Chapter published in:
Linguistic Foundations of Narration in Spoken and Sign Languages
Edited by Annika Hübl and Markus Steinbach
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 247] 2018
► pp. 67–92

Texts as answers to questions

Information structure and its grammatical underpinnings in narratives and descriptions in German and English (topic and anaphoric linkage)

| Heidelberg University
| Heidelberg University
Text production requires the speaker to plan and formulate a coherent text in which information at the micro structural level is embedded and licensed by structures established at the macro structural level. The present paper addresses questions concerning the principles the speaker can rely on when solving a complex task of this kind. We assume that texts are organised around an initialising question, the quaestio, which introduces a space of alternatives which the speaker has to specify. The constraints set up by the quaestio leave the speaker with a range of options which in turn are constrained by language-specific principles partly rooted in the grammatical structure of the respective language. This claim is substantiated by a cross-linguistic study of English and German oral narratives. The analyses focus on grammatical features relating to the syntactic subject and word order constraints and aim to show how grammatical features which operate at the micro-structural level shape information organisation in macro-structural terms. The study also includes a comparison with object descriptions in English and German. They serve in illustrating the role of the underlying quaestio as well as grammatical categories, in this case the syntactic subject, which drives conceptualisation with transformations across the domains of space and entities when providing anaphoric linkage.
Published online: 25 May 2018
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.247.04stu
References

References

Beaver, D.
2002 Presupposition projection in DRT: A critical assessment, In D. Beaver, L. Casilas Martinez, B. Clark & S. Kaufmann (eds), The Construction of Meaning, Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
2004 The optimization of discourse anaphora. Linguistics and Philosophy 27: 3–56.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Berman, R. A. & Slobin, D. I.
(eds) 1994 Relating Events in Narratives: A Cross-linguistic Developmental Study. Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Bierwisch, M.
1965 Poetik und Linguistik. In Mathematik und Dichtung, H. Kreuzer & R. Gunzenhäuser (eds), 46–66. München: Nymphenburger.Google Scholar
Carroll, M., Murcia-Serra, J., Bendiscioli, A. & Watorek, M.
2000 The relevance of information organisation to second language acquisition studies. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 22(3): 441–466.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Carroll, M. & Lambert, M.
2003 Information structure in narratives and the role of grammaticised knowledge: A study of adult French and German learners of English. In Information Structure and the Dynamics of Language Acquisition [Studies in Bilingualism 26], C. Dimroth & M. Starren (eds), 267–287. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2006 Reorganizing principles of information structure in advanced L2s: A study of French and German learners of English. In Educating for Advanced Foreign Language Capacities, H. Byrnes, H. Weger-Guntharp & K. Sprang (eds), 54–73. Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Carroll, M., Roßdeutscher, A., Lambert, M. & von Stutterheim, C.
2008 Subordination in narratives and macrostructural planning. A comparative point of view. In ‘Subordination’ versus ‘Coordination’ in Sentence and Text. A Cross-linguistic Perspective [Studies in Language Companion Series 98], C. Fabricius-Hansen, H. Weger-Guntharp & W. Ramm (eds) ,161–186. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Carroll, M. & von Stutterheim, C.
2011 Event representation, time event relations, and clause structure: A crosslinguistic study of English and German. In Event Representation, E. Pederson & J. Bohnemeyer (eds), 68–83. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Covington, M. A., He., C., Brown, C., Naci, L., McClain, J. T. & Fjordbak, B. S.
2005 Schizophrenia and the structure of language: The linguist’s view. Schizophrenia Research 77: 85–98.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Denison, D.
1985 The origins of periphrastic DO: Ellegård and Visser reconsidered. In Papers from the 4th International Conference on English Historical Linguistics: Amsterdam, 10–13 April 1985 [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 41], R. Eaton, O. Fischer, W. Koopman & F. van der Leek (eds), 45–60. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dijk, T. van
1980 Macrostructures. An Interdisciplinary Study of Global Structures in Discourse, Interaction, and Cognition. Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Fox, B.
1993 Discourse Structure and Anaphora. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Grosz, Barbara J., Joshi, Aravind K. & Weinstein, S.
1995 Centering: A framework formodeling the local coherence of discourse. Computational Linguistics 21: 203–226Google Scholar
Herman, D., Jahn, M. & Ryan, M. -L.
(eds) 2005 Routledge Encyclopedia of Narrative Theory. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Jackendoff, R.
2002 Foundations of Language: Brain, Meaning, Grammar, Evolution. Oxford: OUP.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kamp, H. & Reyle, U.
1993 From Discourse to Logic. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Klein, W.
2008 The topic situation. In Empirische Forschung und Theoriebildung: Beiträge aus Soziolinguistik, Gesprochene-Sprache und Zweitspracherwerbsforschung: Festschrift für Norbert Dittmar, D. B. Ahrenholz, U. Bredel, W. Klein, M. Rost-Roth & R. Skiba (eds), 287–305. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Klein, W. & von Stutterheim, C.
1987 Quaestio und referentielle Bewegung in Erzählungen. Linguistische Berichte 109: 163–183.Google Scholar
Labov, W. & Waletzki, J.
1967 Narrative analysis. In Essays on the Verbal and Visual Arts, J. Helm (ed.), 12–44. Seattle WA: University of Washington Press.Google Scholar
Lambrecht, K.
1994 Information Structure and Sentence Form. Cambridge: CUP.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Levelt, W. J. M.
1989 Speaking: From Intention to Articulation. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
1996 Perspective taking and ellipsis in spatial descriptions. In Language and Space, P. Bloom, M. A. Peterson, M. F. Garrett & L. Nadel (eds), 77–107. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Mann, W. C. & Thompson, S. A.
1988 Rhetorical structure theory: Toward a functional theory of text organization. Text 8(3): 243–281.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Marini, A., Spoletini, I., Rubino, I. A., Ciuffa, M., Bria, P. & Martinotti, G.
2008 The language of schizophrenia: An analysis of micro and macrolinguistic abilities and their neuropsychological correlates. Schizophrenia Research 105: 144–155.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
McAdams, D. P., Josselson, R. & Lieblich, A.
2006 Identity and Story: Creating Self in Narrative. Washington DC: American Psychological Association.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
McAdams, D. P. & McLean, K. C.
2013 Narrative identity. Current Directions in Psychological Science 22(3): 233–238.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Paul, H.
1880: Prinzipien der Sprachgeschichte. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Pavlenko, A.
2005 Bilingualism and thought. In Handbook of Bilingualism: Psycholinguistic Approaches, A. B. M. de Groot & J. Kroll (eds), 433–453. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Pearson, B. & de Villiers, P.
2009 Discourse, narrative and pragmatic development. In Concise Encyclopedia of Pragmatics, K. Brown (ed), 206–216. Oxford: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Quintilian, M. F.
1972/1975 Ausbildung des Redners, 12 Bücher, H. Rahn (ed). Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.Google Scholar
Roberts, C.
2012 Information structure in discourse: Towards an integrated formal theory of pragmatics. Semantics & Pragmatics 5(6): 1–69.Google Scholar
Rooth, Mats
1992 A theory of focus interpretation. Natural Language Semantics 1: 75–116.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Scheffel, M.
2012 Nach dem narrative turn. Handbücher und Lexika des 21. Jahrhunderts. Diegesis 1(1): 43–55.Google Scholar
von Stutterheim, C.
1997 Einige Prinzipien des Textaufbaus. Tübingen: Niemeyer.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
von Stutterheim, C. & Carroll, M.
2005 Subjektwahl und Topikkontinuität im Deutschen und Englischen. Zeitschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik 139: 7–27.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2007 Durch die Grammatik fokussiert. Zeitschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik 145: 35–60.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
von Stutterheim, C. & Klein, W.
1989 Referential movement in descriptive and narrative discourse. In Language Processing in Social Context, R. Dietrich & C. F. Graumann (eds), 39–76. Amsterdam: Elsevier.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2002 Quaestio and L-perspectivation. In Perspective and Perspectivation in Discourse [Human Cognitive Processing 9], C. F. Graumann & W. Kallmeyer (eds), 59–88. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tolstoi, L.
1868 Krieg und Frieden, translated by M. Kegel 2010 München: Winkler.Google Scholar
1868 War and Peace, translated by C. Garnett 2004 New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Толстой, Л.
1996 война и мир. Собрание сочинений в восьми томах Т. 3,4. Москва: “Лексика”.
Traugott, E.
1972 A History of English Syntax. New York NY: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.Google Scholar
Virtanen, T.
1992 Given and new information in adverbials: Clause-initial adverbials of time and space. Journal of Pragmatics 14: 99–115.CrossrefGoogle Scholar