Cover not available
Part of
Information Structure and Reference Tracking in Complex Sentences
Edited by Rik van Gijn, Jeremy Hammond, Dejan Matić, Saskia van Putten and Ana Vilacy Galucio
[Typological Studies in Language 105] 2014
► pp. 1–42

Information structure and reference tracking in complex sentences

An overview

| Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen
ORCID logo | University of Zürich
| Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf & Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen
This volume is dedicated to exploring the crossroads where complex sentences and information management – more specifically information structure (IS) and reference tracking (RT) – come together. Complex sentences are a highly relevant but understudied domain for studying notions of IS and RT. On the one hand, a complex sentence can be studied as a mini-unit of discourse consisting of two or more elements describing events, situations, or processes, with its own internal information-structural and referential organisation. On the other hand, complex sentences can be studied as parts of larger discourse structures, such as narratives or conversations, in terms of how their information-structural characteristics relate to this wider context.We first focus on the interrelatedness of IS and RT (Section 1) and then define and discuss the notion of complex sentences and their subtypes in Section 2. Section 3 surveys issues of IS in complex sentences, while Section 4 focuses on RT in complex sentences. Sections 5 and 6 briefly consider IS and RT in a wider discourse context. Section 5 discusses the interaction between IS, RT, and other discourse factors, and Section 6 focuses on ways in which a specific RT system, switch reference, can function as an RT device beyond the sentence.
Published online: 5 March 2014
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.105.01mat
References (81)
References
Abrusán, Márta. 2008. Islands of contradiction: Presuppositional and negative islands. In Proceedings of SALT XVIII , Márta Abrusán, Tova Friedman & Satoshi Ito (eds), 1-18. Ithaca NY: Cornell University.Google Scholar
Andersen, Torben. 1999. Anti-logophoricity and indirect mode in Mabaan. Studies in Language 23(3): 499-530. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Andrews, Avery. 1985. The major functions of the noun phrase. In Language Typology and Syntactic Description, Vol. I: Clause Structure, Timothy Shopen (ed.), 62-149. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2006. Serial verb constructions in cross-linguistic perspective. In Serial Verb Constructions: A Cross-Linguistic Typology, Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald & Robert M.W. Dixon (eds), 1-68. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Bickel, Balthasar. 1993. Belhare subordination and the theory of topic. In Studies in Clause Linkage, Karen H. Ebert (ed.), 23-55. Zürich: ASAS.Google Scholar
2003a. Clause linkage typology. Lecture series delivered at the 2003 international Role and Reference Grammar Conference, UNESP, São Jose do Rio Preto, Brazil.
2003b. Referential density in discourse and syntactic typology. Language 79: 708-736. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010. Towards a multivariate typology of reference tracking. Presentation given at the Meeting of the Research Group 742 “Grammar and Processing of Verbal Arguments”, Leipzig, April 21. [URL]Google Scholar
Boeckx, Cedric. 2012. Syntactic Islands. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boye, Kasper & Harder, Peter. 2007. Complement-taking predicates. Usage and linguistic structure. Studies in Language 31: 569–606. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Branigan, Holly & Prat-Sala, Mercè. 2000. A cross-linguistic perspective on discourse context and syntactic processing in language production. In Cross-Linguistic Perspectives on Language Processing, Marica De Vincenzi & Vincenzo Lombardo (eds), 205-226. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bresnan, Joan. 2001. Lexical-Functional Syntax. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1981. Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Cole, Peter. 1983. Switch reference in two Quechua languages. In Switch Reference and Universal Grammar [Typological Studies in Language 2], John Haiman & Pamela Munro (eds), 1-16. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cole, Peter, Hermon, Gabriella & Huang, C.-T. James. 2001. Long-distance reflexives: the state of the art. In Long-Distance Reflexives, Peter Cole, Gabriella Hermon & C.-T. James Huang (eds), xiii-xlv. New York NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard. 1983. Switch reference in Huichol: A typological study. In Switch Reference and Universal Grammar [Typological Studies in Language 2], John Haiman & Pamela Munro (eds), 17-38. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Creissels, Denis, Dimmendaal, Gerrit J., Frajzyngier, Zygmunt & König, Christa. 2008. Africa as a morphosyntactic area. In A Linguistic Geography of Africa, Bernd Heine & Derek Nurse (eds), 86-150. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Cristofaro, Sonia. 2003. Subordination. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
de Cuba, Carlos & Ürögdi, Barbara. 2009. Clausal expletives and the referentiality of CP. Paper presented at CCG 19. [URL]
2010. Clearing up the ‘facts’ on com-plementation. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 16(1). [URL]Google Scholar
Dehé, Nicole & Wichmann, Anne. 2010. Sentence-initial I think (that) and I believe (that). Studies in Language 34: 36-74. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dorvlo, Kofi. 2008. A Grammar of Logba. PhD dissertation, Universiteit Leiden.Google Scholar
Dickinson, Connie. 2002. Complex Predicates in Tsafiki. PhD dissertation, University of Oregon.Google Scholar
Dixon, Robert M.W. 1972. The Dyirbal Language of North Queensland. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1977. A Grammar of Yidiɲ. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Engdahl, Elisabet. 1997. Relative clause extractions in context. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 60: 51-79.Google Scholar
Erteschik-Shir, Nomi. 1973. On the Nature of Island Constraints. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
1997. The Dynamics of Focus Structure. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
2007. Information Structure. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Fischer, Rafael & van Lier, Eva. 2011. Cofán subordinate clauses in a typology of subordination. In Subordination in Native South American Languages [Typological Studies in Language 97], Rik van Gijn, Katharina Haude & Pieter Muysken (eds), 221–250. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Foley, William A. & Van Valin, Jr., Robert D. 1984. Functional Syntax and Universal Grammar. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
van Gijn, Rik. 2011. Grammatical and semantic integration in Yurakaré subordination. In Subordination in Native South American Languages [Typological Studies in Language 97], Rik van Gijn, Katharina Haude & Pieter Muysken (eds), 169–192. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012. Switch attention (aka switch reference) in South American temporal clauses: facilitating oral transmission. Linguistic Discovery 10(1): 112-127. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Givón, T. 1983. Topic continuity in discourse: The functional domain of switch-reference. In Switch Reference and Universal Grammar [Typological Studies in Language 2], John Haiman & Pamela Munro (eds), 51-82. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haiman, John. 1978. Conditionals are topics. Language 54: 564-589.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haiman, John & Munro, Pamela. 1983. Introduction. In Switch Reference and Universal Grammar [Typological Studies in Language 2], John Haiman & Pamela Munro (eds), ix-xv. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 2007. Coordination. In Language Typology and Syntactic Description, Vol. II: Complex Constructions, Timothy Shopen (ed.), 1-51. Cambridge: CUP.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heydel, Maren & Murray, Wayne. 2000. Conceptual effects in sentence priming: A cross-linguistic perspective. In Cross-Linguistic Perspectives on Language Processing, Marica De Vincenzi & Vincenzo Lombardo (eds), 227-254. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hooper, Joan & Thompson, Sandra A.. 1973. On the applicability of root transfor mations. Linguistic Inquiry 4: 465–497.Google Scholar
Huang, C.-T. James. 1982. Move wh in a language without movement. The Linguistic Review 1: 369-416 DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huisman, Ronald D. 1973. Angaatiha verb morphology. Linguistics 110: 43-54.Google Scholar
Hyman, Larry & Polinsky, Maria. 2010. Focus in Aghem. In Information Structure: Theoretical, Typological, And Experimental Perspectives, Malte Zimmermann & Caroline Féry, 206-233. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Jary, Mark. 2010. Assertion. New York NY: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jensen, Cheryl. 1999. Tupí-Guaraní. In The Amazonian Languages, Robert M.W. Dixon & Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald (eds), 125-164. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Keenan, Edward L. 1976. Towards a universal definition of ‘subject’. In Subject and Topic, Charles N. Li (ed), 305–333. New York NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Krifka, Manfred. 2008. Basic notions of information structure. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 55: 243-276. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kurilov, Gavril N. 2005. Fol’klor jukagirov. Novosibirsk: Nauka.Google Scholar
Lambrecht, Knud. 1986. Topic, Focus and the Grammar of Spoken French. PhD dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
1994. Information Structure and Sentence Form: Topic, Focus, and the Mental Representation of Discourse Referents. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Langacker, Robert 1969. On pronominalization and the chain of command. In Modern Studies in English, David A. Reibel & Sanford A. Schane (eds), 160-186. Englewoof Cliffs NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C. 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Longacre, Robert A. 2007. Sentences as combinations of clauses. In Language Typology and Syntactic Description, Timothy Shopen (ed.), 372-420. Cambridge: CUP.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lichtenberk, František. 2008. A Grammar of Toqabaqita. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maienborn, Claudia. 2011. Adverbs and adverbials. In Semantics [HSK 33.2], Klaus von Heusinger, Claudia Maienborn & Paul Portner (eds), 1390-1420. Berlin: de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McLendon, Sally 1978. Ergativity, case, and transitivity in Eastern Pomo. International Journal of American Linguistics 44: 1-9. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mithun, Marianne. 1999. The Languages of Native North America. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Olson, Michael L. 1978. Switch reference in Barai. Berkeley Linguistic Society 4: 140-157.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1981. Barai Clause Junctures: Toward a Functional Theory of Interclausal Relations. PhD dissertation, Australian National University.Google Scholar
Reinhart, Tanya. 1982. Pragmatics and Linguistics: An Analysis of Sentence Topics. Bloomington IN: Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Roberts, John R. 1988. Amele switch-reference and the theory of grammar. Linguistic Inquiry 19(1): 45-63Google Scholar
2012. Serial verbs in English: An RRG analysis of catenative verb constructions. Functions of Language 19: 201–234. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ross, John R. 1967a. On the cyclic nature of English pronominalization. In To Honor Roman Jakobson: Essays on the Occasion of his Seventieth Birthday, 1669-1682. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
1967b. Constraints of Variables in Syntax. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Sag, Ivan A. & Wasow, Thomas. 1999. Syntactic Theory: A Formal Introduction. Stanford CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
Scott, Graham. 1978. The Fore language of Papua New Guinea. Pacific Linguistics (series B) 47.Google Scholar
Shimojo, Mitsuaki. 2002. Functional theories of island phenomena. Studies in Language 26: 67-123. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stalnaker, Robert. 1978. Assertion. Syntax and Semantics 9: 315-332.Google Scholar
Stirling, Lesley. 1993. Switch-Reference and Discourse Representation Theory. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stolterfoht, Britta & Bader, Markus. 2004. Focus structure and processing of word order variations in German. In Information Structure, Anita Steube (ed.), 259-276. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Toratani, Kiyoko 2002. The Morphosyntactic Structure and Logical Structures of Compound Verbs in Japanese. PhD dissertation, University at Buffalo.
Valenzuela, Pilar. 2003. Transitivity in Shipibo-Konibo. PhD dissertation, University of Oregon.Google Scholar
Van Valin Jr., Robert D. 1980. On the distribution of passive and antipassive constructions in Universal Grammar. Lingua 50: 303-327. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1990. Semantic parameters of split intransitivity. Language 66: 221-260. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2005. Exploring the Syntax-Semantics Interface. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009. Privileged syntactic arguments, pivots and controllers. In Studies in Role and Reference Grammar, Lilian Guerrero Valenzuela, Sergio Ibáñez & Valeria A. Belloro (eds), 45-68. México City: IIFL-UNAM Press.Google Scholar
Vermeulen, Reiko. 2010. The syntax of topic, contrast and contrastive topic in Japanese and Korean. Paper presented at OnLI II, Ulster. [URL]
de Vries, Lourens. 2005. Towards a typology of tail-head linkage in Papuan languages. Studies in Language 29(2): 363-384. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Watters, John R. 1979. Focus in Aghem. In Aghem Grammatical Structure [Southern California Occasional Papers in Linguistics 7], Larry Hyman (ed.), 137-197. Los Angeles CA: University of Southern California.Google Scholar
Yang, Byong-seon. 1994. Morphosyntactic Phenomena of Korean in Role and Reference Grammar: Psych-Verb Constructions, Inflectional Verb Morphemes, Complex Sentences, and Relative Clauses. PhD dissertation, State University of New York at Buffalo. Published by Hankuk Publishers, Seoul, 1994. [URL]Google Scholar
Zimmermann, Malte. 2011. The grammatical expression of focus in West Chadic. Linguistics 49: 1161-1211. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (15)

Cited by 15 other publications

Ángel J. Gallego & Dennis Ott
2024. Cartography and Explanatory Adequacy, DOI logo
Reinöhl, Uta & T. Mark Ellison
2024. Metaphor forces argument overtness. Linguistics 62:4 ► pp. 795 ff. DOI logo
Simmul, Carl Eric
2024. Information structure of converb constructions: Estonian -des, -mata and -maks constructions. Folia Linguistica 58:1 ► pp. 29 ff. DOI logo
Schneider-Blum, Gertrud
2023. The impact of attentional centering on ergative marking in Tima. STUF - Language Typology and Universals 76:1 ► pp. 87 ff. DOI logo
Lahousse, Karen
2022. Is focus a root phenomenon?. In When Data Challenges Theory [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 273], ► pp. 148 ff. DOI logo
Wälchli, Bernhard
2022. Selectives (“topic markers”) on subordinate clauses. Linguistics 60:5 ► pp. 1539 ff. DOI logo
Barbosa, Raphael Augusto Oliveira
2021. Body-Part Morphemes in Matis (Panoan). Journal of Universal Language 22:1 ► pp. 65 ff. DOI logo
Nikitina, Tatiana & Alexandra Vydrina
2020. Reported speech in Kakabe: Loose syntax with flexible indexicality . Folia Linguistica 54:1 ► pp. 133 ff. DOI logo
Vydrina, Alexandra
2020. Operator focus in discourse and grammar: The two perfectives in Kakabe. Journal of African Languages and Linguistics 41:1 ► pp. 99 ff. DOI logo
Bentzen, Kristine & Merete Anderssen
2019. The form and position of pronominal objects with non-nominal antecedents in Scandinavian and German. The Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 22:2 ► pp. 169 ff. DOI logo
Schneider-Blum, Gertrud & Birgit Hellwig
2018. Reference tracking in Tima and its interplay with split ergative marking. Studies in Language 42:4 ► pp. 970 ff. DOI logo
Matić, Dejan
2016. Ėven converbs and the syntax of switch-reference. In Switch Reference 2.0 [Typological Studies in Language, 114], ► pp. 335 ff. DOI logo
van Gijn, Rik
2016. Switch reference in Western South America. In Switch Reference 2.0 [Typological Studies in Language, 114], ► pp. 153 ff. DOI logo
van Gijn, Rik
2016. Switch reference. In Switch Reference 2.0 [Typological Studies in Language, 114], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Viti, Carlotta
2015. Historical syntax. In Perspectives on Historical Syntax [Studies in Language Companion Series, 169], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 september 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.