Summary
The paper compares broad focus, narrow focus and contrastive focus in English and Italian. It concludes that a focus cannot have a contrastive meaning unless some precise syntactic and discourse features “preliminarly” make it a narrow focus. The comparison between broad and narrow focus should be made on a syntactic and discourse level, whereas the relationship between narrow and contrastive focus is better described in semantic terms. In particular, a narrow focus arises when the intonational prominence is in a marked position, i.e. not only a position which is marked for the intonational prominence as such, but also any position that is marked for the constituent that bears the prominence. One difference in this respect between order in English (more fixed) and in Italian (less fixed) is analysed, leading to the conclusion that some relationships with narrow focus usually attributed to specific syntactic roles are better seen as a matter of simple position of the constituents. The different factors that cause contrastive focus (such as words belonging to closed paradigms, focus on given information, etc.) are analysed comparatively and a classification is suggested in terms of paradigmatic vs. syntagmatic contrast.
2016. Implicits as Evolved Persuaders. In Pragmemes and Theories of Language Use [Perspectives in Pragmatics, Philosophy & Psychology, 9], ► pp. 725 ff.
Lombardi Vallauri, Edoardo
2016. The “exaptation” of linguistic implicit strategies. SpringerPlus 5:1
2018. L’implicite comme moyen de persuasion : une approche quantitative. Corela :HS-25
Lahousse, Karen
2007. Specificational sentences and word order in Romance: A functional analysis. Folia Linguistica 41:3-4
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 22 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.