The prosody of focus projection: word stress and F0 patterns in Georgian

Based on experimental evidence, this paper shows that focus projection/percolation – the phenomenon by way of which prosodic prominence on a sub-constituent signals focus on the whole constituent – has a consistent prosodic realization in Georgian. The novelty of these findings lies in two properties of Georgian that have not been explored from the perspective of focus projection: it is a language with a dedicated focus position (linearly immediately preverbal) and one that does not rely on pitch accents in the expression of phrasal prosody (Skopeteas & Féry 2010; 2016). According to focus projection accounts (Selkirk 1984; Cinque 1993; Ladd 1996; Zubizarreta 1998, a. o.), utterances with narrow focus on the direct object are realized in the same way as broad focus utterances, since in all three cases prosodic prominence is realized on the direct object. In contrast, in utterances with narrow focus on the subject, the subject is the most prosodically prominent element, which means that the whole utterance has a different prosodic realization from that of broad focus contexts. This paper shows that the distribution of prosodic prominence in object- and subject-focus contexts in Georgian fits with this generalization. Specifically, the realization of utterances with narrowly focused objects does not differ from broad focus contexts in their F0 patterns and prominence of the stressed syllable, while narrowly focused subjects differ from subjects in broad focus utterances in both of these parameters.

Focus in Italian echo wh-questions: An analysis at syntax-prosody interface

In this article, we propose an analysis of the so-called echo wh-questions in situ in Italian at syntax–prosody interface. We conduct a prosodic analysis under an experimental approach, showing that a focalized wh-word in echo wh-questions shows its own peculiar properties, different from informative and corrective focus, so that we can analyze it as an instance of Mirative focus. We demonstrate that the wh-word in echo wh-questions occupies a focus position in the low periphery of the clause. We also argue that this position has syntactic properties that, interlaced together with the prosodic properties, lead us to define the projection as a dedicated focus projection for Mirative focus. Crucially, the focus position within the low periphery activated in an echo wh-question, has different syntactic, prosodic and interpretive properties with respect to the informational focus, and to the corrective focus. Therefore, at a general level, our analysis strengthens the idea that partly different intonations and interpretations are associated to positions within the low periphery as opposed to the positions in the left periphery.

Zu satzfinaler Subjektposition, Unakkusativität und C-Domäne im Jiddischen

The article examines structures of Yiddish clauses in which the kernel verb contains only one NP. The thematic role of an accessible NP is patient/theme, whereas the agent-NP remains vacant. It is assumed that a direct object of the type “X efent Y” (‘X opens Y’) and an accessible NP of the type “exists Y” appear in Yiddish in the clause-final position as a focalized subject. The study combines minimalist investigations and the cartographic approach, especially with regard to CP and IP/TP structures proposed in Rizzi (1997, 2004) and Belletti (1999) among others, and adopts the concept of functional topic/focus projections in the syntax of Yiddish. Investigations reveal possibilities of case assignment and feature checking in lower projection areas as well as the correlation between the topic projection of the C-domain and the clause-internal focus projection. A mechanism is assumed to combine precisely clause-final focalized subjects, unaccusatives and the C-domain including the following alternatives: (i) unmarked adverbials (PPs), (ii) expletive es and (iii) verb fronting. The analyzed structures have been observed in texts of Isaac Bashevis Singer (1931), Isaac Leib Peretz, (ed. 1920) and Fishl Bimko (1921) as well as in Yiddish daily newspaper Forverts.

Focus Projection Theories

This chapter examines the phenomenon offocus projection: a sentence with prosodic marking of focus on a word can lead to ambiguity, in that different constituents containing the word can be interpreted as focused. Two general approaches to focus projection are compared. In Default Prosody analyses, focus projection is epiphenomenal, a consequence of general principles requiring that focus be prosodically prominent, coupled with default principles of default prominence. In the F-projection approach, focus projection is encoded more directly, in terms of licensing rules for F-marking on constituents. Overall, the evidence in the literature favors the Default Prosody approach, and this chapter concentrates on comparing these two general approaches, as well as briefly summarizing other aspects of focus projection. The chapter ends with discussion of Basque data that are problematic for widely assumed generalizations about focus projection, and a possible way of understanding the data in the Default Prosody approach.