Cover not available
Part of
Information Structure and Syntactic Change in Germanic and Romance Languages
Edited by Kristin Bech and Kristine Gunn Eide
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 213] 2014
► pp. 53–78

Testing the theory

Information structure in Old English

| University of York
| University of York

Various information structure (IS) distinctions have been proposed in the literature to account for differences in word order in languages both modern and historic. We use the schemes adopted by several ongoing IS annotation projects and examine their effect on object position (pre-/post-verbal) in Old English. While most of the schemes make the same major distinctions, some apparently small differences (e.g. elaborating vs. bridging inferables) have relatively large effects. Although these distinctions are frequently difficult to make, the effort to operationalise them is useful, since failing to include them in the annotation can produce misleading results. Other distinctions (e.g. different types of ‘old’ information) show virtually no effect, supporting the wide-spread view that they constitute a single category.

Published online: 7 May 2014
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.213.03tay
References
Arnold, Jennifer E., Losongco, Anthony, Wasow, Thomas & Ginstrom, Ryan
2000 Heaviness vs. newness: The effects of structural complexity and discourse status on constituent ordering. Language 76(1): 28–55.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biberauer, Theresa & Roberts, Ian
2008 Cascading parameter changes. Internally-driven change in Middle and Early Modern English. In Grammatical Change and Linguistic Theory. The Rosendal Papers [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 113], Þórhallur Eyþórsson (ed.), 79–114. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bies, Ann Elizabeth
1996 Syntax and Discourse Factors in Early New High German: Evidence for Verb-Final Word Order. MA dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Birner, Betty J
2006 Inferential relations and noncanonical word order. In Drawing the Boundaries of Meaning. Neo-Gricean Studies in Pragmatics and Semantics in Honor of Laurence R. Horn [Studies in Language Companion Series 80], Betty J. Birner & Gregory Ward (eds), 31–51. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Calhoun, Sasha, Nissim, Malvina, Steedman, Mark & Brenier, Jason
2005 A framework for annotating information structure in discourse. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Frontiers in Corpus Annotation II: Pie in the Sky , 45–52. Ann Arbor, MI: Association for Computational Linguistics.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Du Bois, John W
1980 Beyond definiteness: the trace of identity in discourse. In The Pear Stories. Cognitive, Cultural, and Linguistic Aspects of Narrative Production , Wallace L. Chafe (ed.), 203–274. Norwood NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Gundel, Jeanette K., Hedberg, Nancy & Zacharski, Ron
1993 Cognitive status and the form of referring expressions in discourse. Language 69(2): 274–307. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haug, Dag T.T
2011 Guidelines for annotation of givenness: The PROIEL project. [URL]
Haviland, Susan E. & Clark, Herbert H
1974 What’s new? Acquiring new information as a process in comprehension. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 13: 512–521. DOI logo [URL]
Karttunen, Lauri
1976 Discourse referents. In Syntax and Semantics 7. Notes from the Linguistic Underground , James D. McCawley (ed.), 363–385. New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Lambrecht, Knud
1996  Information Structure and Sentence Form. Topic, Focus, and the Mental Representations of Discourse Referents . Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Los, Bettelou & Komen, Erwin R
2012 The Pentaset: Annotating information state primitives. Ms, Radboud University Nijmegen.Google Scholar
Nissim, Malvina, Dingare, Shipra, Carletta, Jean & Steedman, Mark
2004 An annotation scheme for information status in dialogue. In Proceedings of the 4th Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC) , 1023–1026, Lisbon, Portugal.Google Scholar
Pintzuk, Susan
1996 Cliticization in Old English. In Approaching Second. Second Position Clitics and Related Phenomena , Aaron L. Halpern & Arnold M. Zwicky (eds), 366–400. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
1999  Phrase Structures in Competition. Variation and Change in Old English Word Order . New York, NY: Garland.Google Scholar
Pintzuk, Susan & Taylor, Ann
2006 The loss of OV order in the history of English. In The Handbook of the History of English, Ans van Kemenade & Bettelou Los (eds), 249–278. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Prince, Ellen F
1981 Toward a taxonomy of given-new information. In Radical Pragmatics , Peter Cole (ed.), 223–255. New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
1992 The ZPG letter: Subjects, definiteness, and information-status. In Discourse Description. Diverse Analyses of a Fund-Raising Text [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 16], Sandra A. Thompson & WilliamC. Mann (eds), 195–325. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Riester, Arndt, Lorenz, David & Seemann, Nina
2010 A recursive annotation scheme for referential information status. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference of Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC) , 717–722, Valetta, Malta.Google Scholar
Taylor, Ann & Pintzuk, Susan
2011 The interaction of syntactic change and information status effects in the change from OV to VO in English. Catalan Journal of Linguistics 10: 71–94.Google Scholar
2012a The effect of information structure on object position in Old English: A pilot study. In Information Structure and Syntactic Change, María José López Couso, Bettelou Los & Anneli Meurman-Solin (eds), 71–94. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012b Rethinking the OV/VO alternation in Old English: The effect of complexity, grammatical weight and information structure. In The Oxford Handbook of the History of English, Terttu Nevalainen & Elizabeth Closs Traugott (eds), 835–845. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taylor, Ann & van der Wurff, Wim
(eds) 2005 Special issue on aspects of OV and VO order in the history of English. English Language and Linguistics 9(1): 1–4. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wallenberg, Joel C
2009 Antisymmetry and the Conservation of C-Command: Scrambling and Phrase Structure in Synchronic and Diachronic Perspective. PhD dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Wasow, Thomas
1997 Remarks on grammatical weight. Language Variation and Change 9: 81–105. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 9 other publications

Chrambach, Susanne
2019. From time-before-place to place-before-time in the history of English. In Developments in English Historical Morpho-Syntax [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory, 346], ► pp. 223 ff. DOI logo
Dreschler, Gea
2017. Chapter 6. The information status of late subjects in passive main clauses in Old English. In Word Order Change in Acquisition and Language Contact [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 243], ► pp. 103 ff. DOI logo
LOS, BETTELOU, GEA DRESCHLER, ANS VAN KEMENADE, ERWIN KOMEN & STEFANO CORETTA
2023. The decline of local anchoring: a quantitative investigation. English Language and Linguistics 27:2 ► pp. 345 ff. DOI logo
STRUIK, TARA & GERT-JAN SCHOENMAKERS
2023. When information structure exploits syntax: The relation between the loss of VO and scrambling in Dutch. Journal of Linguistics 59:3 ► pp. 655 ff. DOI logo
Struik, Tara & Ans van Kemenade
2022. Information structure and OV word order in Old and Middle English: a phase-based approach. The Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 25:1 ► pp. 79 ff. DOI logo
Taylor, Ann & Susan Pintzuk
2018. Split coordination in English. Diachronica 35:3 ► pp. 310 ff. DOI logo
Taylor, Ann & Susan Pintzuk
2020. Split coordination in English. In Diachronic Treebanks for Historical Linguistics [Benjamins Current Topics, 113], ► pp. 16 ff. DOI logo
Tiemann, Juliane
2022. The object position in Old Norwegian. In Language Change at the Interfaces [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 275], ► pp. 61 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2016. Element Order in Old English and Old High German Translations [NOWELE Supplement Series, 28], DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 20 april 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.