A Functional Analysis of Present Day English on a General Linguistic Basis

Mathesius, Vilém; Vachek, Josef

doi:10.1515/9783110813296

Cited by 150 publications

(51 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…First, the result does not fit comparative and theoretical expectations. While previous cross-linguistic studies (Mathesius 1975, Prat Sala 1997 have shown that some languages use passives in contexts in which others use simple reordering, these studies explain this difference in terms of overall word order flexibility. Syntactically, German is, however, a free word order language allowing scrambling and movement of the object to Spec,CP, so one does not expect the preference for grammatical function change found in our data.…”

Section: Germanmentioning

confidence: 54%

Effects of givenness and constraints on free word order

Skopeteas¹,

Fanselow²

2009

Information Structure

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The preference for given information to precede new has already been identified in the earliest studies on information structure within the framework of the Prague School linguistics. In chapter 12 ‘Effects of givenness and constraints on free word order’, Stavros Skopeteas and Gisbert Fanselow present production data from ten different languages showing that cross‐linguistically two distinct syntactic operations are employed as a result of asymmetries in givenness: object fronting (scrambling) and passivization. They account for the typological variation in terms of the type of movement that is structurally available in a language. Givenness asymmetries (optionally) induce operations involving A‐movement (either of the object scrambling type or of the passivization type), while they generally do not induce operations involving A’‐movement. The cross‐linguistic complementarity between passive voice and object fronting as well as the optionality in the reported data support the view that A‐movement is semantically and pragmatically vacuous and is optionally selected in order to fulfill conditions at the discourse interface.

show abstract

Section: Germanmentioning

confidence: 54%

Effects of givenness and constraints on free word order

Skopeteas¹,

Fanselow²

2009

Information Structure

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Within the innermost clausal layer TP, the difference between [+given] and [− given] information seems to be the major factor behind constituent order variation, and it has already been noted by Mathesius (1975); Tomlin (1995), among others, that passivization and simple reordering, i.e., scrambling, are the primary means for responding to that distinction.…”

Section: Word Order Variation In the Innermost Clausal Layer: Tpmentioning

confidence: 96%

In need of mediation: The relation between syntax and information structure

Fanselow¹

2008

Acta Linguistica Hungarica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper defends the view that syntax does not directly interact with information structure. Rather, information structure affects prosody, and only the latter has an interface with syntax. We illustrate this point by discussing scrambling, focus preposing, and topicalization. The position entertained here implies that syntax is not very informative when one wants to narrow down the interpretation of terms such as "focus", "topic", etc.Keywords: givenness, scrambling, focus, topic, cartographic approach Four issues in the interaction of syntax and information structureThe status of the information expressed by the parts of an utterance relative to the utterance's common ground (Krifka 2008) influences the form of the utterance. This comes out clearly when one considers the prosodic shape of a sentence, in which "given" elements are usually unaccented in languages such as German or English, or when one considers morphological markers such as Japanese wa signaling topicality. One would expect, then, that the "information structure" of a sentence is also mir- * I would like to thank Caroline Féry, Shin Ishihara, Denisa Lenertová, Stavros Skopeteas, Thomas Weskott, and Malte Zimmermann for discussions that shaped the content of the present paper substantially. The research reported here was partially supported by DFG grant SFB 632/A1 and D2.

show abstract

“…Concepts of theme and rhyme are first proposed by Mathethius (1975), the founder of information structure in Prague School, and then further developed by Halliday. He interpreted that "Theme is the starting point of clause information, and it is what the clause cares about; rhyme is the statement of the theme, is around the theme and the extended content (Halliday, 2004, p.…”

Section: Thematic Progression Patternsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Translation Strategies for Thematic Progression Patterns in English and Chinese

He¹,

Bing²

2014

ASS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

According to the theory of functional linguistics, the thematic progression patterns are important means of creating the organization of a discourse. The importance of discourse translation, in recent years, has been increasingly highlighted and concerned. This paper aims to discuss the strategies for mutual translation of English and Chinese based on a comparative study of the different presentations of the thematic progression patterns.

show abstract

A Functional Analysis of Present Day English on a General Linguistic Basis

Cited by 150 publications

References 0 publications

Effects of givenness and constraints on free word order

Effects of givenness and constraints on free word order

In need of mediation: The relation between syntax and information structure

Translation Strategies for Thematic Progression Patterns in English and Chinese

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About