• Treffer 1 von 3
Zurück zur Trefferliste

Left peripheral focus

  • 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’,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.zeige mehrzeige weniger

Volltext Dateien herunterladen

  • phr596.pdfeng
    (1067KB)

    SHA-1: d444c884b7390c26229827283856cf8aa605e197

Metadaten exportieren

Weitere Dienste

Suche bei Google Scholar Statistik - Anzahl der Zugriffe auf das Dokument
Metadaten
Verfasserangaben:Gisbert FanselowORCiDGND, Denisa Lenertová
URN:urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-428198
DOI:https://doi.org/10.25932/publishup-42819
ISSN:1866-8364
Titel des übergeordneten Werks (Deutsch):Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe
Untertitel (Englisch):mismatches between syntax and information structure
Schriftenreihe (Bandnummer):Zweitveröffentlichungen der Universität Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe (596)
Publikationstyp:Postprint
Sprache:Englisch
Datum der Erstveröffentlichung:06.02.2020
Erscheinungsjahr:2010
Veröffentlichende Institution:Universität Potsdam
Datum der Freischaltung:06.02.2020
Freies Schlagwort / Tag:A-bar-movement; Accentuation; Cyclic linearization; Czech; Focus; German; Information structure; Intervention effects; Prosody-syntax interface; Topic
Ausgabe:596
Seitenanzahl:43
Quelle:Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 29 (2011) S. 169–209 DOI: 10.1007/s11049-010-9109-x
Organisationseinheiten:Humanwissenschaftliche Fakultät
DDC-Klassifikation:4 Sprache / 40 Sprache / 400 Sprache
Peer Review:Referiert
Publikationsweg:Open Access
Lizenz (Deutsch):License LogoCreative Commons - Namensnennung-Nicht kommerziell 2.0 Generic
Externe Anmerkung:Bibliographieeintrag der Originalveröffentlichung/Quelle
Verstanden ✔
Diese Webseite verwendet technisch erforderliche Session-Cookies. Durch die weitere Nutzung der Webseite stimmen Sie diesem zu. Unsere Datenschutzerklärung finden Sie hier.