrating interest in the interlocutor, thereby strengthening interpersonal ties in casual interactions. In conversational , questions play key roles in structuring . They regulate by allocating speaking rights, signaling the end of one speaker's turn and inviting a response, which helps maintain orderly exchanges without overlap. Questions also enable agenda-setting, where a speaker introduces or redirects topics to guide the conversation's focus, ensuring and progression. Moreover, they challenge assumptions by probing underlying beliefs or justifications, fostering deeper engagement and of meaning within the interaction. Beyond everyday talk, questions find broader applications across domains. In , they persuade by engaging audiences emotionally or logically, as rhetorical questions emphasize points without expecting answers, thereby reinforcing arguments and eliciting agreement. In education, questions probe knowledge by assessing comprehension and stimulating , with higher-order inquiries encouraging analysis and synthesis to build deeper understanding. For instance, the employs sequential questioning to challenge preconceptions and promote self-discovery, enhancing learners' ability to evaluate evidence and form reasoned conclusions. In legal contexts, questions during elicit information from suspects to uncover facts related to crimes, operating under procedural safeguards to ensure admissibility. Survey questions, meanwhile, systematically collect data on attitudes and behaviors, designed for clarity and neutrality to yield reliable insights for or .

Types

Yes-No Questions

Yes-no questions, also referred to as polar or closed questions, are interrogative forms that seek confirmation or denial of a proposition by partitioning the relevant possibilities into a binary true/false distinction. These questions presuppose that the addressee will respond with an affirmation (yes) or negation (no), thereby eliciting a judgment on the of the embedded statement. In linguistic semantics, they contrast with wh-questions by not querying specific content but rather verifying or falsifying a given scenario. In English, yes-no questions are typically formed through subject-auxiliary inversion, where the auxiliary verb precedes the subject, as in "Is it raining?" from the declarative "It is raining." This structure applies to auxiliaries like be, have, do, or modals, ensuring the question targets the polarity of the proposition. Alternatively, tag questions achieve a similar effect by appending an inverted auxiliary and pronoun to a statement, such as "It's raining, isn't it?", which invites agreement or correction while assuming shared context. These formations rely on syntactic movement rules in generative grammar to signal interrogativity. Yes-no questions often embed presuppositions reflecting the speaker's assumptions about shared , which can subtly bias toward one polarity and risk eliciting from the respondent. For instance, a question like "You aren't leaving, are you?" presupposes familiarity with the situation and may pressure affirmation of the negative to align with the speaker's expectation. This evidential arises from contextual clues embedded in the question's form, influencing interpretation and response. Cross-linguistically, yes-no questions exhibit diverse marking strategies. In French, the "est-ce que" construction introduces the question without full inversion, as in "Est-ce que il pleut?" ("Is it raining?"), deriving from a cleft structure that formalizes polarity inquiry. In Mandarin Chinese, the sentence-final particle "ma" converts declaratives into yes-no questions, exemplified by "Xiàyǔ ma?" ("Is it raining?"), where "ma" signals the binary choice without altering word order. These variations highlight how languages encode polar interrogativity through particles, affixes, or intonation rather than uniform inversion.

Alternative Questions

Alternative questions, also known as disjunctive or alternative choice questions, present a set of explicit options connected by disjunction, semantically interpreted as an exhaustive selection from those alternatives. For instance, the question " or ?" denotes the set of propositions {you want , you want }, presupposing that exactly one of these must hold true and that the listed options exhaust the relevant possibilities. This disjunctive semantics aligns alternative questions with closed-ended forms like yes-no questions, though the former involve multiple propositions rather than a single polarity choice. Pragmatically, alternative questions often presuppose that one of the options is correct and serve to facilitate or seek clarification by narrowing the response to the provided choices. They convey neutrality toward the alternatives, unlike biased polar questions, and imply that responses outside the list (e.g., "neither") challenge the presupposed exhaustivity. This makes them particularly useful in contexts requiring commitment to a specific option, such as ordering preferences or confirming plans. In English, alternative questions are formed through coordination with "or," as in "Will you go by or by ?," typically accompanied by a falling intonation contour (e.g., H* L-L%) that distinguishes them from declarative lists or rising-intoned yes-no questions. The disjunction scopes over the operator, generating a set of alternative propositions via compositional semantics, often modeled in Hamblin-style frameworks with an exhaustivity closure. Linguistic variations appear across languages; in German, alternative questions employ the particle "oder" for disjunction, as in "Magst du Tee oder Kaffee?," with a low rising-falling intonation (L*H-L%) signaling the alternative structure and an implicit "whether" operator for semantic composition. These constructions can embed presuppositions, such as the salience of the listed alternatives in the context, where deviations in response may deny the exhaustive list assumption.

Open Questions

Open questions, also referred to as wh-questions in , are forms that denote a set of possible answers without imposing closure, thereby eliciting detailed or specific from an unrestricted range of responses. Unlike binary or choice-limited queries, these questions presuppose that the answer lies within an open domain, such as identifying entities, events, or explanations, and they typically begin with an that specifies the type of sought. For instance, the question "" probes for a without predefined options, allowing the respondent to provide a descriptive answer like "to the store." The core types of open questions are distinguished by their interrogative pronouns, each fulfilling a particular semantic role in relation to the proposition being questioned. "Who" inquires about human participants, often targeting semantic roles such as agents (e.g., "Who wrote the book?") or patients (e.g., "Who did you see?"); "what" seeks non-human entities or actions, typically as themes or instruments (e.g., "What did you eat?"); "when" addresses temporal aspects, querying the time of an event (e.g., "When does the meeting start?"); "where" focuses on spatial locations, corresponding to the goal or source roles (e.g., "Where is the key?"); "why" elicits causal or motivational explanations, probing reasons behind actions (e.g., "Why did you leave early?"); and "how" examines manner, method, or degree, often relating to instrumental or comitative roles (e.g., "How did you solve the problem?"). These pronouns systematically map onto the thematic structure of the sentence, facilitating targeted extraction of propositional content. From a pragmatic perspective, open questions promote elaboration and depth in responses by signaling the speaker's expectation of informative, non-minimal answers, which aligns with Gricean principles of quantity and relevance in conversation. They are particularly valuable in contexts requiring exploration, such as journalistic or academic interviews, where they uncover nuanced details beyond surface-level confirmation (e.g., "What challenges did you face during the project?" encourages a narrative response). Similarly, in therapeutic settings, open questions facilitate client self-disclosure and reflection, enabling therapists to delve into personal experiences without leading the respondent (e.g., "How has this affected your daily life?"). This pragmatic function enhances communicative efficiency by assuming shared knowledge gaps that the addressee can fill expansively. Cross-linguistically, open questions exhibit similar structures but with variations in interrogative forms that reflect language-specific semantics and social norms. In Spanish, the pronoun "qué" serves dual roles akin to English "what" or "which," as in "¿Qué libro lees?" (What book are you reading?) or "¿Qué prefieres?" (Which do you prefer?), allowing flexibility in querying objects or choices without strict distinction. In Japanese, "nani" (何) functions as the interrogative for "what," appearing as "nani" in general contexts or "nan" before certain particles (e.g., "Nani o tabemasu ka?" – What will you eat?), and its use integrates with varying levels through verb conjugations and particles, such as the polite form "Nani o tabemasu ka?" versus the plain "Nani taberu?" to suit formal or informal interactions. These examples illustrate how open questions adapt to typological differences while maintaining their core function of soliciting open-ended information.

Formation

Grammatical Structures

In English, yes-no questions are formed through subject-auxiliary inversion, where the precedes the subject, as in "Did you eat the apple?" rather than the declarative "You ate the apple." This inversion applies to auxiliaries like do, have, be, and modals, but requires in or past tenses without an auxiliary, yielding forms such as "Do you like it?" For open questions, displaces the wh-phrase (e.g., what, who, where) to the front of the , often triggering subject-auxiliary inversion as well, as seen in "What did you eat?" where the wh-element moves from its base position to the specifier of CP. These mechanisms ensure that force is syntactically marked, distinguishing questions from declaratives. Cross-linguistically, question formation exhibits significant diversity in syntactic strategies. In German, a verb-second (V2) word order applies in main clauses, including questions, where the finite verb occupies the second position regardless of whether the clause begins with a wh-element or the subject, as in "Hast du das Buch gelesen?" (Have you read the book?) for yes-no questions or "Was hast du gelesen?" (What have you read?) for wh-questions. This V2 constraint positions the subject after the verb if a non-subject element fronts, contrasting with English's more flexible subject-verb order. In Mandarin Chinese, questions often rely on sentence-final particles rather than word order changes; for instance, the particle ma turns a declarative into a yes-no question ("Nǐ chī le ma?" – Did you eat?), while ne can add emphasis or mark contrast in questions, as in "Nǐ zài nǎr ne?" (Where are you?). These particles encode interrogativity without requiring movement or inversion, highlighting parametric variation in how languages signal questions. More complex question structures involve embedding or multiple interrogative elements. Embedded questions in English appear as subordinate clauses without inversion or wh-movement to the matrix clause front, using statement word order, as in "I wonder if you ate the apple" or "She asked what you ate," where the embedded clause functions as a complement to verbs like wonder or ask. Multiple wh-questions, such as "Who bought what?", permit only one wh-phrase to undergo overt movement to the front in English, with others remaining in situ, reflecting a superiority effect that prioritizes the highest merged wh-element for displacement. These patterns allow for intricate interrogative dependencies while maintaining syntactic coherence. Syntactic constraints limit question formation, particularly through island effects, which block out of certain embedded structures to prevent ungrammatical extractions. For example, wh-extraction from a is impossible, as in the ill-formed "*What did you think bought __ was expensive?" where the wh-phrase cannot escape the island created by the boundary. Similar constraints apply to coordinate structures and adjunct clauses, ensuring that movement respects hierarchical boundaries and locality principles in the syntax. These island constraints, first systematically described in Ross's seminal work, underscore the bounded nature of displacement operations in question formation across languages.

Intonation and Prosody

In spoken English, yes-no questions are typically marked by rising intonation, where the pitch, or (F0), increases toward the end of the utterance, often reaching a high point on the final stressed . This prosodic cue helps distinguish intent from declarative statements, even in the absence of grammatical inversion; for example, the statement "You're coming?" rises in pitch to signal a question. Acoustic studies confirm that this F0 rise is a key perceptual feature for identifying yes-no questions across listeners. Wh-questions, in contrast, generally employ falling or varied intonation contours, with F0 declining at the end to convey information-seeking without the polarity expectation of yes-no forms. For alternative questions, such as "Coffee or ?", a fall-rise contour is common, where pitch falls on the first option and rises on the second to highlight the choice. These patterns differentiate wh-questions from statements, though variations exist; questions, which repeat part of a prior utterance for clarification or surprise (e.g., "You saw who?"), often feature exaggerated F0 rises or wider pitch excursions to disambiguate them from genuine inquiries. Beyond pitch, other prosodic features like lengthening and pauses contribute to question signaling in English. Final syllables in questions undergo lengthening—up to 20-30% longer than in statements—to emphasize the boundary, often paired with brief pauses that segment the rhythmically. Cultural variations influence these patterns; for instance, is known for high rising terminals, where rising intonation is prevalent in questions and statements.

Punctuation and Orthography

The standard (?) originated in medieval manuscripts as the punctus interrogativus, a mark used to indicate a question requiring an answer, evolving from earlier positura notations in Latin texts. It is employed at the end of direct questions in English and many other languages to signal intent. In , an inverted question mark (¿) is placed at the beginning of sentences or clauses to indicate the start of a question, with the standard (?) concluding it, a convention established by the Real Academia Española in the . The (‽), a superimposed question mark and exclamation point, was invented in 1962 by advertising executive Martin K. Speckter to denote exclamatory questions, such as expressions of surprise or disbelief, though it remains nonstandard in formal writing. Orthographic rules for question marks include capitalizing the first word of the following sentence, as the mark functions as terminal punctuation; however, in lists or closely connected clauses, lowercase may follow if the material is not treated as a new sentence. Within quotations, a question mark is placed inside the closing marks if it applies to the quoted material (e.g., She asked, "Why?"), but outside if questioning the quotation itself (e.g., Who said "Hello"?). In titles, question marks are retained as part of the original punctuation, with the enclosing sentence's terminal mark placed outside if needed (e.g., Have you read To Be or Not to Be?). In digital adaptations, the (❓) is commonly used in informal and to represent queries or uncertainty, often enhancing emotional tone in place of or alongside traditional . For accessibility, the in is rendered as dots 2-3-6, identical to the opening but contextually distinguished in .

Responses

Direct Answers

Direct answers provide explicit, informative responses that align with the semantic content of the question posed. For polar questions, which seek confirmation or denial, a direct answer typically consists of "yes" or "no," matching the binary semantic structure of the question. In contrast, for open questions such as wh-questions, direct answers supply propositional content that fills the variable introduced by the interrogative, such as responding to "Where is the ?" with "In ." This semantic alignment ensures that the answer directly addresses the question's , as outlined in linguistic theories where questions denote sets of possible propositions, and answers select from those sets. Direct answers vary in completeness, ranging from minimal partial responses to full elaborations that exhaustively resolve the query. A partial answer, like "" to a location question, suffices by providing the essential without unnecessary detail, relying on shared for interpretation. Full answers, however, expand on the core response to include additional or verification, such as "The is in , ," enhancing clarity in ambiguous situations. This distinction reflects pragmatic considerations in , where partial answers are efficient for straightforward queries while full ones mitigate potential misunderstandings. Politeness often influences the form of direct answers through expansions that soften or elaborate the response, particularly in social interactions. For instance, instead of a bare "yes," a speaker might say "Yes, it is raining, so you might want to bring an umbrella," incorporating reasons or justifications to show consideration for the questioner's needs. Such expansions align with strategies that maintain positive face by demonstrating attentiveness and .

Answering Negative Questions

Answering negative questions presents unique challenges due to the embedded , which can lead to polarity mismatches between the question's form and the intended response. In polarity-based systems, common in many European languages like English and Catalan, a negative question such as "Isn't it raining?" typically expects a "yes" to reject the (indicating it is raining), while a "no" confirms the negative (it is not raining). This alignment with the question's polarity can confuse respondents, as a simple "yes" might ambiguously mean agreement with the , prompting clarifications like "Yes, it isn't raining" or "No, it is raining" to resolve the ambiguity. In contrast, truth-based systems, prevalent in East Asian languages like Korean, treat "yes" as confirming the 's regardless of polarity, reducing such mismatches but still requiring contextual disambiguation. Strategies for responding to negative questions often balance literal truth with pragmatic clarity to avoid misinterpretation. Literal responses adhere strictly to the proposition's semantics, such as answering "Didn't you eat?" with "Yes, I didn't" to affirm the negation, whereas pragmatic strategies prioritize the expected polarity reversal, replying "No, I did eat" to assert the positive alternative and align with conversational norms. Prosodic cues, like rising intonation in rejection, or gestural signals such as head nods, further aid in signaling confirmation or denial across languages, integrating with lexico-syntactic elements for effective communication. These approaches ensure responses resolve the question's dual alternatives ({p, ¬p}) while mitigating the negation's scope ambiguity. Negative questions frequently carry that presuppose the positive alternative, biasing the discourse toward an expected affirmative outcome and functioning as leading prompts in contexts like cross-examinations. For instance, "Doesn't the support the claim?" implies the speaker's in the positive (the evidence does support it), triggering a scalar implicature where the addressee must provide counterevidence for a negative response, thus reinforcing the presupposed truth. This bias arises from the question's non-at-issue content, such as verum focus operators, which project the speaker's commitment to ¬p being unlikely, making neutral or positive confirmations more felicitous. Culturally, negative questions serve functions in certain languages, softening requests by presupposing potential refusal and inviting gentle affirmation. In Japanese, forms like "Kore o tabemasen ka?" (Won't you eat this?) express mutual consideration, reducing imposition in equal or hierarchical interactions and aligning with high-context harmony norms, where direct positives might seem abrupt. This usage, distinct from assertive questioning, highlights how mitigates face-threatening acts in relational .

Indirect or Evasive Responses

Indirect or evasive responses to questions are communicative strategies that avoid providing straightforward , instead deflecting, implying, or redirecting the interaction without explicit or denial. These responses contrast with direct answers by prioritizing social or strategic goals over informational completeness. Common types include counter-questions, which challenge the inquiry's or , such as responding to "Did you finish the report?" with "Why do you ?"; hedges, which soften or qualify potential answers like "Maybe" or "It depends," leaving ; and , which opts out of the exchange entirely, signaling reluctance or non-cooperation. In , these responses serve functions such as maintaining by mitigating face-threatening acts, enabling through , or asserting power dynamics, particularly in political where leaders evade to control narratives. For instance, in press conferences, politicians may use evasive tactics to avoid while preserving a positive image. Examples of such responses encompass , as in replying to "Where is the money?" with "As if I'd know!", which mocks the question's assumption; or topic shifts, redirecting to unrelated matters to dilute the original probe. These illustrate non-serious or incongruous replies that resist question constraints. Theoretically, indirect or evasive responses often involve violations of Grice's and its maxims, particularly flouting the maxim of quantity by providing insufficient detail or relevance to implicate evasion without overt refusal, thereby generating conversational implicatures that convey reluctance or deflection.

Embedded Forms

Indirect Questions

Indirect questions, also referred to as embedded , are subordinate that embed an interrogative structure within a larger matrix , typically functioning as a complement to verbs of asking, knowing, or wondering. This syntactic transforms the direct illocutionary of a question into a presupposed or reported , as in the example "She asked whether the meeting had started," where "whether the meeting had started" serves as the object of "asked." In English, such follow declarative without subject-auxiliary inversion, distinguishing them from direct questions; for instance, "if it is true" rather than the ungrammatical "*if is it true." Indirect questions exhibit variations based on their type. Yes-no indirect questions are introduced by complementizers like "if" or "whether," as in "I don't know if he will arrive on time," which embeds a polar without altering the matrix clause's assertive tone. Wh-indirect questions, in contrast, begin with interrogative pronouns or adverbs such as "what," "where," or "why," preserving the open-ended nature of the query while subordinating it, for example, "Tell me what you think about the proposal." These forms adapt the grammatical structures of direct questions to subordinate contexts, maintaining semantic focus on alternatives without inversion or question intonation. Semantically, indirect questions shift from assertive directness to a presupposed , often conventionally implicating the non-emptiness of the answer set or the speaker's . In constructions like "Let me know whether you can attend," the embedded clause implies an expectation of response without explicitly demanding it, the question's propositional alternatives within verb's semantics. This shift facilitates uses in reported speech, where questions are indirectly conveyed without , such as "He wondered why she left early," reporting the original in a context. A primary application of indirect questions is in strategies, where embedding softens the directness of a request, reducing perceived in social interactions. For example, "Could you tell me where the exit is?" employs an indirect form to mitigate face-threatening aspects of the inquiry, making it more deferential than the direct "Where is the exit?" This politeness effect is particularly evident in yes-no embeddings with verbs like "know" or "wonder," which frame the question as a collaborative exchange rather than an .

Rhetorical Questions

A rhetorical question is an interrogative form used not to elicit information but to assert a proposition, often implying its own answer through shared presuppositions or context. For instance, the question "Did John lift a finger to help?" conveys the assertion that John did not, relying on the audience's agreement with the implied negative response. In linguistic terms, rhetorical questions exhibit the syntactic structure of questions while functioning semantically as declarative statements. These questions serve multiple pragmatic functions, including persuasion by reinforcing shared beliefs, emphasis to highlight obvious truths, and irony to convey sarcasm or contrast. In persuasive contexts, they engage the audience by prompting implicit agreement, as in "Can you force somebody to be a good productive citizen?" which asserts the impossibility without seeking reply. For emphasis, examples like "Who would steal a newspaper?" underscore the unlikelihood of the action, strengthening the speaker's point. Irony arises when the question inverts expectations, such as "Has the educational system been so watered down?" implying the opposite of the literal query. Rhetorical questions are prevalent in literature and speeches, where they heighten emotional impact and rhetorical force, as seen in Martin Luther King Jr.'s "How can segregation exist in the true Body of Christ?" to affirm moral incompatibility. Rhetorical questions encompass various types, including yes/no forms that bias toward a specific polarity, wh-questions expecting a null or minimal answer, and tag-like structures that invite confirmatory denial. Yes/no types, such as "Who understands English?" imply a negative or exclusive answer like "no one (relevant) does." Wh-questions often denote null responses, for example, "What has John ever done for Sam?" asserting "nothing." A specialized form is erotesis, a posing questions in confident expectation of strong affirmation or denial to evoke , as in Queen Elizabeth I's "Was I not born in the realm?" implying undeniable legitimacy. Tag-like rhetorical questions, resembling "Who cares?" anticipate the response "no one," functioning as emphatic dismissals. From a pragmatic perspective, rhetorical questions lack a genuine semantic for an answer, instead deriving their illocutionary from contextual commitment and presupposed common ground, effectively operating as assertions. They update the discourse context by committing both speaker and addressee to the implied , bypassing the addressee's typical in question resolution. This relies on felicity conditions like answer expectedness and contextual , evident in corpus analyses where rhetorical questions co-occur with markers of shared knowledge, such as "you know," and elicit affirmative backchannels rather than replies. Thus, their form serves rhetorical ends, transforming inquiry into declarative emphasis without altering core semantic content.

Broader Applications

Questions in Philosophy and Logic

In and logic, questions are formally analyzed through erotetic logic, which treats questions not as propositions but as abstract entities that demand answers. A foundational framework in this field is provided by Nuel Belnap and Thomas Steel, who conceptualize a question as the set of its direct answers, where direct answers are those that precisely resolve the inquiry without extraneous . This approach highlights the structural properties of questions, such as their presuppositions—conditions that must hold for the question to be felicitous—and the logical relations between questions and their possible resolutions. Philosophically, questions play a central role in epistemological inquiry and dialectical reasoning. The , as depicted in Plato's dialogues, employs a series of probing questions to expose contradictions in interlocutors' beliefs, fostering self-examination and the pursuit of truth through elenchus (refutation). In epistemology, questions challenge traditional accounts of ; Edmund Gettier's 1963 cases, known as Gettier problems, question whether justified true belief suffices for knowledge by presenting scenarios where such beliefs arise coincidentally rather than through genuine justification. Certain questions generate paradoxes by undermining their own resolvability. The , in a question form such as "Is this statement false?", creates a self-referential loop: affirming its truth requires it to be false, and denying it requires it to be true, thus defying bivalent logic. Similarly, questions with failed s, like "Have you stopped beating your wife?", embed an unaddressed assumption (that the wife-beating occurred), rendering direct answers inadequate and illustrating how presupposition failure can invalidate the question's logical standing. In modern extensions, particularly within , questions inform the design of question-answering systems that rely on semantic in . These systems translate natural language questions into executable logical forms, as exemplified in early work on question-answer pairs over knowledge bases like Freebase, enabling machines to infer and retrieve precise responses.

Questions in Education and Acquisition

In child , questions emerge as a key in syntactic and pragmatic development. Typically, children begin producing simple yes/no questions around 18-24 months, often through rising intonation without inversion, such as "Mommy gone?" By age 3, they start forming wh-questions, like "Where ball?" or "What that?", marking the onset of more complex structures as they grasp basic question words and auxiliary placement. This progression reflects growing awareness of information-seeking functions, with full comprehension and production of varied wh-questions (e.g., who, when) solidifying between ages 3-5. Overgeneralization errors are common during this phase, where children apply auxiliary inversion rules inconsistently, resulting in forms like "Why the dog barked?" instead of "Why did the dog bark?", as they extend patterns from declarative sentences. In educational settings, questions serve as vital tools for promoting cognitive growth and active engagement. , a foundational framework for classifying learning objectives, emphasizes higher-order questions to foster , , and synthesis; for instance, prompts like "How does this historical event influence modern policy?" encourage students to dissect relationships and form judgments beyond mere recall. Inquiry-based teaching builds on this by centering lessons around student-generated questions, driving through exploration and problem-solving, as seen in strategies where learners investigate topics via guided inquiries like "What factors affect ?" to build deeper conceptual understanding. Research highlights disparities in question-asking, particularly differences that affect participation. Studies show teachers often direct more higher-order questions to boys and call on them more frequently, potentially reinforcing inequities in STEM and discussion-based subjects. In large lecture settings, women tend to ask and answer fewer questions overall, using more deferential language, though this gap narrows in smaller or virtual formats. Challenges in leveraging questions for learning include supporting English as a Second Language (ESL) learners through scaffolding, such as sequencing questions from concrete to abstract (e.g., starting with "What is this?" before "Why does it happen?") to build comprehension without overwhelming linguistic barriers. Post-2020, digital tools like quiz apps have addressed these issues by enabling interactive, adaptive question-based assessments; platforms such as Quizizz and Kahoot! facilitate real-time feedback and gamified inquiries, enhancing engagement for diverse learners in hybrid environments.

Historical Development

Etymology and Origins

The word "question" entered English in the early as a noun denoting a philosophical or theological problem, derived from Anglo-French questiun and question, meaning "difficulty, problem, or legal ." It stems directly from Latin quaestionem (accusative of quaestio), signifying "a seeking, , examination, or judicial investigation," formed from the past-participle stem of quaerere, "to seek, ask, or inquire." This Latin root traces further to the Proto-Indo-European stem *kʷo- (or *kwo-), which served as the basis for relative and interrogative pronouns across , underlying forms like "who," "what," and "which" in various descendants. The concept of questioning appears in some of the earliest written records, with Sumerian cuneiform tablets from around 2500 BCE documenting legal inquiries and administrative interrogations, such as those related to disputes, contracts, and judicial proceedings in Mesopotamian society. These texts, part of the broader legal tradition, represent initial efforts to codify inquiries in written form, predating more structured law codes like that of in the mid-21st century BCE. In , the term erōtēma (from erōtaō, "to ask or question") denoted a used in oratory and to persuade or emphasize, as seen in works by philosophers like , highlighting questions as tools for argumentation rather than mere factual seeking. Evolutionary milestones in the formation of questions include the development of interrogative particles from Proto-Indo-European *kʷo- stems, which evolved into distinct markers in early languages like Hittite and , often shifting or adding particles to signal inquiries. Writing systems profoundly influenced this process; for instance, Sumerian cuneiform and initially conveyed questions through contextual particles or intonation indicators rather than dedicated , allowing scribes to record complex oral inquiries in administrative and contexts. These systems enabled the preservation and standardization of interrogative structures, bridging spoken traditions with durable records. Cultural shifts marked a transition from predominantly oral traditions—where questions drove tribal disputations and —to formalized written formats in medieval . By the , the quaestio disputata emerged as a key method in European universities, converting live oral debates into structured written texts that posed a central question, presented arguments pro and contra, and resolved it dialectically, as exemplified in works by . This evolution reflected the growing role of in intellectual inquiry, culminating in early printed editions of such Q&A dialogues after the 15th-century of the , which disseminated scholastic questions widely.

Evolution in Linguistics

In the early 20th century, emphasized descriptive analysis of forms, treating questions as observable sentence types without delving into underlying mental processes. Leonard Bloomfield's Language (1933) exemplified this approach by classifying interrogatives as distinct syntactic patterns, such as yes-no questions marked by intonation or particles and wh-questions using specific interrogative words, drawing examples from diverse languages like Latin to illustrate cross-linguistic variations in form. Similarly, Edward Sapir's Language (1921) highlighted the functional role of interrogatives in communication, viewing them as tools for eliciting through , particles, or dedicated forms, while stressing their adaptation to cultural and psychological contexts in shaping expressive needs. The mid-20th century marked a shift to , which introduced rule-based mechanisms to explain question formation. Noam Chomsky's (1957) proposed transformational rules, including , to derive interrogatives from underlying declarative structures, positing that questions arise via operations on deep structure to produce surface forms like "What did John see?" from a base sentence. Building on this, Jerrold Katz and Paul Postal's An Integrated Theory of Linguistic Descriptions (1964) advanced semantic integration, arguing that question meanings are interpreted at deep structure levels through projection rules that preserve semantic relations, enabling a unified account of syntax and semantics for interrogatives. Contemporary developments in the late 20th century focused on formal semantics and pragmatics, refining how questions denote information requests. Charles Hamblin's "Questions in Montague English" (1973) introduced partition semantics, where a question like "Who came?" denotes the set of all possible true propositions (e.g., {p | p = 'John came', p = 'Mary came', ...}), effectively partitioning the possible worlds into exhaustive alternatives. Complementing this, Stephen Levinson's Pragmatics (1983) examined questions in discourse, analyzing their felicity conditions and implicatures, such as how rising intonation signals yes-no queries and contextual assumptions guide interpretation in conversation. Recent advances since the 2010s have integrated and typology, enhancing question theories through data-driven methods. In , Michael Heilman and Noah Smith's "Question Generation via Overgenerating Transformations and Ranking" (2009) pioneered rule-based and statistical models to automatically generate questions from text, influencing neural approaches like those in tasks. typology has progressed via large-scale databases, with updates to the World Atlas of Language Structures (WALS) revealing patterns like the prevalence of postverbal question particles in approximately 36% of sampled languages (314 out of 884) for that feature and variations in wh-in-situ strategies, informed by corpus-based comparisons across over 2,600 languages. Since the 2020s, developments in have further advanced question-related research, with transformer-based models such as T5 and large language models (e.g., GPT series) enabling more sophisticated automatic question generation and answering systems, as demonstrated in benchmarks like 2.0 updates and multilingual typology projects integrating WALS with as of 2023. These tools have facilitated real-time cross-linguistic analysis and improved simulations of human-like inquiry in AI.

References

  1. https://glossary.sil.org/term/question
  2. https://dickhudson.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/1975questions.pdf
  3. https://www.thoughtco.com/question-grammar-1691710
  4. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-is-a-question/
  5. https://philpapers.org/rec/BELTLO-2
  6. https://ontology.buffalo.edu/smith/articles/Questions.pdf
  7. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/royal-institute-of-philosophy-supplements/article/what-is-a-question/2C8CCDFC8B52DB62CF08F9E9CA49915C
  8. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32542980/
  9. https://www.grammarly.com/blog/sentences/interrogative-sentences/
  10. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/speech-acts/
  11. https://langeek.co/en/grammar/course/506/interrogative-mood
  12. https://fiveable.me/key-terms/introduction-linguistics/question-formation
  13. https://emcawiki.net/Question_intonation
  14. https://www.grammarist.com/grammar/declarative-imperative-exclamatory-and-interrogative-sentences/
  15. https://www.grammarly.com/blog/sentences/kinds-of-sentences/
  16. https://philpapers.org/rec/HAMQ
  17. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/43647832_The_Discourse_Function_Of_Questions
  18. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0378216694901015
  19. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2003-00456-013
  20. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3776909/
  21. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4174386/
  22. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/interrogation
  23. https://www.pewresearch.org/writing-survey-questions/
  24. https://wals.info/chapter/116
  25. https://apics-online.info/parameters/103.chapter.html
  26. https://glossary.sil.org/term/yes-no-question
  27. https://www.thoughtco.com/yes-no-question-grammar-1692617
  28. https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/grammar/british-grammar/questions-yes-no-questions-are-you-feeling-cold
  29. https://www.grammaring.com/subject-auxiliary-inversion-in-question-tags
  30. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/345728166_How_to_ask_the_obvious_-_A_presuppositional_account_of_evidential_bias_in_English_yesno_questions
  31. https://journals.linguisticsociety.org/proceedings/index.php/SALT/article/download/2887/2627/3162
  32. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/361013718_On_French_Est-ce_que_YesNo_Questions_and_Related_Constructions
  33. http://www.lingref.com/cpp/wccfl/38/paper3558.pdf
  34. https://mariabiezma.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/biezmarawlinsquestions.pdf
  35. https://compass.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/lnc3.12161
  36. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10988-012-9123-z
  37. https://aclanthology.org/Y00-1037.pdf
  38. https://typo.uni-konstanz.de/questionsInterfaces/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/SONG-Yixiao-MiQPoster.pdf
  39. https://ecampusontario.pressbooks.pub/essentialsoflinguistics2/chapter/a1-4-phrasal-movement-in-wh-questions/
  40. https://www.inf.pucrs.br/~propor2010/proceedings/regular_papers/DuranEtAl.pdf
  41. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00319/full
  42. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6010234/
  43. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/psychology/open-ended-question
  44. https://www.cliffsnotes.com/study-guides/spanish/spanish-i/asking-and-answering-questions/interrogative-pronouns-question-words
  45. https://mochidemy.com/support/japanese-pronouns/
  46. https://ethanpoole.com/handouts/ling-200b/2021/5-english-questions.pdf
  47. https://ecampusontario.pressbooks.pub/essentialsoflinguistics2/chapter/a1-3-head-movement-in-yes-no-questions/
  48. https://ecampusontario.pressbooks.pub/essentialsoflinguistics/chapter/8-11-wh-movement/
  49. https://www.ling.upenn.edu/~beatrice/syntax-textbook/ch11.html
  50. http://ozziefallick.github.io/files/german_v2_order.pdf
  51. https://fh.pku.edu.cn/docs/2019-01/20190107140740335320.pdf
  52. https://udel.edu/~stomioka/NSF/Constant.pdf
  53. https://people.umass.edu/nconstan/Constant%25202010%2520Mandarin%2520ne%2520as%2520Contrastive%2520Topic%2520--%2520Draft%25202010.09.24.pdf
  54. https://ecampusontario.pressbooks.pub/essentialsoflinguistics2/chapter/embedded-content-questions/
  55. https://semantics.uchicago.edu/kennedy/classes/w06/readings/rudin88.pdf
  56. https://ethanpoole.com/handouts/ling-200b/2021/8-islands.pdf
  57. http://www.colinphillips.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/phillips2013_islands1.pdf
  58. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3364522/
  59. https://www.sfu.ca/~hedberg/Hedberg_Talk_Eh_Lab_Feb_2019.pdf
  60. http://sprosig.org/sp2006/contents/papers/PS5-19_0047.pdf
  61. https://www.isca-archive.org/speechprosody_2006/sityaev06_speechprosody.pdf
  62. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/questions/shaping-the-intonation-of-whquestions/0D0FDD10685D2D407A4A612FD68C9474
  63. https://idsl1.phil-fak.uni-koeln.de/sites/IDSLI/dozentenseiten/Repp/ReppRosin2015_Interspeech_Echo_final.pdf
  64. https://ferreiralab.faculty.ucdavis.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/222/2015/05/Ferreira-1993_ProsodySentenceProduction_Psych-Review.pdf
  65. https://bilinguistics.com/languages/australian-english-speech-and-language-development/
  66. https://www.isca-archive.org/speechprosody_2010/fletcher10_speechprosody.pdf
  67. https://www.unicode.org/L2/L2016/16125-n4726-medieval-punct.pdf
  68. https://www.babbel.com/learn-spanish/beginner/spanish-question-mark
  69. https://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2014/10/01/the-rise-and-fall-of-the-interrobang
  70. https://www.btb.termiumplus.gc.ca/tcdnstyl-chap?lang=spa&lettr=chapsect4&info0=4
  71. https://www.grammarbook.com/blog/quotation-marks/question-marks-with-quotation-marks/
  72. https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/punctuation/quotation_marks/more_quotation_mark_rules.html
  73. https://www.ssc.education.ed.ac.uk/resources/vi&multi/braille/punctuation.html
  74. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00351935
  75. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/questions/
  76. https://www.radeksimik.eu/pdf/simik-egg-intro-questions.pdf
  77. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-linguistics/article/polar-answers/7275CC44717121A045B5018977C9C4B1
  78. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00899/full
  79. https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/etd/7347/
  80. https://www.york.ac.uk/media/languageandlinguistics/documents/conferences/wlvcce2015/Holmberg_abstract.pdf
  81. https://projects.iq.harvard.edu/files/meaningandmodality/files/gonzalez_henninger_davidson_2019.pdf
  82. https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/pdf/10.1146/annurev-linguistics-022421-064837
  83. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228388218_Negative_bias_in_polar_questions
  84. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/21582440251367186
  85. https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation?paperid=52173
  86. https://aclanthology.org/2023.sigdial-1.30.pdf
  87. https://rozenbergquarterly.com/issa-proceedings-1998-evasion-in-question-answer-argumentation-an-empirical-extension/
  88. https://www.psychosocial.com/index.php/ijpr/article/download/5746/5214/10473
  89. https://kata.petra.ac.id/index.php/ing/article/view/19517
  90. https://www.academia.edu/79177383/Why_say_it_that_way_evasive_answers_and_politeness_theory
  91. https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation?paperid=112157
  92. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/379973680_The_Pragmatics_of_Dialogue_Evasion_in_American_Political_Debates
  93. https://etheses.whiterose.ac.uk/id/eprint/14112/1/487849-VOL1.pdf
  94. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0378216622000261
  95. https://conf.ling.cornell.edu/culc15/posters/SaturdayPosters/MaloriHammonds.pdf
  96. https://ygdp.yale.edu/phenomena/inversion-embedded-questions
  97. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/259810911_What_indirect_questions_conventionally_implicate
  98. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0378216687901925
  99. https://web.stanford.edu/dept/linguistics/semgroup/semfest2011/Rohde11.pdf
  100. https://www.thoughtco.com/erotesis-rhetoric-term-1690673
  101. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/plato-ethics-shorter/
  102. https://fitelson.org/proseminar/gettier.pdf
  103. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/liar-paradox/
  104. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/presupposition/
  105. https://nlp.stanford.edu/pubs/semparseEMNLP13.pdf
  106. https://parentresourcesblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/questions-development.pdf
  107. https://slpnow.com/blog/233-how-to-teach-wh-questions-6-practical-strategies-for-slps/
  108. https://www.thoughtco.com/overgeneralization-in-grammar-1691365
  109. https://learningcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/higher-order-thinking/
  110. https://www.edutopia.org/blog/inquiry-based-learning-asking-right-questions-georgia-mathis
  111. https://narst.org/research-matters/teaching-for-gender-difference
  112. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8756329/
  113. https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/siteassets/district/curriculum/esol/cpd/module5/docs/questioning.pdf
  114. https://www.educationcorner.com/35-incredible-classroom-apps/
  115. https://www.hurix.com/blogs/top-digital-assessment-tools-for-teachers-and-students-a-practical-guide/
  116. https://www.etymonline.com/word/question
  117. https://www.britannica.com/topic/cuneiform-law
  118. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/medieval-literary/
  119. https://www.scribd.com/document/331285820/Bloomfield-Language-1933
  120. http://stanford.edu/class/psych205/papers/Chomsky-1957.pdf
  121. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-linguistics/article/jerrold-j-katz-paul-m-postal-an-integrated-theory-of-linguistic-descriptions-research-monographs-26-cambridge-mass-mit-press-1964-pp-xi-178/0CA427DB90F768E17CD0A6F7AA78A78B
  122. https://archive.org/details/pragmatics00levi
  123. https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~mheilman/papers/heilman-smith-qg-tech-report.pdf
  124. https://wals.info/chapter/92
  125. https://wals.info/chapter/93
  126. https://rajpurkar.github.io/SQuAD-explorer/
  127. https://glottolog.org/
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
Contribute something
User Avatar
No comments yet.