Information Status and Noncanonical Word Order in English (Studies in Language Companion Series)

Focusing on information status and noncanonical word order in English, this work considers constructions which involve either preposing or postposing or both (argument reversal). With reference to noncanonical word order, the book considers the issue of what constitutes familiar versus unfamiliar information within an utterance, as well as the relationship between familiar information and the source of its familiarity. Editorial page 3 Title page 4 Copyright page 5 Table of contents 6 List of Tables 10 Acknowledgments 12 Chapter 1. Introduction 15 Preposing and Postposing Constructions 16 Preposing 17 Postposing 19 Argument reversal 21 Theoretical Framework 23 Focus/presupposition 25 'New to the discourse' vs. 'new to the hearer' 27 Linking relations 31 Posets 31 Links 33 Weight 38 Data 41 Notational Conventions 43 Chapter 2. Preposing 45 Topicalization 52 General constraints 59 Proposition assessment 64 Proposition affirmation 64 Proposition suspension 76 Topicalization and definiteness 92 Focus Preposing 97 General constraints 98 Echoing 102 Yiddish-movement 104 Left-Dislocation 107 Summary 109 Chapter 3. Postposing 111 General Constraints 113 Existential 'there' 116 Presentational 'there' 120 A comparison of existential and presentational 'there' 123 Definites in 'There'-Sentences 127 The so-called 'definiteness effect' 128 Definitesin existential 'there'-sentences 134 Hearer-old entities treated as hearer-new 137 Hearer-new tokens of hearer-old types 140 Hearer-old entities newly instantiating a variable 144 False definites 152 Definites in presentational 'there'-sentences 155 Right-Dislocation 159 General constraints 160 A comparison of right-dislocation and postposing 164 Summary 167 Chapter 4. Argument Reversal 169 Inversion 170 General constraints 173 Linking relations 186 Inversion and definiteness 194 'Locative inversion' and verb choice 196 Passivization 208 General constraints 210 Linking relations 215 A comparison of passivization and inversion 217 PP Preposing with 'There'-Insertion 219 Summary 225 Chapter 5. Noncanonical Word Order and Discourse Structure 227 Commonalities and Differences Across Constructions 228 Linking Relations and Noncanonical Word Order 232 Preposing 233 Argument reversal 240 The anchoring poset 244 Open Propositions and Locative Constituents 249 Presuppositional preposing 249 Locative preposing constructions 252 Intonation 259 Inversion 260 Preposing 266 Toward a Unified Theory of Noncanonical Word Order 269 Chapter 6. Extensions and Implications 273 Crosslinguistic Extensions 273 Farsi inversion 274 Italian presentational 'ci'-sentences 277 Italian subject postposing 281 Italian inversion 284 Yiddish 'es'-sentences 288 Summary of Constraints on Noncanonical Word Order 289 Theoretical Implications 294 Appendix 299 References 303 Index 321 This Work Provides A Comprehensive Discourse-functional Account Of Three Classes Of Noncanonical Constituent Placement In English — Preposing, Postposing, And Argument Reversal — And Shows How Their Interaction Is Accounted For In A Principled And Predictive Way. In Doing So, It Details The Variety Of Ways In Which Information Can Be 'given' Or 'new' And Shows How An Understanding Of This Variety Allows Us To Account For The Distribution Of These Constructions In Discourse. Moreover, The Authors Show That There Exist Broad And Empirically Verifiable Functional Correspondences Within Classes Of Syntactically Similar Constructions.
relying Heavily On Corpus Data, The Authors Identify Three Interacting Dimensions Along Which Individual Constructions May Vary With Respect To The Pragmatic Constraints To Which They Are Sensitive: Old Vs. New Information, Relative Vs. Absolute Familiarity, And Discourse- Vs. Hearer-familiarity. They Show That Preposed Position Is Reserved For Information That Is Linked To The Prior Discourse By Means Of A Contextually Licensed Partially-ordered Set Relationship; Postposed Position Is Reserved For Information That Is 'new' In One Of A Small Number Of Distinct Senses; And Argument-reversing Constructions Require That The Information Represented By The Preverbal Constituent Be At Least As Familiar Within The Discourse As That Represented By The Postverbal Constituent. Within Each Of The Three Classes Of Constructions, Individual Constructions Vary With Respect To Whether They Are Sensitive To Familiarity Within The Discourse Or (assumed) Familiarity Within The Hearer's Knowledge Store. Thus, Although The Individual Constructions In Question Are Subject To Distinct Constraints, This Work Provides Empirical Evidence For The Existence Of Strong Correlations Between Sentence Position And Information Status. The Final Chapter Presents Crosslinguistic Data Showing That These Correlations Are Not Limited To English. This work provides a comprehensive discourse-functional account of three classes of noncanonical constituent placement in English preposing, postposing, and argument reversal and shows how their interaction is accounted for in a principled and predictive way. In doing so, it details the variety of ways in which information can be 'given' or 'new' and shows how an understanding of this variety allows us to account for the distribution of these constructions in discourse. Moreover, the authors show that there exist broad and empirically verifiable functional correspondences within classes of syntactically similar constructions. Relying heavily on corpus data, the authors identify three interacting dimensions along which individual constructions may vary with respect to the pragmatic constraints to which they are old vs. new information, relative vs. absolute familiarity, and discourse- vs. hearer-familiarity. They show that preposed position is reserved for information that is linked to the prior discourse by means of a contextually licensed partially-ordered set relationship; postposed position is reserved for information that is 'new' in one of a small number of distinct senses; and argument-reversing constructions require that the information represented by the preverbal constituent be at least as familiar within the discourse as that represented by the postverbal constituent. Within each of the three classes of constructions, individual constructions vary with respect to whether they are sensitive to familiarity within the discourse or (assumed) familiarity within the hearer's knowledge store. Thus, although the individual constructions in question are subject to distinct constraints, this work provides empirical evidence for the existence of strong correlations between sentence position and information status. The final chapter presents crosslinguistic data showing that these correlations are not limited to English. Betty J. Birner, Gregory Ward. Includes Bibliographical References (p. 289-306) And Index.