##Matrix Yes-No Questions

In Yiddish, matrix yes/no questions are formed a number of
ways. Firstly, verb initial word order is used to indicate matrix
yes-no questions. This is illustrated below:

		Source: a:229
		Vetted: t
		Judgment: g
		Phenomena: {Matrix yes-no questions, word order}
		Farshteyt er shpanis?
		Farshtey-t er shpanis?
		understand-2SG 2SG.NOM Spanish?
		Does he understand Spanish?

		Source: a:228
		Vetted: t
		Judgment: g
		Phenomena: {Matrix yes-no questions, word order}
		Zaynen zey meshug-e?
		be-3PL 3PL.NOM crazy-NOM.N?
		Are they crazy?

This could be analyzed as either as movement to VSO word order or subject verb inversion. In order to determine which, a complex verb phrase involving an auxiliary is required. Our primary reference grammar does not provide such an example, however we found one such example elsewhere, in which only the auxiliary and not the main verb moves to the initial position, telling us that this should probably be analyzed as subject-verb inversion:

		Source: d:181
		Vetted: t
		Judgment: g
		Phenomena: {Matrix yes-no questions, word order}
		Moyshe hot gekoft a hunt?
		Moyshe hot ge-kof-t a hunt?
		Moses have;3G PP-buy-PP IND.SG dog?  
		Moses has bought a dog?

		Source: d:181
		Vetted: t
		Judgment: g
		Phenomena: {Matrix yes-no questions, word order}
		Tsi hot Moyshe gekoft a hunt?
		Tsi hot Moyshe ge-kof-t a hunt?
		Whether have;3G Moses PP-buy-PP IND.SG dog?  
		Moses has bought a dog?

The optional marker tsi can also be used preceding the verb in yes-no interrogative clauses:

		Source: a:229
		Vetted: t
		Judgment: g
		Phenomena: {Matrix yes-no questions, word order}
		Tsi farshteyt er shpanis?
		Tsi farshtey-t er shpanis?
		whether understand-2SG 2SG.NOM Spanish?
		Does he understand Spanish?

		# incorrect position of tsi
		Source: author based on a:229
		Vetted: f
		Judgment: u
		Phenomena: {Matrix yes-no questions, word order}
		Farshteyt tsi er shpanis?
		Farshtey-t tsi er shpanis?
		understand-2SG whether 2SG.NOM Spanish?
		Does he understand Spanish?

		# incorrect position of tsi
		Source: author based on a:229
		Vetted: f
		Judgment: u
		Phenomena: {Matrix yes-no questions, word order}
		Farshteyt er tsi shpanis?
		Farshtey-t er tsi shpanis?
		understand-2SG 2SG.NOM whether Spanish?
		Does he understand Spanish?

		# incorrect position of tsi
		Source: author based on a:229
		Vetted: f
		Judgment: u
		Phenomena: {Matrix yes-no questions, word order}
		Farshteyt er shpanis tsi?
		Farshtey-t er shpanis tsi?
		understand-2SG 2SG.NOM Spanish whether?
		Does he understand Spanish?

Topicalization from standard yes-no interrogative word order (VSO) is possible, in which case use of tsi is not possible, and the construction is accompanied by rising intonation:

		# topicalization of subject from yes-no interrogative word order
		Source: a:229
		Vetted: t
		Judgment: g
		Phenomena: {Matrix yes-no questions, word order}
		Er farshteyt shpanis?
		Er farshtey-t shpanis?
		2SG.NOM understand-2SG Spanish?
		Does he understand Spanish?

		# topicalization of object from yes-no interrogative word order
		Source: author based on a:229
		Vetted: f
		Judgment: g
		Phenomena: {Matrix yes-no questions, word order}
		Shpanis farshteyt er?
		Shpanis farshtey-t er?
		Spanish understand-2SG 2SG.NOM?
		Does he understand Spanish?

		# tsi is not permitted in topicalized interrogative
		Source: author based on a:229
		Vetted: f
		Judgment: u
		Phenomena: {Matrix yes-no questions, word order}
		Tsi er farshteyt shpanis?
		Tsi er farshtey-t shpanis?
		Whether 2SG.NOM understand-2SG Spanish?
		Does he understand Spanish?

		# tsi is not permitted in topicalized interrogative
		Source: author based on a:229
		Vetted: f
		Judgment: u
		Phenomena: {Matrix yes-no questions, word order}
		Tsi Shpanis farshteyt er?
		Tsi Shpanis farshtey-t er?
		Whether Spanish understand-2SG 2SG.NOM?
		Does he understand Spanish?

		# yes-no questions with negation
		Source: author
		Vetted: f
		Judgment: g
		Phenomena: {Matrix yes-no questions, negation}
		Zingt nit der man?
		Zing-t nit der man?
		sing-1SG NEG DEF.NOM.M man.
		Isn't the man singing?

		Source: author
		Vetted: f
		Judgment: g
		Phenomena: {Matrix yes-no questions, negation}
		Tsi zingt nit der man?
		Tsi zing-t nit der man?
		whether sing-1SG NEG DEF.NOM.M man.
		Isn't the man singing?

As argued above, it seems like subject-verb inversion might be a good way of analyzing the word order of yes-no interrogatives, however experimentation with the selection of this option in the customization system resulted in a grammar that showed unfortunate side effects. This was that the grammar produced an additional (and spurious) parse for both intransitive and transitive declarative (SVO) sentences, with the INV feature of the verb being positive. Interestingly, these spurious parses are not converted into interrogatives, are not being picked up as interrogatives with the int-cl rule. We decided this negative interaction between the implementations of subject-verb inversion and V2 word order was not worth the gain in coverage of interrogative sentences. Instead we will wait until we are hand editing the TDL, and explore whether it is possible to constrain the grammar produced with subject-verb inversion turned on so as the two phenomena get along together, or whether we will need to completely implement this ourselves.  Since the optional clause initial tsi marker can only occur in the presence of VSO word order, and the different interrogative strategies available in the customization system are independent of each other, this option was ruled out for being used also.


##Adverbs

Yiddish adverbs are not subject to inflection. The base form of adjectives in Yiddish can be used as manner adverbs. Manner adverbs can also be formed with derivational affixes out of bases including adjectives, past participles, and nouns, however we will not address these. Manner adverbs in Yiddish appear in the final position of unmarked clauses, in which case they attach to the VP. This is illustrated below:

		Source: a:193
		Vetted: t
		Judgment: g
		Phenomena: {adverb}
		Dos kind zingt shayn.
		Dos kind zing-t shayn.
		DEF.ACC.N child sing-1SG nicely.
		The child sings nicely.

Adverbs can also be topicalized by being moved to the first position, resulting in them attaching to the S. This is illustrated below:

		Source: author based on a:193
		Vetted: f
		Judgment: g
		Phenomena: {adverb}
		Shayn dos kind zingt.
		Shayn dos kind zing-t.
		nicely DEF.ACC.N child sing-1SG.
		Nicely, the child sings.

The remaining possible positions (at least in a simple declarative  sentence such as this) are ungrammatical: 

		# adverb in wrong location
		Source: author based on a:223-224
		Vetted: t
		Judgment: u
		Phenomena: {adverb, word order}
		Der man shayn leyent dos bukh.
		Der man shayn leyen-t dos bukh.
		DEF.NOM.M man nicely read-1SG DEF.ACC.N book.
		The man reads the book nicely.

		# adverb in wrong location
		Source: a:223-224
		Vetted: t
		Judgment: u
		Phenomena: {adverb, word order}
		Der man leyent shayn dos bukh.
		Der man leyen-t shayn dos bukh.
		DEF.NOM.M man read-1SG nicely DEF.ACC.N book.
		The man reads the book nicely.

		Also, just prepending the adverb to the front would violate V2:

		Source: a:223-224
		Vetted: t
		Judgment: u
		Phenomena: {adverb, word order}
		Shayn der man leyent dos bukh.
		Shayn der man leyen-t dos bukh.
		nicely DEF.NOM.M man read-1SG DEF.ACC.N book.
		The man reads the book nicely.

Since manner adverbs are not yet handled by the Grammar Matrix, no
implementation has of yet been done.


ATTRIBUTIVE ADJECTIVES

Yiddish adjectives occur between the determiner and the noun and agree with the case, gender and number of the noun they modify. Agreement is marked via a suffix on the adjective. The following examples show correct and incorrect positioning of adjectives in the noun phrase.

Source: author
Vetted: f
Judgment: g
Phenomena: {adjectives}
Dos voyl kind zingt.
Dos voyl-e kind zing-t.
DEF.NOM.N nice-NOM.SG.N child sing-3SG.
The nice child sings.

Source: author
Vetted: f
Judgment: u
Phenomena: {adjectives}
Dos kind voyle zingt.
Dos kind voyl-e zing-t.
DEF.NOM.N child nice-NOM.SG.N sing-3SG.
The nice child sings.

# The adjective is almost an adverb here, but shouldn't be inflected. 
Source: author
Vetted: f
Judgment: u
Phenomena: {adjectives}
Dos kind zingt voyle.
Dos kind zing-t voyle-e.
DEF.NOM.N nice good-NOM.SG.N sing-3SG.
The child sings nice.

The following examples show adjectival agreement in the nominative
case:

Source: author
Vetted: f
Judgment: g
Phenomena: {adjectives, agreement}
Der guter man zing.
Der gut-er man zing.
DEF.SG.NOM.M good-NOM.SG.M man sing;1SG.
The good man sings.

Source: author
Vetted: f
Judgment: g
Phenomena: {adjectives, agreement}
Di gute froy zingst.
Di gut-e froy zing-st.
DEF.SG.NOM.F good-NOM.SG.F woman sing-2P.
The good woman sings.

Source: author
Vetted: f
Judgment: g
Phenomena: {adjectives, agreement}
Dos gute kind zingt.
Dos gut-e kind zing-t.
DEF.PL.NOM.N good-NOM.SG.N child sing-3SG.
The good child sings.

The following examples show adjectival agreement in the accusative
case:

Source: author
Vetted: f
Judgment: g
Phenomena: {adjectives, agreement}
Ikh ze dos gutn man.
Ikh ze dos gut-n man.
1SG.NOM ze;1SG DEF.ACC.M good-ACC.SG.M man.
I see the good man.

Source: author
Vetted: f
Judgment: g
Phenomena: {adjectives, agreement}
Ikh ze di gute froy.
Ikh ze di gute-e froy.
1SG.NOM see;1SG 3SG.ACC.F good-ACC.SG.F woman.
I see the good woman.

Source: author
Vetted: f
Judgment: g
Phenomena: {adjectives, agreement}
Ikh ze dos gute kind.
Ikh ze dos gut-e kind.
1SG.NOM see;1SG 3SG.ACC.F good-ACC.SG.N kind.
I see the good child.

The following examples show adjectival agreement in the dative
case:

Source: author
Vetted: f
Judgment: g
Phenomena: {determiner, word order, agreement}
Di mame git dem gutn man dos bukh.
Di mame git dem gut-n man dos bukh.
DEF.NOM.F mother give;1SG DEF.DAT.M good-DAT.SG.M man DEF.ACC.N book.
The mother gives the good child the book.

Source: author
Vetted: f
Judgment: g
Phenomena: {determiner, word order, agreement}
Di mame git der guter froy dos bukh.
Di mame git der gut-er kind dos bukh.
DEF.NOM.F mother give;1SG DEF.DAT.F good-DAT.SG.F child DEF.ACC.N book.
The mother gives the good child the book.

Source: author
Vetted: f
Judgment: g
Phenomena: {determiner, word order,agreement}
Di mame git dem gutn kind dos bukh.
Di mame git dem gut-n kind dos bukh.
DEF.NOM.F mother give;1SG DEF.DAT.N good-DAT.SG.N child DEF.ACC.N book.
The mother gives the good child the book.

The following examples show adjectival agreement with a plural noun.
Plural Yiddish adjectives forms make no distinction between case and
gender:

Source: author
Vetted: f
Judgment: g
Phenomena: {adjectives, agreement}
Di gute kinder zing.
Di gut-e kind-er zing.
DEF.PL.NOM.M good-NOM.PL child-NOM.PL sing;1SG.
The good children sing.

The following are a handful of ungrammatical permutations of the above:

Source: author
Vetted: f
Judgment: u
Phenomena: {adjectives, agreement}
Der gutn man zing.
Der gut-n man zing.
DEF.SG.NOM.M good-NOM/DAT.SG.M man sing;1SG.
The good man sings.

Source: author
Vetted: f
Judgment: u
Phenomena: {adjectives, agreement}
Ikh ze di guter froy.
Ikh ze di gute-er froy.
1SG.NOM see;1SG 3SG.DAT.F good-ACC.SG.F woman.
I see the good woman.

Source: author
Vetted: f
Judgment: u
Phenomena: {determiner, word order,agreement}
Di mame git dem gute kind dos bukh.
Di mame git dem gut-e kind dos bukh.
DEF.NOM.F mother give;1SG DEF.DAT.N good-NOM/ACC.SG.N child DEF.ACC.N book.
The mother gives the good child the book.

Source: author
Vetted: f
Judgment: u
Phenomena: {adjectives, agreement}
Di gutn kinder zing.
Di gut-n kind-er zing.
DEF.PL.NOM.M good-NOM.SG.N child-PL sing;1SG.
The good children sing.

Since adjectives are not yet handled by the Grammar Matrix, no
implementation has of yet been done.


EMBEDDED CLAUSES

Subordinate clauses in Yiddish display the same V2 word order as
declarative main clauses and are introduced by the complementizer
'az', which, in some circumstances can be omitted:

Source: a:233
Vetted: t
Judgment: g
Phenomena: {embedded declarative}
Zi meynt, az ikh bin meshuge.
Zi meyn-t, az ikh bin meshuge.
3SG.NOM.F think-3SG, COMP 1SG.NOM be;1SG crazy. 
She thinks that I have gone crazy.

Source: a:233
Vetted: t
Judgment: g
Phenomena: {embedded declarative}
Zi meynt, ikh bin meshuge.
Zi meyn-t, ikh bin meshuge.
3SG.NOM.F think-3SG, COMP 1SG.NOM be;1SG crazy. 
She thinks I have gone crazy.

Additionally, constituents within the embedded clauses can be
topicalized:

Source: a:232
Vetted: t
Judgment: g
Phenomena: {embedded declarative}
Ikh veys, az moyshe kumt morgn.
Ikh veys, az moyshe kum-t morgn.
1SG.NOM know;3G COMP Moyshe come;3G tomorrow.
I know that Moyshe is coming tomorrow.
 
Source: a:232
Vetted: t
Judgment: g
Phenomena: {embedded declarative}
Ikh veys, az morgn moyshe kumt.
Ikh veys, az morgn moyshe kum-t.
1SG.NOM know;3G COMP tomorrow Moyshe come;3G.
I know that it's tomorrow Moyshe is coming.

Source: a:232
Vetted: t
Judgment: g
Phenomena: {embedded declarative}
Ikh veys, az es moyshe kumt morgn.
Ikh veys, az es moyshe kum-t morgn.
1SG.NOM know;3G COMP 1SG.NOM Moyshe come;3G tomorrow.
I know that it's Moyshe that's coming tomorrow.

Since subordinate clauses are not yet handled by the Grammar Matrix,
no implementation has of yet been done.

While our reference grammar does not say anything about subordinate
yes-no interrogatives, from looking through the data in the Corpus of
Modern Yiddish it would appear that the interrogative marker 'tsi',
which translates as 'whether' is used as a complementizer instead of
'az' similar, to English. As to the word order in embedded
interrogatives, it appears that both SVO and VSO are possible, with
VSO having the effect of contributing more interrogative force to
the utterance. 

Source: author based on examples in c
Vetted: f
Judgment: g
Phenomena: {embedded interrogative}
Ikh freg, tsi iz es efsher
Ikh freg, tsi iz es efsher
1SG.NOM ask;3SG, whether;COMP be;3SG 3SG.NOM.N possible.
I ask whether it is possible?

Source: author based on examples in c
Vetted: f
Judgment: g
Phenomena: {embedded interrogative}
Ikh freg, tsi es iz efsher
Ikh freg, tsi es iz efsher
1SG.NOM ask;3SG, whether;COMP 3SG.NOM.N be;3SG possible.
I ask, whether it is possible

Source: author based on examples in c
Vetted: f
Judgment: u
Phenomena: {embedded interrogative}
Ikh freg, az iz es efsher
Ikh freg, az iz es efsher
1SG.NOM ask;3SG, that;COMP be;3SG 3SG.NOM.N possible.
I ask whether it is possible.

Our reference grammar does talk about embedded wh-interrogatives
though. In these constructions, word order is mostly SVO in the
embedded clause but there are some cases where inversion happens
where the resultant sentential force is more interrogative than
declarative.

Source: a:233
Vetted: t
Judgment: g
Phenomena: {embedded interrogative}
Ikh veys nit vemen du host gezen.
Ikh veys nit vemen du host ge-ze-n.
1SG.NOM know;3G NEG WHO;DAT 2SG.NOM have;2SG PP-see-PP. 
I know not whom you have seen.

Source: a:233
Vetted: t
Judgment: g
Phenomena: {embedded interrogative}
Ikh veys nit vos du host gezen.
Ikh veys nit vos du host ge-ze-n.
1SG.NOM know;3G NEG what 2SG.NOM have;2SG PP-see-PP. 
I know not what you have seen.

Use of the complementizer 'az' in wh-interrogative subordinate
clauses, the following would most likely be ungrammatical as the wh
words 'vos' and 'vemen' already serve as complementizer.

Source: author based on a:233
Vetted: f
Judgment: u
Phenomena: {embedded interrogative}
Ikh veys nit az vemen du host gezen.
Ikh veys nit az vemen du host ge-ze-n.
1SG.NOM know;3G NEG that WHO;DAT 2SG.NOM have;2SG PP-see-PP. 
I know not whom you have seen.

Source: author based on a:233
Vetted: f
Judgment: u
Phenomena: {embedded interrogative}
Ikh veys nit az vos du host gezen.
Ikh veys nit az vos du host ge-ze-n.
1SG.NOM know;3G NEG that what 2SG.NOM have;2SG PP-see-PP. 
I know not what you have seen.

