Why do you think crime is down?

[Khemehekis]

1. Why do you think crime is down? [What do you think caused the decline in crime?]

2. Why do you think crime is down? [What leads you to believe that crime is down?]


Kankonian:

1. Ar kardass er gher vuen?
2sg think-PRS why crime decline-PST

2. Er ar kardass az gher vuen?
why 2sg think-PRS that crime decline-PST

[Lao Kou]

Géarthnuns

Öçek la, gü chü gnökürhüls lö chelöi haumalosüf sho, höhövaz?
2SG-NOM AUX.PRES, CONJ DEF crime.rate-NOM AUX.PRESPRF why decline-SPEC PTCL, think-INTERR
Why do you think crime is down? [What do you think caused the decline in crime?]

Öçek la, gü chü gnökürhüls lö haumalosüf sho, chelöi höhövaz?
2SG-NOM AUX.PRES, CONJ DEF crime.rate-NOM AUX.PRESPRF decline-SPEC PTCL, why think-INTERR
Why do you think crime is down? [What leads you to believe that crime is down?]

[Lambuzhao]

1) Wod eiraulim wa zonac rædlonik?
INTERR.INAN.ACC believe-PRS.2SG CNJ crime<COLL> diminish<SBJV>3SG

2) Wod zurreiræk ihmeu wa zonac rædlonik?
INTERR.INAN.ACC <CAUS>believe-PRS.3SG 2SG.DAT CNJ crime<COLL> diminish<SBJV>3SG

I'm not 100% certain I understand both those meanings/subtexts from that selfsame question.

Are there any other natlangs that would have that duplicity of meaning in this question?

[Xing]

Leopardish

1)

Ete a ngo mwarui ko dimu punimuki or
think ERG 2s why PFV diminish crime
'What do you think caused the decline in crime?'

2)

Mwarui ete a ngo ko dimu punimuki?
why think ERG 2s PFV diminish crime
'What caused you to believe that crime has declined?'

The following can be interpreted as either 1) or 2)

Ete a ngo ko dimu punimuki mwarui?
think ERG 2s PFV diminish crime why

When the wh-word (mwarui 'why') is fronted, it's possible to disambiguate between the meanings.

[Khemehekis]

Leopardish

1)

Ete a ngo mwarui ko dimu punimuki or
think ERG 2s why PFV diminish crime
'What do you think caused the decline in crime?'

2)

Mwarui ete a ngo ko dimu punimuki?
why think ERG 2s PFV diminish crime
'What caused you to believe that crime has declined?'

The following can be interpreted as either 1) or 2)

Ete a ngo ko dimu punimuki mwarui?
think ERG 2s PFV diminish crime why

When the wh-word (mwarui 'why') is fronted, it's possible to disambiguate between the meanings.

Oh, cool! Leopardish's method of distinguishing the two is similar to Kankonian's.

[Xing]

Nizhmel

ziò ye tuoshien zhile kiem?
2s think crime down why
[zʲøː ↗ eː tʰoːɕẽː ʑiːlɛː kʰʲẽː]

Can mean either (1) or (2).

[Imralu]

1. Why do you think crime is down? [What do you think caused the decline in crime?]

2. Why do you think crime is down? [What leads you to believe that crime is down?]

German:

1.
Was glaubst du, warum die Kriminalität zurückgegangen ist?
what believe.2S you.SG why the.F criminality decreased is
Literally "What do you believe why crime is down?"


2.
Warum glaubst du, dass die Kriminalität zurückgegangen ist?
why believe.2S you.SG COMPLEMENTISER the.F criminality decreased is
Literally: "Why do you believe that crime is down."

Not sure how idiomatic that is with zurückgegangen, but my examples show the common grammatical patterns.
________________________________
In Ngolu, there is no Wh-movement, so the location of the "why", in the matrix clause or the subordinate clause, differentiates the meaning. (In English, the sentence is ambiguous because Wh-movement is so strong it can pluck the wh- word out of a subordinate clause and put it in the matrix clause making it ambiguous about which level of the sentence it refers to.)

simple gloss.

1.
believe you.NOM that.ACC be.PERF decrease the.NOM crime the.CAUSAL be.what
> believe you that has decreased the crime because of what?
>> you believe that the crime has decreased why

2.
believe you.NOM the.CAUSAL be.what that.ACC be.PERF decrease the.NOM crime
> believe you because of what that has been reduced the crime
>> you believe why that the crime has decreased

The first sentence could, in theory, be interpreted with the second meaning. (believe you.NOM that.ACC be.PERF decrease the.NOM crime the.CAUSAL be.what) except that longer, heavier arguments, such as the accusative subordinate clause here, by default go later in the sentence, meaning that the "why" part of the sentence would naturally occurs before it.
_______________________________________________

I'm not 100% sure about any of this, but I think in German sign language these may be correct ...

(WHY) YOU THINK CRIME [DECREASE]PFV WHY

... is ambiguous

To be less ambiguous you could say ...

[CRIME [DECREASE]PFV WHY]TOPIC YOU THINK WHAT
= What do you hold to be the reason for the fall in crime?

you<CRIME [DECREASE]PFV> WHY YOU THAT THINK WHY[/color]
= What is the reason for you to believe that crime has fallen?

[Tuslaven Kukristo]

(Teeverb Kuluxem)
Ubpash yem tuatnafen echleezo blangee qeen?
you think | that | crime | is low | because | what?

[Dormouse559]

Silvish

1.
Porqué lo crim dimenguiscz, a dar li mot?
[pɔɾˈkɛ lə ˈkɾem dɪmɛŋˈgeɕ a ˈdaɾ lɪ ˈmɔt]
why DEF-M crime go_down-3SG to give-INF DEF-OBL.M opinion
Why is crime going down, in your opinion?

2.
Porqué pesaz ca lo crim dimenguiscz?
[pɔɾˈkɛ pɛˈzats ka lə ˈkɾem dɪmɛŋˈgeɕ]
why think-2SG.FORM SBRD DEF-M crime go_down-3SG
Why do you think crime is going down?

[clawgrip]

Japanese

犯罪はなぜ減っていると思う？
Hanzai wa naze hette iru to omou?
crime TOP why decrease-CONJ be COMPL think

なぜ犯罪が減っていると思っているの？
Naze hanzai ga hette iru to omotte iru no?
why crime NOM decrease-CONJ be COMPL think-CONJ be Q

The main difference here is:
In the first sentence, hanzai ("crime") is placed as the topic, and the verb omou ("think") is used in its plain form, giving the first meaning by default.
In the second sentence, hanzai ("crime") is not the topic, and the verb omou ("think") is in the continuous form, which shows that it is what the person is thinking or believes right now.

[Iyionaku]

Yélian

Miyde æ'térnisa yiciyret, pe letarei?
[ˈm͡aiːdə œˈtɛrniːsa ˌʃiˈc͡aiːrɛ pə leˈtaːr͡ɛɪ]
Why CON-crime PST-decline-3SG, what believe-2SG
Why has crime declined, what do you think?

Miyde letarei pi æ'térnisa yiciyret?
[ˈm͡aiːdə leˈtaːr͡ɛɪ pi œˈtɛrniːsa ˌʃiˈc͡aiːrɛt]
Why believe-2SG that CON-crime PST-decline-3SG
Why do you think that crime is down?

[prettydragoon]

Rireinutire

ta vitukave hii sitipuru veyuko yoñi yakayo:
/tɑ ˈvitukɑve hiː ˈsitipuɹu ˈvejuko ˈjoŋi ˈjɑkɑjo/
ta vitu-ka-ve hii siti-pu-ru veyu-ko yoñi ya-ka-yo ||
2S.NOM think-PRS-HSY that.CONJ crime-ADJZ-NMZ.NOM decrease-PSPART why.Q be-PRS-Q ||
1. Why do you think crime is down? [What do you think caused the decline in crime?]

ta yoñi vitukayo hii sitipuru veyuko yakave:
/tɑ ˈjoŋi ˈvitukɑjo hiː ˈsitipuɹu ˈvejuko ˈjɑkɑve/
ta yoñi vitu-ka-yo hii siti-pu-ru veyu-ko ya-ka-ve ||
2S.NOM why.Q think-PRS-Q that.CONJ crime-ADJZ-NMZ decrease-PSPART be-PRS-HSY ||
2. Why do you think crime is down? [What leads you to believe that crime is down?]

While siti does indeed mean 'crime', it can only refer to a single instance of iniquity. To speak of crime as a phenomenon, you need the word sitipuru, 'crimelyness' or 'criminality'.

Translation challenge 77/100