There is a consensus that QR cannot move QP out of the declarative embedded clause but it is controversial whether QP can move out of the interrogative embedded clause via QR. In this squib I propose that QR is clause-bound regardless of the sentence type, and the clause-boundedness of QR follows from the two facts: first, QP is not compatible with an edge feature like topic/focus so that QR is only motivated by the scope effect, even though the wh-movement is triggered by an edge feature as well as a wh-feature, and second, the wh-phrase and its trace cannot serve as a QR trigger, contra Fox (2000). I argue that the apparent counterexample to the clause-boundedness condition can be explained by the transitivity of the scope relation. This proposal sheds a new light on the locality of QR and the thorny problems like "why may the universal quantifier inside the free relative clause have scope over the matrix subject, whereas the one inside the embedded wh-clause cannot?".
1. Introduction<BR>2. The Scope Economy Approach<BR>3. Asymmetry between QR and Wh-movement<BR>4. The Clause-Bounded Condition and the Wh-clause<BR>5. Concluding Remarks<BR>References<BR>
(0)
(0)