@misc{FanselowLenertova2010,
  author    = {Fanselow, Gisbert and Lenertov{\´a}, Denisa},
  title     = {Left peripheral focus},
  series = {Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  journal   = {Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  number    = {596},
  issn      = {1866-8364},
  doi       = {10.25932/publishup-42819},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-428198},
  pages     = {43},
  year      = {2010},
  abstract  = {In Czech, German, and many other languages, part of the semantic focus of the utterance can be moved to the left periphery of the clause. The main generalization is that only the leftmost accented part of the semantic focus can be moved. We propose that movement to the left periphery is generally triggered by an unspecific edge feature of C (Chomsky 2008) and its restrictions can be attributed to requirements of cyclic linearization, modifying the theory of cyclic linearization developed by Fox and Pesetsky (2005). The crucial assumption is that structural accent is a direct consequence of being linearized at merge, thus it is indirectly relevant for (locality restrictions on) movement. The absence of structural accent correlates with given-ness. Given elements may later receive (topic or contrastive) accents, which accounts for fronting in multiple focus/contrastive topic constructions. Without any additional assumptions, the model can account for movement of pragmatically unmarked elements to the left periphery ('formal fronting', Frey 2005). Crucially, the analysis makes no reference at all to concepts of information structure in the syntax, in line with the claim of Chomsky (2008) that UG specifies no direct link between syntax and information structure.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{FanselowLenertova2011,
  author    = {Fanselow, Gisbert and Lenertova, Denisa},
  title     = {Left peripheral focus mismatches between syntax and information structure},
  series = {Natural language \& linguistic theory},
  volume    = {29},
  journal   = {Natural language \& linguistic theory},
  number    = {1},
  publisher = {Springer},
  address   = {Dordrecht},
  issn      = {0167-806X},
  doi       = {10.1007/s11049-010-9109-x},
  pages     = {169 -- 209},
  year      = {2011},
  abstract  = {In Czech, German, and many other languages, part of the semantic focus of the utterance can be moved to the left periphery of the clause. The main generalization is that only the leftmost accented part of the semantic focus can be moved. We propose that movement to the left periphery is generally triggered by an unspecific edge feature of C (Chomsky 2008) and its restrictions can be attributed to requirements of cyclic linearization, modifying the theory of cyclic linearization developed by Fox and Pesetsky (2005). The crucial assumption is that structural accent is a direct consequence of being linearized at merge, thus it is indirectly relevant for (locality restrictions on) movement. The absence of structural accent correlates with givenness. Given elements may later receive (topic or contrastive) accents, which accounts for fronting in multiple focus/contrastive topic constructions. Without any additional assumptions, the model can account for movement of pragmatically unmarked elements to the left periphery ('formal fronting', Frey 2005). Crucially, the analysis makes no reference at all to concepts of information structure in the syntax, in line with the claim of Chomsky (2008) that UG specifies no direct link between syntax and information structure.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{WierzbaFanselow2020,
  author    = {Wierzba, Marta and Fanselow, Gisbert},
  title     = {Factors influencing the acceptability of object fronting in German},
  series = {The journal of comparative Germanic linguistics},
  volume    = {23},
  journal   = {The journal of comparative Germanic linguistics},
  number    = {1},
  publisher = {Springer},
  address   = {New York},
  issn      = {1383-4924},
  doi       = {10.1007/s10828-020-09113-1},
  pages     = {77 -- 124},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {In this paper, we address some controversially debated empirical questions concerning object fronting in German by a series of acceptability rating studies. We investigated three kinds of factors: (i) properties of the subject (given/new, pronoun/full DP), (ii) emphasis, (iii) register. The first factor is predicted to play a crucial role by models in which object fronting possibilities are limited by prosodic properties. Two experiments provide converging evidence for a systematic effect of this factor: we find that the relative acceptability of object fronting across subjects that require an accent (new DPs) is lower than across deaccentable subjects (pronouns and given DPs). Other models predict object fronting across full phrases (but not across pronouns) to be limited to an emphatic interpretation. This prediction is also borne out, suggesting that both types of models capture an empirically valid generalization and can be seen as complementing each other rather than competing with each other. Finally, we find support for the view that informal register facilitates object fronting. In sum, our experiments contribute to clarifying the empirical basis concerning a phenomenon influenced by a range of interacting factors. This, in turn, informs theoretical approaches to the prefield position and helps to identify factors that need to be carefully controlled in this field of research.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{FanselowZimmermannPhilipp2022,
  author    = {Fanselow, Gisbert and Zimmermann, Malte and Philipp, Mareike},
  title     = {Assessing the availability of inverse scope in German in the covered box paradigm},
  series = {Glossa : a journal of general linguistics},
  volume    = {7},
  journal   = {Glossa : a journal of general linguistics},
  number    = {1},
  publisher = {Open Library of Humanities},
  address   = {London},
  issn      = {2397-1835},
  doi       = {10.16995/glossa.5766},
  pages     = {1 -- 24},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {This paper presents the results of a novel experimental approach to relative quantifier scope in German that elicits data in an indirect manner. Applying the covered-box method (Huang et al. 2013) to scope phenomena, we show that inverse scope is available to some extent in the free constituent order language German, thereby validating earlier findings on other syntactic configurations in German (Rado \& Bott 2018) and empirical claims on other free constituent order languages (Japanese, Russian, Hindi), as well as recent corpus findings in Webelhuth (2020). Moreover, the results of the indirect covered-box experiment replicate findings from an earlier direct-query experiment with comparable target items, in which participants were asked directly about the availability of surface scope and inverse scope readings. The configuration of interest consisted of canonical transitive clauses with deaccented existential subject and universal object QPs, in which the restriction of the universal QP was controlled for by the context.},
  language  = {en}
}