Part of
Approaches to Hungarian: Volume 16: Papers from the 2017 Budapest Conference
Edited by Veronika Hegedűs and Irene Vogel
[Approaches to Hungarian 16] 2020
► pp. 7396
References
Aronoff, Mark & Janie Rees-Miller
(eds.) 2017The handbook of linguistics. Wiley, Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brassai, Sámuel
1852Tapogatódzások a magyar nyelv körül [Exploring the Hungarian Language]. Pesti Napló 802.Google Scholar
1860A magyar mondat [The Hungarian Sentence]. Magyar Akadémiai Értesítő. A széptudományi Osztály közlönye 1. 279–399.Google Scholar
1885A mondat dualismusa [The dualism of the sentence]. Értekezések a Magyar Tudományos Akadémia Nyelv- és Széptudományi Osztály Köréből 12.Google Scholar
Brody, Mihály & Kriszta Szendrői
2010Exhaustive focus is an answer. Unpublished Manuscript. [URL].
Davies, Jason
2013d3-cloud. [URL]
Destruel, Emilie J. & Leah Velleman
2014Refining contrast: Empirical evidence from the English it-cleft. Empirical Issues in Syntax and Semantics 10. 197–214.Google Scholar
Drummond, Alex
2010Ibex (Internet Based Experiments). [URL]
É. Kiss, Katalin
1995Discourse configurational languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
1998Identificational focus versus information focus. Language 72(2). 245–273. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2002The syntax of Hungarian. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2008A pioneering theory of information structure. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 55. 23–40. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gussenhoven, Carlos
2004The phonology of tone and intonation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halliday, Michael
1967Notes on transitivity and theme in English: Part 2. Journal of linguistics 3(2). 199–244. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hamblin, Charles L.
1973Questions in montague English. Foundations of language 10(1). 41–53.Google Scholar
Káldi, Tamás, Anna Babarczy & Ágnes Bende-Farkas
2016Hungarian focus: Presuppositional content and exhaustivity revisited Language and Linguistic structure. In Joseph Edmonds, Michaela Martinková & Marketa Janebova (eds.), Proceedings of the Olomouc Linguistics Colloquium 2016. Olomouc: Palacký University Olomouc.Google Scholar
Káldi, Tamás & Anna Babarczy
2017A kontextus hatása a magyar preverbális fókusz értelmezésére: egy szemmozgás-követéses vizsgálat [The effect of context on the interpretation of the Hungarian pre-verbal focus: an eye-tracking study] In Zoltán Bánréti & István Kenesei (eds.), Általános Nyelvészeti Tanulmányok. XXIX, 99–126. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
2018Linguistic exhaustivity inference is context dependent: A visual-world eye-tracking study on Hungarian focus. Acta Linguistica Academica 65(4). 547–595. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kálmán, László
1985Word order in neutral sentences. In István Kenesei (ed.), Approaches to Hungarian 1, 13–23. Szeged: JATE.Google Scholar
Kenesei, István
2006Focus as identification. In Valéria Molnár & Susanne Winkler (eds), The architecture of focus, 137–168. Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krifka, Manfred
1992A framework for focus-sensitive quantification. Semantics and Linguistic Theory 2. 215–236. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2001For a structured meaning account of questions and answers. In Caroline Féry & Wolfgang Strenfeld (eds.), Audiatur Vox Sapientiae: A Festschrift for Arnim von Stechow (Studia grammatica, Band 52), 287–319. De Gruyter Akademie Forschung.Google Scholar
2008Basic notions of information structure. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 55(3–4), 243–276. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Miller, Jim
2006Focus. In Keith Brown (ed.), Encyclopedia of language and linguistics (2nd ed.), 511–518. Elsevier. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Molnár, Valéria
2002Contrast – from a contrastive perspective. Language and Computers 39(1), 174–161.Google Scholar
Roberts, Craige
1996Information structure in discourse: Towards an integrated formal theory of pragmatics. In Jae-Hak Yoon & Andreas Katjol (eds.), Working Papers in Linguistics-Ohio State University Department of Linguistics 49, 91–136. Columbus: The Ohio State University Department of Linguistics.Google Scholar
Rooth, Mats
1985 Association with focus . Ph.D. thesis. Massachussets Institute of Technology.
1992A theory of focus interpretation. Natural Language Semantics 1(1). 75–116. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Selkirk, Elisabeth
1984Phonology and syntax. Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
2002Contrastive FOCUS vs. presentational focus: Prosodic evidence from right node raising in English. In Bernard Bel & Isabelle Marlin (eds.), Speech Prosody 2002: Proceedings of the First International Speech Prosody Conference, 643–646. Laboratoire Parole et Langage, Université de Provence.Google Scholar
Skopeteas, Stavros & Gisbert Fanselow
2011Focus and the exclusion of alternatives: On the interaction of syntactic structure with pragmatic inference. Lingua 121(11). 1693–1706. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Surányi, Balázs
2011A szintaktikailag jelöletlen fókusz pragmatikája [The pragmatics of syntactically unmarked focus]. In Huba Bartos (ed.), Általános Nyelvészeti Tanulmányok 23, 281–313. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
Zimmermann, Malte
2008Contrastive focus and emphasis. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 55. 347–360. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Káldi, Tamás, Ágnes Szöllösi & Anna Babarczy
2021. Hungarian Structural Focus: Accessibility to Focused Elements and Their Alternatives in Working Memory and Delayed Recognition Memory. Frontiers in Psychology 12 DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 march 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.