Pied-piping

Key takeaways

Pied-piping belongs to biology; place it in that map before memorising details.
Learn the definition first, then one example that makes the definition concrete.
Connect Pied-piping to a quantity you can measure, compute or draw — that is where exam questions come from.
Reproduce the core statement of Pied-piping from memory before moving on to harder problems.

Reference excerpt

In linguistics, pied-piping is a phenomenon of syntax whereby a given focused expression brings along an encompassing phrase with it when it is moved. The term was introduced by John Robert Ross in 1967. It references the legend of the Pied Piper of Hamelin, where a piper lures rats and children away from their town. In syntactic pied-piping, a focused expression (such as an interrogative word) pulls its host phrase with it when it moves to its new position in the sentence. Metaphorically, the focused expression is the piper, and the host phrase is the material being pied-piped. Pied-piping is an aspect of syntactic discontinuities and has to do with constituents that can or cannot be discontinuous. Pied-piping is most visible in cases of wh-fronting of information questions and relative clauses, but it is not limited to wh-fronting. It can also occur with almost any type of discontinuity, including extraposition, scrambling, and topicalization. Most, if not all, languages that allow discontinuities employ pied-piping to some extent. However, there are significant differences across languages in this area, with some languages using pied-piping much more than others.

Pied-piping in English

Wh-clauses vs. relative clauses

Wh-clauses In English, pied-piping occurs when a wh-expression drags its containing phrase with it to the front of the clause. The pied-piped material can be a noun phrase (NP), an adjective phrase (AP), an adverb phrase (AdvP), or a prepositional phrase (PP). In the following examples, the focused expression is indicated in bold, and the fronted word/phrase in the (b) and (c) sentences is underlined, with the gap marking its canonical position. The material that has been pied-piped is any underlined material that is not bolded. The (b) sentences show the focused expression pied-piping the target phrase, and the (c) sentences show absence of pied-piping. which is often ungrammatical.

(1) a. She bought that house. b. Which house did she buy ___? c. *Which did she buy ___ house?

(2) a. She is ten years old. b. How old is she ___? c. *How is she ___ old?

(3) a. John left the scene very slowly. b. How slowly did John leave the scene ___? c. *How did John leave the scene ___ slowly?

Pied-piping also occurs in embedded wh-clauses:

(4) a. Sarah likes someone's paper. b. Sam asked whose paper Sarah likes ___. c. *Sam asked whose Sarah likes ___ paper.

In (4), the possessive interrogative whose is contained within a determiner phrase (DP) that also includes paper. Attempting to move who and the possessive 's is syntactically impossible without also moving the possessive's complement, paper. As a result, (4b) is grammatical while (4c) is not because the focused expression has moved without the target phrase.

Relative clauses Pied-piping is very frequent in relative clauses, where a greater flexibility about what can or must be pied-piped is discernible:

(5) a. He likes stories about hobbits. b. ...hobbits stories about whom he likes ___. c. ...hobbits about whom he likes stories ___. d. ...hobbits whom he likes stories about ___.

In English, the pied-piping mechanism is more flexible in relative clauses than in interrogative clauses, because material can be pied-piped that would be less acceptable in the corresponding interrogative clause.

(6) a. She laughed because of the face you made. b. ?Because of what did she laugh ___? - Pied-piping seems marginally acceptable in this matrix wh-clause. c. *We asked because of what she laughed ___? - Pied-piping is simply bad in this embedded wh-clause. d. ...the face you made because of which she laughed ___ - Pied-piping is possible in this relative clause.

(7) a. Tom likes your picture of Susan. b.??Your picture of whom does Tom like ___? - Pied-piping seems strongly marginal in this matrix wh-clause. c. *They know your picture of whom Tom likes ___? - Pied-piping is simply bad in this embedded wh-clause. d. ...Susan, your picture of whom Tom likes ___ - Pied-piping is possible in this relative clause.

The (d) examples, where pied-piping has occurred in a relative clause, are acceptable. The corresponding wh-clauses in the (b) and (c) sentences are much less acceptable. This aspect of pied-piping (i.e. that it is more restricted in wh-clauses than in relative clauses in English) is poorly understood, especially in light of the fact that the same contrast in acceptability does not occur in closely related languages such as German.

Preposition placement variation

Pied-piping vs. preposition stranding Pied-piping is sometimes optional with English prepositions (in, of, on, to, with, etc.). In these flexible cases, preposition phrases can be constructed with a continuous structure (pied-piping) or an alternative discontinuous structure (preposition stranding). When pied-piping occurs, the preposition phrase is continuous, because the preposition follows the focused expression to a new position. In preposition stranding, the preposition phrase is discontinuous because the preposition stays in its original position while the focused expression moves away. The following examples show cases where either pied-piping or preposition stranding can occur.

(8) a. Fred spoke with Susan. b. With whom did Fred speak ___. c. Who did Fred speak with ___?

(9) a. Fred is waiting for Susan. b. For whom is Fred waiting ___? c. Who is Fred waiting for ___?

Influences on variation In cases where pied-piping and preposition stranding are interchangeable, both types of constructions are generally considered acceptable by native English speakers. However, prescriptive grammar rules specify that the object of a preposition must immediately follow its governing preposition. Preposition pied-piping is favoured in formal registers of English, such as academic writing and printed text. In comparison, pied-piping is disfavoured in colloquial registers. Speakers tend to prefer preposition stranding instead of pied-piping in informal contexts, such as private dialogue and private correspondence. In (8) and (9) above, the (b) sentences present a formal register, while a colloquial register is observed in the (c) sentences.

… excerpt ends here. Continue reading the full article.

Illustrations

Worked examples

Example 1 — a first encounter with Pied-piping

Start with the simplest possible case. Write down what Pied-piping claims or describes in one sentence, then invent the smallest concrete situation in which that sentence is true. In biology, the smallest case is usually a single object, a single equation or a single measurement. Check that every symbol or term in your sentence has a meaning in that case.

Example 2 — changing one variable

Take the situation from Example 1 and change exactly one quantity: double it, halve it, or set it to zero. Predict what should happen to Pied-piping before you calculate. Comparing your prediction with the result is the fastest way to find out whether you understand the idea or only the words.

Example 3 — an exam-style question

Typical questions about Pied-piping ask you to (a) state it precisely, (b) apply it to given data, and (c) explain a limitation. Practise writing all three answers in under five minutes; the third part is what separates a full-mark answer from an average one.

Applications of Pied-piping

In research: Pied-piping appears in biology research whenever the underlying quantities have to be modelled precisely. Papers usually cite it as a starting assumption and then explore where it breaks down.
In technology and industry: Engineering practice reuses Pied-piping in design rules, simulations and safety margins. Knowing the idea lets you read a specification sheet and understand why the numbers look the way they do.
In the classroom: Pied-piping is common in secondary-school and first-year university syllabi. It links to neighbouring topics Generative syntax, Syntactic relationships, Syntactic transformation, so understanding it makes those chapters shorter.
In everyday life: Look for Pied-piping outside the textbook — in sport, cooking, traffic, electronics or the sky above you. An example you found yourself is remembered far longer than one you were given.

How to study Pied-piping in 20 minutes

Read the reference excerpt below once, without taking notes.
Close the page and write down what Pied-piping means in your own words.
Compare your version with the excerpt and mark what you missed.
Work through the three examples above with pen and paper.
Explain Pied-piping out loud to somebody else — or to Teacher Smith in the lgStudy chat.

Frequently asked questions

What is Pied-piping in simple terms?

In linguistics, pied-piping is a phenomenon of syntax whereby a given focused expression brings along an encompassing phrase with it when it is moved. The term was introduced by John Robert Ross in 1967.

Why does Pied-piping matter?

Because it connects several biology ideas at once: it gives you a definition you can apply, a quantity you can calculate, and a way to check whether a result is plausible.

How should I study Pied-piping?

Read the excerpt, restate it from memory, then work through the examples and applications listed on this page. The five-step study plan above takes about twenty minutes.

What does this page cover?

It gives you a compact reference excerpt plus original lgStudy explanations, examples, applications and study material on Pied-piping.