Notes on the syntax and the pragmatics of German Left Dislocation

Abstract

Both German Left Dislocation (GLD) as well as so called Hanging Topic Left Dislocation (HTLD) are commonly considered to be topic marking constructions. This paper demonstrates that while this is in fact true for the former construction, it is not for the latter. Contra the standard assumption it will be shown that the resumptive pronoun (RP) of GLD may be positioned in the middle field of a German clause. However, it cannot appear anywhere in the middle field, but only in the designated topic position. Thus, the RP necessarily has the status of a sentence topic. As regards discourse properties, it is shown that GLD has to respect the condition of recoverability, and that it is a sentence topic promotion device, which, however, maintains the current discourse topic. GLD differs crucially from the HTLD construction and standard V-second clauses with regard to these properties. In addition, the syntax of GLD is considered. After a critical discussion of two recent movement analyses of the dislocated phrase, it is argued that an analysis which base generates the dislocated phrase at the left periphery of the clause containing the RP is more adequate. The paper ends with some reflections about the relationship between the syntactic structure of GLD and its discourse properties.

Scientific modelling in generative grammar and the dynamic turn in syntax

“…In Ott's ellipsis proposal, we saw movement, deletion and biclausal structure. In DS, we have tree location underspecification which is similar to the quasi-movement of Frey (2004) and the Adjunction and LINK operations which connect different structures at the nodes, again similar to Ott's posit of two CPs with traces connecting various elements. Now of course, in terms of theory, Cann et al (2003) are completely accurate in stating the differences in approach.…”

“…These accounts are usually couched in terms of movement and traces (see Wiltschko 1997;Zaenen 1997). Frey (2004), following Cinque (1990), posits a quasi-movement dependency called a chain. Assuming a biclausal structure (in order to model the so-called external and internal aspects of this kind of construction), the underlying structure is "[a] chain α 1 , .…”

Verb second and its deviations: An argument for feature scattering in the left periphery

“…Crucially, these XPs appear to be invisible with respect to the second-position requirement. If these first-position items are base-generated in the left periphery (Anagnostopoulou 1997;Wiltschko 1997;Zaenen 1997;Frey 2004) or if these structures result from ellipsis within a bi-clausal structure (Ott 2014), the apparent exception to V2 is unproblematic because the bottleneck effect is a restriction on movement.…”

A Unified Analysis of Indicative and Biscuit Conditionals as Topics

“…Consider the examples in (11) We will focus on these German constructions in the following as their semantic and pragmatic differences have been worked out in detail by Frey (2004). He shows (building on Altmann 1981) that the following characteristics concerning prosodic integration (P), the resumptive element (R), and binding facts (B) set these two constructions apart:…”

“…Concerning semantic and pragmatic effects, Frey (2004) argues that GLD marks aboutness topicality in the sense of Reinhart (1981). In this view (which is based on Strawson 1964) topicality establishes the entity the sentence is about.…”