The syntax, information structure, and prosody of German ‘VP’-fronting
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 20344251 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Vera Lee‐schoenfeld (0000-0002-1133-5338, University of Georgia, corresponding author), Vera Lee-Schoenfeld, Anya Lunden (William & Mary) |
| Year | 2019 |
| Volume | 36 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 231-283 |
| Publication date | 2019-05-26 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | The Linguistic Review (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0167-6318 • E-ISSN: 1613-3676 |
| Publisher | Walter de Gruyter GmbH (PUBLISHER • DE) |
| DOI | 10.1515/tlr-2018-2012 |
| OpenAlex | W2904872846 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 25 |
This paper explores fronted verb phrases in German, drawing attention to the difference between passive/unaccusative VPs and fronted agentive v Ps. While both kinds of verb phrases have been discussed in the literature as being frontable, it has been largely overlooked that fronted v Ps typically come with a certain kind of post-fronting context and a rise-fall or bridge-contour intonation, which is characteristic of I-topicalization. We observe that, unlike VPs, agentive v Ps essentially need to be I-topics, with a high tone at the right edge of the fronted domain, in order to be frontable. Given the special context required for fronted v Ps, the situation described by the v P does not contain new information but must already have been under discussion and is now being commented on. We present the results of two experimental studies and appeal to the thetic/categorical distinction to offer a new angle on the definiteness effect that has been associated with fronted verb phrases. We propose that a subject-containing fronted v P is associated with a thetic rather than the default categorical judgment, which means that the fronted subject and predicate form only one information-structural unit (a topic) rather than two (topic and comment). Contributing to the literature on theticity, we observe that, unlike in non-fronting thetic statements, the subject in fronted v Ps cannot be a true definite. We attribute this to clashing intonation restrictions on theticity in non-fronting constructions versus theticity in just the fronted portion of a sentence
Complementizer · German · Linguistics · Syntax · Topicalization · Word order · Computer Science · History · Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism · Philosophy · Phonetics and Phonology Research · Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
Consequences of the Serial Nature of Linguistic Input for Sentenial Complexity
Types of topics in German and Italian
Linguistic complexity
Derivation by Phase
Severing the External Argument from its Verb
A Comprehensive grammar of the English language
Contrast and movement to the German prefield
Zur Frage der grammatischen Repräsentation thetischer und kategorischer Sätze
Topicalization and Other Puzzles of German Syntax
Specificity and Definiteness in Sentence and Discourse Structure
Intonation and Contrast
VP-fronting
Grammatical weight and relative clause extraposition in English
Intonational structure in Japanese and English
A Performance Theory of Order and Constituency
Three reasons for accenting a definite subject
Scope Inversion under the Rise-Fall Contour in German
Discourse new, F-marking, and normal stress
The thetic/categorical distinction revisited once more
The thetic/categorical distinction revisited
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |