Part of
When Data Challenges Theory: Unexpected and paradoxical evidence in information structureEdited by Davide Garassino and Daniel Jacob
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 273] 2022
► pp. 1–36
Edited by Davide Garassino and Daniel Jacob
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 273] 2022
► pp. 1–36
IntroductionWhen data challenges theory
The analysis of information structure and its paradoxes
This article provides a comprehensive survey on current research
on information structure so as to clarify some ‘paradoxical’ effects
stemming from the tension between data and theory. Paradoxes are here
defined as unexpected data in light of certain assumptions held in
mainstream literature. More specifically, we explore two possible sources of
paradoxes: certain features of the experimental design and, above all,
inadequate discourse models. Mainly considering dislocation and cleft
sentences in French and Italian we suggest that some apparent paradoxes
(such as non-focalizing clefts or dislocation expressing focus-related
functions) can be conceived of as the effect of general pragmatic mechanisms
and rhetorical strategies exploited by speakers. We also claim that these
effects can be better understood through explicit models of discourse.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Information structure and discourse organization
- 2.1Common ground
- 2.2Information structure and (implicit) questions
- 2.3Alternatives and types of focus
- 3.The ‘building blocks’ of information structure
- 4.The realization of information structure and its ‘natural
paradoxes’
- 4.1Information structure and prosody
- 4.2The IS-prosody-syntax triangle
- 4.3‘Non-canonical’ syntax: Left dislocation and cleft sentences in French and
Italian
- 4.3.1Left dislocation
- 4.3.2Cleft sentences
- 5.Conclusion and overview of the volume
- 5.1As a way of conclusion
- 5.2Contributions to this volume
-
Acknowledgments -
Notes -
References
References (125)
Angermuller, Johannes, Maingueneau, Dominique & Wodak, Ruth. 2014. The
Discourse Studies Reader: An
introduction. In The
Discourse Studies Reader, Johannes Angermuller, Dominique Maingueneau & Ruth Wodak (eds), 2–14. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 
Arvaniti, Amalia. In
press. The Autosegmental-Metrical
model of intonational
phonology. In Prosodic
Theory and Practice. Stefanie Shattuck-Hufnagel & Jonathan Barnes (eds). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. <[URL]> (11 June 2021).
Asher, Nicholas & Lascarides, Alex. 2003. Logics
of
Conversation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Austin, John L. 1962. How
to Do Things with Words: The William James Lectures Delivered at
Harvard University in
1955. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Baumann, Stefan, Grice, Martine & Steindamm, Susanne. 2006. Prosodic
marking of focus domains – categorical or
gradient? In Proceedings
of Speech Prosody
2006, 301–304. <[URL]> (11 June 2021).
Baumann, Stefan & Riester, Arndt. 2012. Referential
and lexical givenness: Semantic, prosodic and cognitive
aspects. In Prosody
and Meaning, Gorka Elordieta & Pilar Prieto (eds), 119–162. Berlin-New York: De Gruyter Mouton.
Beaver, David I. & Clark, Brady Z. 2008. Sense
and Sensitivity: How Focus Determines
Meaning. Hoboken, N.J.: John Wiley & Sons.
Berretta, Monica. 2002. “Quello
che voglio dire è che”: le scisse da strutture topicalizzanti a
connettivi
testuali. In La
parola al testo. Scritti per Bice Mortara
Garavelli, Gian Luigi Beccaria & Carla Marello (eds), 15–31, Alessandria: Edizioni dell’Orso.
Bianchi, Valentina, Bocci, Giuliano & Cruschina, Silvio. 2015. Focus
fronting and its
implicatures. In Romance
Languages and Linguistic Theory 2013. Selected Papers from ‘Going
Romance’, Enoch O. Aboh, Jeannette Schaeffer & Petra Sleeman (ed), 3–19. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
. 2016. Focus
fronting, unexpectedness, and evaluative
implicatures. Semantics and
Pragmatics 9(3): 1–54.
Borreguero Zuloaga, Margarita. 2016. Elementi
anaforici e frasi scisse nei testi giornalistici
contemporanei. In La
lingua variabile nei testi letterari, artistici e funzionali
contemporanei (1915–2014): analisi, interpretazione,
traduzione, Giovanni Ruffino (ed), 529–542. Firenze, Franco Cesati.
Brunetti, Lisa. 2009. On
links and tails in
Italian. Lingua 119(5): 756–781.
Brunetti, Lisa & Avanzi, Mathieu. 2017. Discourse
properties of French clitic left dislocated NPs and their effect on
prosody. Ms. <[URL]> (11 June 2021).
Bühler, Karl. 2011. Theory
of Language. The Representational Function of
Language. [Sprachtheorie. Die
Darstellungsfunktion der
Sprache. Jena: G. Fischer, 1934]. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Büring, Daniel. 2003. On
D-trees, beans, and
B-accents. Linguistics and
Philosophy 26: 511–545.
. 2016. (Contrastive)
Topic. In The
Oxford Handbook of Information
Structure, Caroline Féry & Shinichiro Ishihara (eds), 64–85. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cantini, Andrea & Bruni, Riccardo. 2017. Paradoxes
and contemporary
logic. In The
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Edward N. Zalta (ed). <[URL]> (11 June 2021).
Cartoni, Bruno & Meyer, Thomas. 2012. Extracting
directional and comparable corpora from a multilingual corpus for
translation
studies. In Proceedings
of the Eighth International Conference on Language Resources and
Evaluation (LREC), Nicoletta Calzolari, Khalid Choukri, Thierry Declerck, Mehmet Uğur Doğan, Bente Maegaard, Joseph Mariani, Asuncion Moreno, Jan Odijk & Stelios Piperidis (eds), 2132–2137. Paris: European Language Resources Association.
Chafe, Wallace. 1976. Givenness,
contrastiveness, definiteness, subjects, topics, and point of
view. In Subject
and Topic, Charles N. Li (ed), 25–55. New York: Academic Press.
. 1994. Discourse,
Consciousness, and Time: The Flow and Displacement of Conscious
Experience in Speaking and
Writing. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Clark, Herbert H. 1994. Discourse
in
production. In Handbook
of Psycholinguistics, Morton A. Gernsbacher (ed), 985–1021. San Diego: Academic Press.
1996. Using
Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cresti, Emanuela. 2018. The
illocution-prosody relationship and the Information Pattern in
spontaneous speech according to the Language into Act Theory
(L-AcT). Linguistik
Online, 88(1).
Cruschina, Silvio. 2019. Focus
Fronting in Spanish: Mirative implicature and information
structure. Probus 31(1): 119–146.
De Cesare, Anna-Maria. 2011–2018. Contrast-It,
University of Basel. <[URL]> (11 June 2021).
. 2017. Cleft
constructions. In Manual
of Romance Morphosyntax and Syntax [Manuals
of Romance
Linguistics 17], Elisabeth Stark & Andreas Dufter (eds), 536–568. Berlin-New York: De Gruyter Mouton.
. 2020. È
con piacere che … / C’est avec plaisir que … On Italian
and French manner adverbial clefts expressing emotional
states. In Pour
une perspective fonctionnelle des constructions syntaxiques
marquées [Special
issue], Anna-Maria De Cesare & Mervi Helkkula (eds). Neuphilologische
Mitteilungen 120: 429–448.
. This
volume. To be or not to be focus
adverbials? A corpus-driven study of It. anche in
spontaneous spoken
Italian. In When
Data Challenges Theory. Unexpected and Paradoxical Evidence in
Information Structure, Davide Garassino & Daniel Jacob (eds). Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
De Cesare, Anna-Maria, Garassino, Davide, Agar Marco, Rocío, Albom, Ana & Cimmino, Doriana. 2016. Sintassi
marcata dell’italiano contemporaneo in prospettiva contrastiva con
il francese, lo spagnolo, il tedesco e l’inglese. Uno studio basato
sulla scrittura dei quotidiani
online. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
Declerck, Renaat. 1984. The
pragmatics of it-clefts and
wh-clefts. Lingua 64(4): 251–289.
. 1988. Studies
on Copular Sentences, Clefts and
Pseudo-clefts. Berlin-New York: De Gruyter Mouton.
De Kuthy, Kordula, Brunetti, Lisa & Berardi, Marta. 2019. In Proceedings
of the 13th Linguistic Annotation
Workshop, 113–123. <[URL]> (11 June 2021).
Delin, Judith. 1992. Properties
of it-cleft
presupposition. Journal of
Semantics 9: 179–196.
Delin, Judith & Oberlander, Jon. 1995. Syntactic
constraints on discourse structure: The case of
it-clefts. Linguistics 33: 465–500.
Destruel, Emilie. 2012. The
French c’est-cleft: An empirical study on its
meaning and
use. In Empirical
Issues in Syntax and
Semantics 9, Christopher Piñon (ed), 95–112. <[URL]> (11 June 2021).
Destruel, Emilie & Féry, Caroline. 2020. Prominence
in French dual focus. Language and
Speech 64(2): 319–345.
Dryer, Matthew S. 1996. Focus,
pragmatic presupposition, and activated
propositions. Journal of
Pragmatics 26(4): 475–523.
2006. Descriptive
theories, explanatory theories, and basic linguistic
theory. In Catching
Language: Issues in Grammar Writing, Felix Ameka, Alan Dench & Nicholas Evans (eds), 207–234. Berlin-New York: De Gruyter Mouton.
Dufter, Andreas. 2008. On
explaining the rise of c’est-clefts in
French. In The
Paradox of Grammatical Change, Ulrich Detges & Richard Waltereit (eds), 31–56. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
. 2009. Clefting
and discourse organization: Comparing Germanic and
Romance. In Focus
and Background in Romance Languages, Andreas Dufter & Daniel Jacob (eds), 83–121. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Dufter, Andreas & Gabriel, Christoph. 2016. Information
structure, prosody, and word
order. In Manual
of Grammatical Interfaces in
Romance [Manuals of Romance
Linguistics 10], Susann Fischer & Christoph Gabriel (eds), 419–455. Berlin-New York: De Gruyter Mouton.
É. Kiss, Katalin. 1998. Identificational
focus versus information
focus. Language 74(2): 245–273.
Evans, Nicholas & Levinson, Stephen C. 2009. The
myth of language universals: Language diversity and its importance
for cognitive science. Behavioral and
Brain
Sciences (32): 429–492.
Face, Timothy & D’Imperio, Mariapaola. 2005. Reconsidering
a focal typology: Evidence from Spanish and
Italian. Italian Journal of
Linguistics 17(2): 271–289.
Frascarelli, Mara. 2003. Topicalizzazione
e ripresa clitica. Analisi sincronica, confronto diacronico e
considerazioni
tipologiche. In Italia
linguistica anno Mille. Italia linguistica anno
Duemila, Nicoletta Maraschio & Teresa Poggi Salani (eds), 547–562. Roma: Bulzoni.
. 2017. Dislocations
and
Framings. In Manual
of Romance Morphosyntax and Syntax [Manuals
of Romance
Linguistics 17], Elisabeth Stark & Andreas Dufter (eds), 472–501. Berlin-New York: De Gruyter Mouton.
Frascarelli, Mara & Ramaglia, Francesca. 2013. Pseudoclefts
at the Syntax-Prosody-Discourse
Interface. In The
Structure of Clefts, Katherina Hartmann & Tonjes Veenstra (eds), 97–138. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Garassino, Davide. 2014. Reverse
pseudo-clefts in Italian and English. A contrastive
analysis. In Tra
romanistica e germanistica: lingua, testo, cognizione e cultura /
Between Romance and Germanic: Language, Text, Cognition, and
Culture, Iørn Korzen, Angela Ferrari & Anna-Maria De Cesare (eds), 55–74. Bern: Peter Lang.
. 2016. Using
Cleft sentences in Italian and English. A multifactorial
analysis. In Current
Issues in Italian, Romance and Germanic Non-canonical Word Orders.
Syntax – Information Structure – Discourse
Organization, Anna-Maria De Cesare & Davide Garassino (eds), 181–204. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
. This
volume. Translation as a source of
pragmatic interference? An empirical investigation of French and
Italian cleft
sentences. In When
Data Challenges Theory. Unexpected and Paradoxical Evidence in
Information Structure, Davide Garassino & Daniel Jacob (eds). Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Garassino, Davide & Jacob, Daniel. 2018. Polarity
Focus and non-canonical syntax in Italian, French and Spanish.
Clitic left dislocation and sì che / sí
que-constructions. In The
Grammatical Realization of Polarity Contrast. Theoretical,
Empirical, and Typological Approaches, Christine Dimroth & Stefan Sudhoff (eds), 227–254. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
García García, Marco & Uth, Melanie. 2018. Introduction.
Core issues of focus realization in
Romance. In Focus
Realization in Romance and Beyond, Marco García García & Melanie Uth (eds), 1–30. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Ginzburg, Jonathan. 2012. The
Interactive Stance: Meaning for
Conversation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Groenendijk, Jeroen & Stokhof, Martin. 1991. Dynamic
Predicate Logic. Linguistics and
Philosophy 14: 39–100.
Gundel, Jeanette K. & Fretheim, Thorstein. 2004. Topic
and
focus. In The
Handbook of Pragmatics, Laurence R. Horn & Gregory Ward (eds), 175–195. Oxford: Blackwell.
Hasselgård, Hilde. 2010. Adjunct
Adverbials in
English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hedberg, Nancy & Fadden, Lorna. 2007. The
information structure of it-clefts,
wh-clefts and reverse
wh-clefts in
English. In The
Grammar Pragmatics Interface: Essays in Honor of Jeanette K.
Gundel, Nancy Hedberg & Robert Zacharski (eds), 49–76. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Heidinger, Steffen. 2018. Acceptability
and frequency in Spanish focus
marking. In Focus
Realization in Romance and Beyond, Marco García García & Melanie Uth (eds), 99–128. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Höhle, Tilman N. 1992. Über
Verum-Fokus im
Deutschen. In Informationsstruktur
und Grammatik. Linguistische Berichte
Sonderhefte (Vol. 4), Jacobs Joachim (ed), 112–141. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
Horton, William S. & Gerrig, Richard J. 2016. Revisiting
the memory-based processing approach to common
ground. In Memory
and Common Ground Processes in
Language [Special
Issue], Sarah Brown-Schmidt, Melissa C. Duft & William S. Horton (eds). Topics 8(4): 780–795.
Jacob, Daniel. 2015. Anaphorische
Spaltsätze im Französischen: Grammatik – Text –
Rhetorik. In Informationsstrukturen
im Kontrast, Séverine Adam, Michael Schecker & Daniel Jacob (eds), 101–122. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
Jacobs, Joachim. 2001. The
dimensions of
topic-comment. Linguistics 39(4): 641–681.
Kamp, Hans, van Genabith, Josef & Reyle, Uwe. 2011. Discourse
Representation
Theory. In The
Handbook of Philosophical
Logic, volume 15, Dov M. Gabbay & Franz Guenthner (eds), 124–394. Dordrecht: Springer.
Karssenberg, Lena. 2018. Non-Prototypical
Clefts in French. A Corpus Analysis of “il y a”
clefts. Berlin-New York: De Gruyter Mouton.
Karssenberg, Lena & Lahousse, Karen. 2018. The
information structure of French il y a &
c’est clefts: A corpus-based
analysis. Linguistics 56(3): 513–548.
Keenan, Edward L. 1976. Towards
a universal definition of
‘subject’. In Subject
and Topic, Charles N. Li (ed), 305–333. New York: Academic Press.
Klein, Wolfgang & Von Stutterheim, Christiane. 1992. Textstruktur
und referentielle
Bewegung. Zeitschrift für
Literaturwissenschaft und
Linguistik 86: 67–92.
Koehn, Philipp. 2005. Europarl:
A Parallel Corpus for Statistical Machine
Translation. In Proceedings
of Machine Translation Summit
X, 79–86.
Kratzer, Angelika. 1991. The
representation of
focus. In Semantik
/ Semantics. Ein internationales Handbuch der zeitgenössischen
Forschung. An International Handbook of Contemporary
Research, Armin von Stechow & Dieter Wunderlich (eds), 825–834. Berlin-New York: De Gruyter Mouton.
Kratzer, Angelika & Selkirk, Elisabeth. 2020. Deconstructing
information
structure. Glossa 5(1): 113, 1–53.
Krifka, Manfred. 2006. Association
with focus
phrases. In Architecture
of Focus, Victoria Molnar, & Susanne Winkler (eds), 105–136. Berlin-New York: De Gruyter Mouton.
. 2008. Basic
notions of information
structure. Acta Linguistica
Hungarica 55(3–4): 243–276.
Krifka, Manfred & Musan, Renate. 2012. Information
structure: Overview and linguistic
issues. In The
Expression of Information Structure, Manfred Krifka & Renate Musan (eds), 1–44. Berlin-New York: De Gruyter Mouton.
Ladd, Robert D. 2008. Intonational
Phonology, 2nd
edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lahousse, Karen & Lamiroy, Béatrice. 2015. “C’est
ainsi que”: grammaticalisation ou lexicalisation ou les deux à la
fois? Journal of French Language
Studies 27: 161–185.
Lambrecht, Knud. 1994. Information
Structure and Sentence Form: Topic, Focus, and the Mental
Representation of Discourse
Referents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
. 2001. A
framework for the analysis of cleft
constructions. Linguistics 39(3): 463–516.
Larrivée, Pierre. This
volume. The curious case of the rare
focus movement in
French. In When
Data Challenges Theory. Unexpected and Paradoxical Evidence in
Information Structure, Davide Garassino & Daniel Jacob (eds). Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Leonetti, Manuel & Escandell-Vidal, Maria Victoria. 2009. Fronting
and verum focus in
Spanish. In Focus
and Background in Romance Languages, Andreas Dufter & Daniel Jacob (eds), 155–204. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Li, Charles N. & Thompson, Sandra. 1976. Subject
and topic: A new typology of
language. In Subject
and Topic, Charles N. Li (ed), 459–489. New York: Academic Press.
Lombardi Vallauri, Edoardo. This
volume. Distinguishing psychological
Given/New from linguistic Topic/Focus makes things
clearer. In When
Data Challenges Theory. Unexpected and Paradoxical Evidence in
Information Structure, Davide Garassino & Daniel Jacob (eds). Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Masia, Viviana. This
volume. Remarks on Information
Structure marking asymmetries: The epistemological view on the
micropragmatic profile of
utterances. In When
Data Challenges Theory. Unexpected and Paradoxical Evidence in
Information Structure, Davide Garassino & Daniel Jacob (eds). Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Matić, Dejan. This
volume. Alternatives to information
structure. In When
Data Challenges Theory. Unexpected and Paradoxical Evidence in
Information Structure, Davide Garassino & Daniel Jacob (eds). Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Matić, Dejan & Nikolaeva, Irina. 2018. From
polarity focus to salient polarity: From things to
processes. In The
Grammatical Realization of Polarity Contrast. Theoretical,
Empirical, and Typological Approaches, Christine Dimroth & Stefan Sudhoff (eds), 9–53. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Matić, Dejan & Wedgwood, Daniel. 2013. The
meaning of focus: The significance of an interpretation-based
category in cross-linguistic
analysis. Journal of
Linguistics 49: 127–163.
Mertens, Piet. 2012. La
prosodie des
clivées. In Penser
les langues avec Claire
Blanche-Benveniste, Sandrine Caddéo, Marie-Noëlle Roubaud, Magali Rouquier & Frédéric Sabio (eds), 127–139. Aix-en-Provence: Presses Universitaires de Provence.
Neeleman, Ad & Vermeulen, Reiko. 2012. The
syntactic expression of information
structure. In The
Syntax of Topic, Focus, and Contrast. An Interface-based
Approach, Ad Neeleman & Reiko Vermeulen (eds), 1–38. Berlin-New York: De Gruyter Mouton.
Onea, Edgar. 2016. Potential
Questions at the Semantic-Pragmatic
Interface. Leiden: Brill.
Ozerov, Pavel. 2018. Tracing
the sources of Information Structure: Towards the study of
interactional management of
information. Journal of
Pragmatics 138: 77–97.
. 2021. Multifactorial
Information Management (MIM): Summing up the emerging alternative to
information structure. Linguistics
Vanguard 7(1).
.
Patten, Amanda L. 2012. The
English It-cleft: A Constructional Approach and a Diachronic
Investigation. Berlin-New York: De Gruyter Mouton.
Paul, Hermann. 1898. Prinzipien
der Sprachgeschichte. Halle (Saale): Niemeyer.
Pekarek Doehler, Simona, De Stefani, Elwis, & Horlacher, Anne-Sylvie. 2015. Time
and Emergence in Grammar. Dislocation, Topicalization and Hanging
Topic in French
Talk-in-interaction. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Primus, Beatrice. 2010. Case
marking
typology. In The
Oxford Handbook of Linguistic
Typology, Jae Jung Song (ed), 303–321. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Prince, Ellen F. 1978. A
comparison of WH-clefts and it-clefts in
discourse. Language 54: 883–906.
1981. Toward
a taxonomy of given-new
information. In Radical
Pragmatics, Peter Cole (ed), 233–255. New York: Academic Press.
Repp, Sophie. 2016. Contrast:
Dissecting an elusive information-structural notion and its role in
grammar. Oxford Handbook of
Information Structure, Caroline Féry & Shinichiro Ishihara (eds), 270–289. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Riester, Arndt. 2015. Analyzing
Questions under Discussion and information structure in a Balinese
narrative. In Proceedings
of the Second International Workshop on Information Structure of
Austronesian Languages, Linguistics
Dynamics Science
Project 2, 1–26. Tokyo: Research Institute for Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa.
. 2019. Constructing
QUD
trees. In Questions
in Discourse. Vol. 2: Pragmatics, Malte Zimmermann, Klaus von Heusinger & Edgar Onea (eds), 163–192. Leiden: Brill.
Riester, Arndt & Baumann, Stefan. 2013. Focus
triggers and focus types form a corpus
perspective. Dialogue &
Discourse 4 (2): 215–248.
Riester, Arndt & Shiohara, Asako. 2018. Information
structure in Sumbawa: A QUD
analysis. In Perspectives
on Information Structure in Austronesian
Languages, Sonja Riesberg, Asako Shiohara & Atsuko Utsumi (eds), 285–311. Berlin: Language Science Press.
Riester, Arndt, Brunetti, Lisa & De Kuthy, Kordula. 2018. Annotation
guidelines for Questions under Discussion and information
structure. In Information
Structure in Lesser-Described Languages: Studies in Syntax and
Prosody, Evangelia Adamou, Katharina Haude & Martine Vanhove (eds), 403–443. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Rizzi, Luigi. 1997. The
fine structure of the left
periphery. In Elements
of Grammar: A Handbook of Generative
Syntax, Liliane Haegeman (ed), 281–337. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Roberts, Craige. 2004. Context
in dynamic
interpretation. In The
Handbook of Pragmatics, Laurence R. Horn & Gregory Ward (eds), 197–220. Oxford: Blackwell.
. 2012
[1996]. Information structure: Towards
an integrated formal theory of
pragmatics. Semantics &
Pragmatics 5: 1–69.
Roggia, Carlo Enrico. 2009. Le
frasi scisse in italiano. Struttura informativa e funzioni
discorsive. Geneva: Slatkine.
Rooth, Mats. 1985. Association
with Focus. PhD
Dissertation, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.
. 1992. A
theory of focus
interpretation. Natural Language
Semantics 1(1): 75–116.
. 1996. Focus. In The
Handbook of Contemporary Semantic
Theory, Shalom Lappin (ed), 271–297. Oxford; Blackwell.
Rosemeyer, Malte, Jacob, Daniel & Konieczny, Lars. This
volume. How alternatives are
created: Specialized background knowledge affects the interpretation
of clefts in
discourse. In When
Data Challenges Theory. Unexpected and Paradoxical Evidence in
Information Structure, Davide Garassino & Daniel Jacob (eds). Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Shlonski, Ur & Bocci, Giuliano. 2019. Syntactic
cartography. In Oxford
Research Encyclopedia of Linguistics. <[URL]> (11 June 2021).
Sperber, Dan & Wilson, Deirdre. 1995. Relevance:
Communication and Cognition, 2nd
edn. Oxford: Blackwell.
Stalnaker, Robert. 2002. Common
ground. Linguistics and
Philosophy 25: 701–721.
. 2009. A
response to Abbott on presupposition and common
ground. Linguistics and
Philosophy 31: 539–44.
Torregrossa, Jacopo. 2018. Distinguishing
focus and contrast at PF: A view from
Italian. In Focus
Realization and Interpretation in Romance and
Beyond, Marco García-García & Melanie Uth (eds), 173–200. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Turco, Giuseppina. 2014. Contrasting
Opposite Polarity in Germanic and Romance Languages: Verum Focus and
Affirmative Particles in Native Speakers and Advanced L2
Learners. PhD
thesis, Radboud University Nijmegen.
Turco, Giuseppina, Dimroth, Christine & Braun, Bettina. 2013. Intonational
means to mark verum focus in German and
French. Language and
Speech 56(4): 460–490.
Vallduví, Enric. 1991. The
role of plasticity in the association of focus and
prominence. Proceedings of the
Eastern States Conference on
Linguistics (ESCOL) 7: 295–306.
Vallduví, Enric & Vilkuna, Maria. 1998. On
rheme and
kontrast. In The
Limits of Syntax [Syntax and
Semantics 29], Peter Culicover & Louise McNally (eds), 79–108. New York: Academic Press.
van der Wal, Jenneke. 2016. Diagnosing
focus. Studies in
Language 40: 259–301.
van Kuppevelt, Jan. 1995. Discourse
structure, topicality and
questioning. Journal of
Linguistics 31: 109–147.
Velleman, Leah & Beaver, David I. 2016. Question-based
models of information
structure. In Oxford
Handbook of Information Structure, Caroline Féry & Shinichiro Ishihara (eds), 86–107. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wilder, Chris. 2013. English
‘emphatic
do’. Lingua 128: 142–171.
Wilson, Deirdre & Sperber, Dan. 2004. Relevance
theory. In The
Handbook of Pragmatics, Laurence R. Horn & Gregory Ward (eds), 607–632. Oxford: Blackwell.
Zimmermann, Malte & Onea, Edgar. 2011. Focus
marking and focus
interpretation. Lingua 121: 1651–1670.
Cited by (3)
Cited by three other publications
De Cesare, Anna-Maria
2022. To be or not to be focus adverbials?. In When Data Challenges Theory [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 273], ► pp. 204 ff. 
Garassino, Davide
2022. Translation as a source of pragmatic interference?. In When Data Challenges Theory [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 273], ► pp. 272 ff.
Lombardi Vallauri, Edoardo
2022. Distinguishing psychological Given/New from linguistic Topic/Focus makes things clearer. In When Data Challenges Theory [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 273], ► pp. 40 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 21 october 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.