Clefting and nominal predication: Two focus-marking constructions in Movima

2021 ◽  
Vol 52 (1) ◽  
pp. 117-138
Author(s):  
Katharina Haude
Keyword(s):  
The Other ◽  
Matrix Clause ◽  
Focus Marking ◽  
Predicate Position

Abstract Movima (isolate, Bolivia) has two focus constructions that superficially look very similar. One is a simple clause with a noun in predicate position and a verb placed inside the argument phrase. Its pragmatically marked status stems from the inversion of the prototypical association of lexical and pragmatic categories. In the other construction, the predicative noun is additionally preceded by a free pronoun. This construction is a cleft, the pronoun and noun together constituting an equational matrix clause. The two constructions also differ in function: the simple clause with a nominal predicate is a simple predication, while the cleft is a specificational sentence.

Foregrounding of subordinate clauses by word order: Psycholinguistic evidence of the function of V>Adv (V2) word order in Danish

Linguistics ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 58 (1) ◽  
pp. 245-273
Author(s):  
Marie Herget Christensen ◽  
Tanya Karoli Christensen ◽  
Torben Juel Jensen
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
High Frequency ◽  
Main Clause ◽  
The Other ◽  
Subordinate Clause ◽  
Matrix Clause ◽  
Subordinate Clauses ◽  
Clause Complex

AbstractIn modern Danish, main clauses have the word order X>Verb>Adverb (i. e., V2) whereas subordinate clauses are generally characterized by the “subordinate clause” word order Subject>Adverb>Verb. Spoken Danish has a high frequency of “main clause” word order in subordinate clauses, however, and in the article we argue that this “Main Clause Phenomena” (cf. Aelbrecht et  al. 2012) functions as a foregrounding device, signaling that the more important information of the clause complex is to be found in the subordinate clause instead of in its matrix clause.A prediction from the foregrounding hypothesis is that a subordinate clause with Verb>Adverb word order will attract more attention than a clause with Adverb>Verb word order. To test this, we conducted an experiment under the text change paradigm. 59 students each read 24 constructions twice, each containing a subordinate clause with either Verb>Adverb or Adverb>Verb word order. Half of the subordinate clauses were governed by a semifactive predicate (open to both word orders) and the other half by a semantically secondary sentence (in itself strongly favoring Verb>Adverb word order). Attention to the subordinate clause was tested by measuring how disinclined the participants were to notice change of a word in the subordinate clause when re-reading it.Results showed significantly more attention to Verb>Adverb clauses than to Adverb>Verb clauses (though only under semifactive predicates), and more attention to subordinate clauses under semantically secondary than semifactive predicates. We consider this as strongly supporting the hypothesis that Verb>Adv word order functions as a foregrounding signal in subordinate clauses.

Adverbial clauses and V3

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (s3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Eva Csipak
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Speech Act ◽  
The Other ◽  
Order Effects ◽  
Matrix Clause ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Pragmatic Analysis ◽  
The Matrix ◽  
Adverbial Clauses ◽  
Biscuit Conditionals

AbstractThis paper discusses word order effects in German adverbial clauses: often, the matrix clause can exhibit either V2 or V3 word order. I argue that adverbial clauses with V3 word order have an obligatory ‘biscuit’ interpretation and receive a speech act modifying interpretation, as has previously only been argued for ‘biscuit conditionals’. I show that this phenomenon holds more generally. On the other hand, a pragmatic analysis for V2 biscuit conditionals remains necessary.

scholarly journals The role of focus marking in disjunctive questions: A QUD-based approach

2021 ◽  
Vol 30 ◽  
pp. 654
Author(s):  
Morwenna Hoeks
Keyword(s):  
The Other ◽  
Congruence Condition ◽  
Contrastive Topic ◽  
Structural Differences ◽  
Alternative Questions ◽  
The Difference ◽  
The One ◽  
The Right ◽  
Focus Marking

Disjunctive questions are ambiguous: they can either be interpreted as polar questions (PolQs), as open disjunctive questions (OpenQs), or as closed alternative questions (ClosedQ). The goal of this paper is to show that the difference in interpretation between these questions can be derived via effects of focus marking directly. In doing so, the proposal brings out the striking parallel between the prosody of questions with foci/contrastive topics on the one hand and that of alternative questions on the other. Unlike previous approaches, this proposal does not rely on structural differences between AltQs and PolQs derived via ellipsis or syntactic movement. To show how this works out, an account of focus and contrastive topic marking in questions is put forward in which f-marking in questions determines what constitutes a possible answer by signaling what the speaker's QUD is like. By imposing a congruence condition between f-marked questions and their answers that requires answers to resolve the question itself as well as its signaled QUD, we predict the right answerhood conditions for disjunctive questions.

scholarly journals On the semantics of when-clauses

2010 ◽  
Vol 20 ◽  
pp. 544
Author(s):  
David Patrick Hall ◽  
Ivano Caponigro
Keyword(s):  
Main Idea ◽  
The Other ◽  
Semantic Interpretation ◽  
Semantic Mapping ◽  
Matrix Clause ◽  
Formal Identity ◽  
Free Relative ◽  
The Matrix ◽  
Embedded Clauses ◽  
Interrogative Clauses

This paper is about non-interrogative temporal embedded clauses introduced by when (temporal when-clauses), their semantic interpretation and their syntax/semantics mapping. Our goal is to provide a fully compositional account of temporal when-clauses that accounts for their formal identity with interrogative clauses and their difference in meaning. The main idea is that temporal when-clauses are syntactically and semantically free relative clauses. Previous syntactic analyses (Grimshaw 1977, Bresnan and Grimshaw 1978, a.o) have provided robust support to the syntactic side of this claim. On the other hand, the semantic proposals for temporal when-clauses that we are aware of (Bonomi 1997, Vikner 2004, Moens and Steedman 1988) have ignored these syntactic conclusions and have argued for analyses that are problematic for the syntactic/semantic mapping. These semantic analyses are also not fully adequate in handling the interpretative properties of these clauses. We provide evidence from the distributional and interpretive properties of when-clauses as well as from the temporal alignment of the matrix clause with the when-clause that supports our analysis.

scholarly journals The prosody of French wh-in-situ questions: Echo vs. non-echo

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-35
Author(s):  
ALIZA GLASBERGEN-PLAS ◽  
STELLA GRYLLIA ◽  
JENNY DOETJES
Keyword(s):  
Information Seeking ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Question Type ◽  
The Other ◽  
Focus Structure ◽  
Narrow Focus ◽  
The One ◽  
Focus Marking ◽  
Echo Questions

This study compares the prosodic properties of French wh-in-situ echo questions and string-identical information seeking questions in relation to focus. Thirty-six (12 $\times$ 3) wh-in-situ questions were embedded in dialogues designed to elicit (A) echo questions expressing auditory failure, (B) information seeking questions with broad focus or (C) information seeking questions with narrow focus on the wh-phrase, i.e. a focus structure similar to the one of echo questions. Analyses regarding the F0, duration and intensity of the utterances produced by 20 native speakers of French show clear prosodic differences between the three conditions. Our results indicate that part of the prosodic properties of echo questions can be attributed to the presence of narrow focus (A and C vs. B) while another part is truly characteristic of echo questions themselves (A vs. B and C). In combination with known differences regarding their pragmatics, semantics and syntax, this sets echo questions apart as a separate question type. At the same time, our results offer evidence for prosodic encoding of focus in French wh-in-situ questions, confirming and adding to existing claims regarding the prosody of focus marking in French on the one hand and the presence of focus marking in wh-interrogatives on the other.

scholarly journals Re-evaluating the importance of discourse-embedding for specificational and predicative clauses

Pragmatics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wout Van Praet
Keyword(s):  
Information Structure ◽  
The Other ◽  
Separate Layer ◽  
The One ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Definition Of Information ◽  
Focus Marking

Abstract This paper studies the discourse-embedding of specificational clauses, in contrast with predicative ones. Specificational clauses – which express a variable – value relation – are assumed to have a ‘fixed’ information structure. This follows from the widespread definition of information structure in terms of a presupposition – focus contrast, which is often conflated with the variable – value contrast, on the one hand, and with a given – new contrast, on the other. Against these conflations, this study demonstrates that the specification is a separate layer of meaning, which not only shows variation in terms of focus-marking (Van Praet and O’Grady 2018), but also in terms of its embedding in specific contexts of use. These findings urge us to revisit not only the basis for distinguishing specificational clauses from predicative ones, but also to separate out the different layers of coded and pragmatic meaning that have been conflated under the header of ‘information structure’.

Differential grammaticalization of copulas in Tsúùt’ínà and Tłı̨chǫ Yatıì

Diachronica ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. 262-293
Author(s):  
Nicholas Welch
Keyword(s):  
North America ◽  
The Other ◽  
Matrix Clause ◽  
The Matrix ◽  
Embedded Clause

Abstract The languages of the Dene (aka Athapaskan) family in North America almost universally employ two copular verbs. In several languages of this family, copular forms are also employed as verbal auxiliaries: forms of one copula mark clausal focus while forms of the other mark TAM (tense/aspect/mode) categories. With reference to two Dene languages in particular, Tłı̨chǫ Yatıì and Tsúùt’ínà, I explain this difference by positing distinct grammaticalization paths and motivations for each copula: both focus and TAM markers originate in a uniclausal reanalysis of biclausal constructions, the former from constructions where the matrix clause asserts the truth of the embedded clause, and the latter from those where the matrix clause supplies extra TAM information to the embedded clause. Both grammaticalizations involve an upward reanalysis of copulas as functional heads.

scholarly journals Vom Matrixsatz zum Diskursmaker: Die Grammatikalisierung von Hauptsache

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 185
Author(s):  
Ferran Robles Sabater
Keyword(s):  
The Other ◽  
Semantic Features ◽  
Matrix Clause ◽  
Functional Characteristics ◽  
Discourse Marker ◽  
The Core ◽  
The Matrix ◽  
The One ◽  
Discourse Particle ◽  
Conceptual Meaning

<p>This paper has a double purpose. On the one hand, it intends to prove the existence of a discourse marker (DM) Hauptsache. This element preserves the core conceptual meaning of the homonymous noun, but differs from it with regard to its morphosyntactic and semantic features as well as to its discourse-organizing, information structuring, and modal functions. On the other hand, the emergence of Hauptsache as a discourse particle is explained on the grounds of a grammaticalization process similar to the ones described for the prototypical German DMs. Evidence drawn from a corpus of German and Austrian parliamentary protocols will show in which ways the six fundamental processes implied in the grammaticalization of DMs (decategorization, scope expansion, subjectification, persistence, syntactic fixation, phonetic and/or morphosyntactic reduction) can be found in the evolution from the matrix clause die Hauptsache is to the monolexematic Hauptsache. The paper ends with a brief discussion of the formal, semantical, and functional characteristics of Hauptsache.</p>

scholarly journals One =Mi: An Evidential, Epistemic Modal, and Focus Marker

2011 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 20
Author(s):  
Iksoo Kwon
Keyword(s):  
The Other ◽  
Epistemic Modal ◽  
Focus Marking ◽  
The Given

The aim of this paper is to support Faller’s (2003) claim that an enclitic -mi in Imbabura Quechua cannot be classified as a pure evidential (EV, henceforth) or as a pure epistemic modal (EM, henceforth), but encode both notions, based on elicited data from two native Imbabura Quechua speakers. This paper also observes that the marker is used as a focus marker and explores a possibility that its focus marking function can be conceptually related to the other functions in that all the functions indicate that the origo’s attention is given to more cognitively salient portion of stimuli in the given context.

Focus on head-final relatives

2013 ◽  
Vol 58 (2) ◽  
pp. 191-215 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karsten A. Koch
Keyword(s):  
Relative Clause ◽  
Information Structure ◽  
Head Noun ◽  
Matrix Clause ◽  
Discourse Context ◽  
Background Matching ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Complex Nominals ◽  
Focus Marking

AbstractHead-final relatives in Nɬe?kepmcxín (Thompson River Salish) have previously been described as rare. This article presents new data illustrating a range of possible head-final relatives and the discourse context in which they occur. The difference between head-initial and head-final relative structures is accounted for by information structure, namely the position of focus. When focus falls on the entire NP containing the relative clause, a head-initial relative is generated. However, when focus falls on the relative clause itself, excluding the head noun, a head-final relative is used. The effect inside complex nominals is to linearize focus before background, matching the FOCUS ≫ BACKGROUND generalization observed in matrix clause focus marking. The study is the first examination of focus marking inside the Salishan nominal domain.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document