[LFG] position for local discourse function

[George Aaron Broadwell]

Hi Mary,

I think San Dionisio Ocotepec Zapotec has this kind of discourse position.
I will look for the ms of a paper on this and send it to you.

Aaron
P.S.  Unfortunately I am about to get on an airplane, so I'll have to look
for it when I get home...

On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 8:39 AM Mary Dalrymple <
mary.dalrymple at ling-phil.ox.ac.uk> wrote:

>
> Does anyone know of a language that has a specifier position where any
> grammatical function in the clause (but, crucially, not a subordinate
> clause) can appear, as long as it has a discourse function like TOPIC or
> FOCUS?   If we assume that information structure roles are represented as
> TOPIC or FOCUS at f-structure, the relevant specifier node would have an
> annotation that looks like this, where GF stands for any grammatical
> function (SUBJ, OBJ, etc.):
>
> (^ TOPIC) = v
> (^ GF) = v
>
> That is, the phrase would be an information structure TOPIC, and it would
> also bear some grammatical function GF in the same clause, but it does not
> license an unbounded dependency (GF* is not allowed) -- it must bear a
> grammatical function in the same clause, not a lower clause.
>
> Thanks!
>
>  - Mary
> _______________________________________________
> LFG mailing list
> LFG at listserv.linguistlist.org
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lfg
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lfg/attachments/20150518/10868fa5/attachment.htm>