<html>
  <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
  </head>
  <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">Topic/focus markers often have "other
      functions" (just like all other grammatical marker types), but
      what does it mean to be "clearly members of some broad category"?<br>
      <br>
      I don't think it is clear that English "not" can be said to "be an
      adverb" (because the English Adverb category is extremely
      heterogenous, and motivated primarily by a tradition going back to
      antiquity that posits "adverb" as a major part of speech).<br>
      <br>
      It is also not clear that Estonian negative particles "are
      auxiliaries", because other Estonian Auxiliaries (especially olema
      'be') behave rather differently (see Tamm 2015: 403, in Miestamo
      et al. (eds.)).<br>
      <br>
      The issue also arises for copula-derived focus markers (as in
      Chinese and Hausa, mentioned by Kilu von Prince and Patrick
      McConvell): Are these markers synchronically members of "a broad
      copula category"? Detailed study of focus constructions has often
      revealed clear behavioural differences between the two types of
      forms.<br>
      <br>
      And do we want to say that Akan's focus marker "na" is "really a
      coordinator"? (cf. Reggie Duah's and Daniel Ross's posts)<br>
      <br>
      It seems that the within-language similarities are often best
      attributed to earlier diachronic processes which led to multiple
      uses of elements which do not have a unified synchronic function
      anymore. <br>
      <br>
      Identifying recurrent paths of change is an interesting research
      question. But arguing about "reasonable analyses" of grammatical
      elements as belonging to some broader class does not seem so
      productive. Very often, grammatical markers are quite unique in
      their behaviour and need not be seen as belonging to any category.<br>
      <br>
      Martin<br>
      <br>
      On 01.08.19 01:08, Frederick J Newmeyer wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAOLDpRPJT4fRDnU6A5ZBsdTWVBG2vvoJL5Y424gcBXz1qfk=gA@mail.gmail.com">
      <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm
          0.0001pt;font-family:"Palatino",serif"><font
            size="4"><span style="font-family:"Times New
              Roman",serif">
            </span></font></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm
          0.0001pt;font-family:"Palatino",serif"><font
            size="4"><span style="font-family:"Times New
              Roman",serif">Dear Lingtyp,<span></span></span></font></p>
        <font size="4">
        </font>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm
          0.0001pt;font-family:"Palatino",serif"><font
            size="4"><span style="font-family:"Times New
              Roman",serif"><span> </span></span></font></p>
        <font size="4">
        </font>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm
          0.0001pt;font-family:"Palatino",serif"><font
            size="4"><span style="font-family:"Times New
              Roman",serif">I am looking for examples where topic
              markers or focus
              markers in some language are clearly members of some broad
              morphosyntactic
              category.<span></span></span></font></p>
        <font size="4">
        </font>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm
          0.0001pt;font-family:"Palatino",serif"><font
            size="4"><span style="font-family:"Times New
              Roman",serif"><span> </span></span></font></p>
        <font size="4">
        </font>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm
          0.0001pt;font-family:"Palatino",serif"><font
            size="4"><span style="font-family:"Times New
              Roman",serif">Let me give an example involving
              negatives of the sort of thing
              that I am looking for. Negative elements in various
              languages are often members
              of a broader category: in Estonian negative particles are
              auxiliaries, in
              Tongan they are complement-taking verbs, in English they
              are adverbs, and so
              on.<span></span></span></font></p>
        <font size="4">
        </font>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm
          0.0001pt;font-family:"Palatino",serif"><font
            size="4"><span style="font-family:"Times New
              Roman",serif"><span> </span></span></font></p>
        <font size="4">
        </font>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm
          0.0001pt;font-family:"Palatino",serif"><font
            size="4"><span style="font-family:"Times New
              Roman",serif">So what I am looking for are parallel
              examples with topic and
              focus markers: cases where a reasonable analysis would
              assign them to some
              broader category.<span></span></span></font></p>
        <font size="4">
        </font>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm
          0.0001pt;font-family:"Palatino",serif"><font
            size="4"><span style="font-family:"Times New
              Roman",serif"><span> </span></span></font></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm
          0.0001pt;font-family:"Palatino",serif"><font
            size="4"><span style="font-family:"Times New
              Roman",serif">Thanks,<span></span></span></font></p>
        <font size="4">
        </font>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm
          0.0001pt;font-family:"Palatino",serif"><font
            size="4"><span style="font-family:"Times New
              Roman",serif"><span> </span></span></font></p>
        <font size="4">
        </font>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm
          0.0001pt;font-family:"Palatino",serif"><font
            size="4"><span style="font-family:"Times New
              Roman",serif">Fritz<span></span></span></font></p>
        <font size="4">
        </font>
        <div>
          <div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature"
            data-smartmail="gmail_signature">
            <div dir="ltr">
              <div>
                <div dir="ltr">
                  <div>
                    <div dir="ltr">
                      <div><font size="4"><br>
                          Frederick J. Newmeyer<br>
                          Professor Emeritus, University of Washington<br>
                        </font></div>
                      <font size="4">Adjunct Professor, U of British
                        Columbia and Simon Fraser U</font><br>
                    </div>
                  </div>
                </div>
              </div>
            </div>
          </div>
        </div>
      </div>
      <br>
      <fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
      <pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
Lingtyp mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a>
</pre>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    <br>
    <pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">-- 
Martin Haspelmath (<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:haspelmath@shh.mpg.de">haspelmath@shh.mpg.de</a>)
Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History
Kahlaische Strasse 10   
D-07745 Jena  
&
Leipzig University
Institut fuer Anglistik 
IPF 141199
D-04081 Leipzig  </pre>
  </body>
</html>