Abstract
Broad focus (or informational integration or nonautonomy) is lexically and contextually constrained, but these constraints are not well understood. On a standard theory of focus interpretation, the presupposition of a broad focus is verified whenever those of two narrow foci are. I argue that to account for cases where two narrow foci are preferred, it is necessary to assume that broad focus competes with two narrow foci and implicates the opposite of what they presuppose. Central constraints on thetic statements are thus accounted for in an Optimality Theory (OT) enriched Alternative Semantics.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bende-Farkas, Á. (1999). Incorporation as unification. In: Proceedings of the 12th Amsterdam Colloquium. Amsterdam: ILLC.
Blutner R. (1998). Lexical pragmatics. Journal of Semantics, 15, 115–162
Blutner R., Zeevat H. (eds) (2003). Optimality theory and pragmatics. London, MacMillan
Borschev V., Partee B. (2002). The Russian genitive of negation: Theme – rheme structure or perspective structure?. Journal of Slavic Linguistics, 10, 105–144
Büring D. (2003). ‘On D-Trees, beans, and B-accents. Linguistics and Philosophy, 26, 511–545
Coseriu E. (1967). Lexikalische solidaritäten. Poetica, 1, 293–303
Drubig H.B. (1992). Zur Frage der grammatischen Repräsentation thetischer und kategorischer Sätze. In: Jacobs J. (eds) Informationsstruktur und Grammatik (= Linguistische Berichte Sonderheft vol 4. Opladen, West-deutscher Verlag, pp 142–195
Eckardt, R. (1996). Intonation and predication: an investigation in the nature of judgement structure. Arbeitspapiere des SFB 340 77. University of Tübingen.
Farkas D., de Swart H. (2003). The semantics of incorporation. Stanford, CSLI Publications
Hamblin C.L. (1973). Questions in Montague English. Foundations of Language, 10, 41–53
Höhle T. (1982). Explikationen für ‘normale Betonung’ und ‘normale Wortstellung’. In: Abraham W. (eds) Satzglieder im Deutschen. Tübingen, Narr, pp. 75–133
Jacobs J. (1991). Focus Ambiguities. Journal of Semantics, 8, 1–36
Jacobs J. (1993). Integration. In: Reis M. (eds) Wortstellung und informationsstruktur. Tübingen, Niemeyer, pp. 64–116
Jacobs J. (1999) Informational autonomy. In: Bosch P., van der Sandt R. (eds) Focus. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp 56–81
Jacobs J. (2001). The dimensions of topic-comment. Linguistics, 39, 641–681
Jäger G. (2001). Topic-comment structure and the contrast between stage level and individual level predicates. Journal of Semantics, 18, 83–126
Kennedy R. (1999). Focus constituency. Journal of Pragmatics, 31:1203–1230
Krifka M. (2001). Quantifying into question acts. Natural Language Semantics, 9, 1–40
Krifka M. (2001a). For a structured account of questions and answers. In: Féry C., Sternefeld W. (eds) Audiatur vox sapientiae: A festschrift for Arnim von Stechow. Berlin, Akademie Verlag, pp. 287–319
Krifka M. (2003). Quantifiers in questions. Korean Journal of English Language and Linguistics, 3:499–526
Krifka M. (2004). The semantics of questions and the focusation of answers. In: Lee Ch., Gordon M., Büring D. (eds) Topic and focus: a cross-linguistic perspective. Dordrecht, Kluwer, pp 139–151
Kruijff-Korbayová I., Steedman M. (2003). Discourse and Information Structure. Journal of Logic, Language and Information, 12, 249–259
Kuroda S.-Y. (1972). The Categorical and the thetic judgment. Evidence from Japanese syntax. Foundations of Language, 9, 153–185
Ladusaw W. (1994). Thetic and categorical, stage and individual, weak and strong. In: Harvey M., Santelmann L. (eds) Proceedings of SALT 4. Ithaca, Cornell University, pp. 220–229
Lötscher A. (1985). Akzentuierung und Thematisierbarkeit von Angaben. Linguistische Berichte, 97, 228–251
McNally L. (1998). Stativity and Theticity. In: Rothstein S. (eds) Events and grammar. Dordrecht, Kluwer, pp. 293–307
Roberts C. (1998). Focus, the flow of information, and universal grammar. In: Culicover P., McNally L. (eds) Syntax and semantics 29: the limits of syntax. New York, Academic Press, pp. 109–160
Rochemont M. (1986). Focus in generative grammar. Amsterdam, Benjamins
Rooth M. (1992). A theory of focus interpretation. Natural Language Semantics, 1, 75–116
Sasse H.-J. (1995). Theticity and VS order: a case study. in Sprachtypologie und universalienforschung, 48, 3–31
Schwarzschild R. (1999). Givenness, AvoidF and other constraints on the placement of accent. Natural Language Semantics, 7:141–177
Steedman M. (2000). Information structure and the syntax-phonology interface. Linguistic Inquiry, 31, 649–689
Szabolcsi A. (1986). From the definiteness effect to lexical integrity. In: Abraham W., Meij S. (eds) Topic, focus and configurationality. Amsterdam, John Benjamins, pp. 321–348
van Geenhoven, V. (1996). Semantic incorporation and indefinite descriptions. Ph.D. thesis, University of Tübingen.
van Kuppevelt J. (1995). Discourse structure, topicality and questioning. Linguistics, 31, 109–147
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sæbø, K.J. Focus interpretation in Thetic statements: Alternative Semantics and Optimality Theory Pragmatics. JoLLI 16, 15–33 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10849-006-9021-2
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10849-006-9021-2