Relative clauses - a correction

[George Aaron Broadwell]

Dear Joan,

Yes, you are right.  I have made an error in my glossing.  The examples with
topicalization should be as follows:

As for the dog (TOPIC), John grabbed it         grab is neutral voice
As for John (TOP), he grabbed the dog           grab is neutral voice
                                                         (not actor focus
voice)

Thanks for catching this!

Aaron
At 02:25 PM 3/20/00 -0500, you wrote:
>
> Interesting observation....is there a typo in thegloss of the second example
> below?:
>
> Compare this to topicalization, which doesn't use the actor focus voice:
>
> As for the dog (TOPIC), John grabbed it         grab is neutral voice
> As for John (TOP), he grabbed the dog           grab is actor focus voice
>
> You say that topicalization doesn't use the actor focus voice, but then
gloss
> the second example as containing actor focus voice.
>
> thanks for clarifying,
> Joan
>
> George Aaron Broadwell wrote:
>>
>> Dear LFG-ers,
>>
>> I've followed the discussion on relative clauses with some interest, but
>> one thing has puzzled me.  Perhaps some of you can clarify how we know
what
>> the correct discourse function of the head of RC is with respect to the
RC.
>>
>> In most Mayan languages, there is a very clear morphological distinction
>> between focus constructions and topic constructions.  If you focus a
>> transitive subject, you *must* use a special verb form (usually called
>> "antipassive", but perhaps more correctly "actor focus", as Aissen as
>> argued.)
>>
>> For example in Kaqchikel, the facts are as follows:
>>
>> (interrogative focus)
>>
>> Who did John grab?              grab is in the neutral voice
>> Who grabbed the dog?    grab is in the actor focus voice
>>
>> (contrastive focus)
>>
>> It was the dog that John grabbed (not the cat). grab is neutral voice
>> It was John who grabbed the dog (not Mary)      grab is actor focus voice
>>
>> Compare this to topicalization, which doesn't use the actor focus voice:
>>
>> As for the dog (TOPIC), John grabbed it         grab is neutral voice
>> As for John (TOP), he grabbed the dog           grab is actor focus voice
>>
>> Now the problem is that relative clauses show the same pattern as focus
>> constructions, and not the pattern seen in topic constructions:
>>
>> The dog John grabbed has mange.                 grab is neutral voice
>> The man who grabbed the dog is my uncle         grab is actor focus voice
>>
>> That suggests to me that the head of the relative clause has the discourse
>> role FOCUS, and not TOPIC.
>>
>> Towards the end of his last post, Yehuda said "One thing we have to
>> remember is that 'relative clause' isn't an analysis
>> -- it's a taxonomic classification. Different languages may use different
>> formal devices to achieve the same consequence, and even one language may
>> use multiple devices."
>>
>> Do people think that the head might be TOPIC in some lgs and FOCUS in
>> others?
>>
>> Aaron
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> George Aaron Broadwell,  g.broadwell at albany.edu
>> Dept. of Anthropology, UAlbany, Albany NY 12222
>> (518)-442-4711   Web page:
>> <http://www.albany.edu/anthro/fac/broadwell.htm>http://www.albany.edu/ant
>> hro/fac/broadwell.htm
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> "I really do not know that anything has ever been more exciting than
>> diagramming sentences."   Gertrude Stein, Lectures in America, 1935.
>
>
> --
> Joan Maling
> Natural Language & Linguistic Theory
> Volen Center, MS-013          tel:  781-736-3261 (Office)
> Brandeis University           tel:  781-736-4870 (Center)
> Waltham, MA 02454-9110        fax:  781-736-2398
>



-------------------------------------------------------------------------
George Aaron Broadwell,  g.broadwell at albany.edu
Dept. of Anthropology, UAlbany, Albany NY 12222
(518)-442-4711   Web page: http://www.albany.edu/anthro/fac/broadwell.htm
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I really do not know that anything has ever been more exciting than
diagramming sentences."   Gertrude Stein, Lectures in America, 1935.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lfg/attachments/20000320/aa6998d3/attachment.htm>