[Lingtyp] Topic and focus markers with other functions

Fri Aug 2 20:10:42 UTC 2019

Quite apart from the problems of defining focus (on which I'm less sceptical than the sources Eitan cites), in some of the categories that have been cited the literature as focus markers the question arises whether they really *mark* focus, or are rather (i) attracted to a focused constituent, or (ii) focus plays a role in their distribution.

Regarding (i), I'm not a Quechuanist, but have had discussions with colleagues who are, and it is by no means clear that everyone considers evidentials in these languages as also marking focus, rather than as attaching to the focused constituent.

Regarding (ii), I have worked on "optional" ergativity, and would not consider ergative marking associated with focus as "marking" focus. In any of the types of "classical" split ergative system, with a split, say, between humans and non-humans, or non-past and past, we would not consider the ergative case as a marker of the categories of "non-human" or "past" – either because there is a clear segmental marking already (past), or because there is no marking of the category at all outside agents (non-human). So if ergative case only occurs on focused agents (at least probabilistically – such systems often don't seem to be entirely categorical), recognisable as focused through prosody and context, why would we consider the ergative as a focus marker?

Eva

-------------------------------------------------------
Eva Schultze-Berndt
Professor of Linguistics
Linguistics and English Language
School of Arts, Languages and Cultures
The University of Manchester
Oxford Road
M13 9PL
Manchester, UK
E-mail: eva.schultze-berndt at manchester.ac.uk

________________________________
From: Lingtyp [lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org] on behalf of Eitan Grossman [eitan.grossman at mail.huji.ac.il]
Sent: 02 August 2019 11:33
To: John Du Bois
Cc: lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
Subject: Re: [Lingtyp] Topic and focus markers with other functions

Hi all,

The term 'focus marker,' whatever its definition, assumes (i) that we know what focus is and (ii) that there are markers that *code* this particular meaning or function.

There is some recent work on information structure that calls these two assumptions into question, suggesting instead that 'focus' is a secondary or epiphenomenal effect associated with items and constructions whose coded meanings are interactional and discursive in nature. The same reasoning has been applied to 'topic' and other notions fundamental to the study of information structure.

I am thinking in particular by work by Dejan Matić, Daniel Wedgewood, and Pavel Ozerov, such as the following and others cited therein.

Matić, Dejan, and Daniel Wedgwood. 2013. The Meanings of Focus: The Significance of an Interpretation-Based Category in Cross-Linguistic Analysis. Journal of Linguistics 49 (1): 127–63. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226712000345.
Ozerov, Pavel. 2018. Tracing the sources of Information Structure: Towards the study of interactional management of information<https://www.academia.edu/35286594/Tracing_the_sources_of_Information_Structure_Towards_the_study_of_interactional_management_of_information>, Journal of Pragmatics 138: 77-97.

Best wishes from Salos!
Eitan

On Fri, Aug 2, 2019 at 1:08 PM John Du Bois <dubois at ucsb.edu<mailto:dubois at ucsb.edu>> wrote:
Does the multilingualism include Tok Pisin? Could the new construction you describe be a calque on a Tok Pisin "there is" construction?
Jack

On Fri, Aug 2, 2019 at 9:03 AM Nicholas Evans <nicholas.evans at anu.edu.au<mailto:nicholas.evans at anu.edu.au>> wrote:

Confirming Jeff's remark about Náma and related languages. In Nen and Nmbo (closely related to Náma) a focus marker is in the process of grammaticalising from a combination of a demonstrative (roughly: 'there') plus an inflected copula. It can be used in its fully inflected form, usually after a clause-initial NP, but as it grammaticalises the inflectional categories on the copula(a rich set of subject agreement and TAM values) are freezing around the 3sgPresent value. With Eri Kashima, Mark Ellison and Saliha Muradoglu we are currently conducting a study that looks at this grammaticalisation process in a variationist framework, across two communities linked by many multilingual individuals

Best Nick

________________________________
From: Lingtyp <lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org<mailto:lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org>> on behalf of Maia Ponsonnet <maia.ponsonnet at uwa.edu.au<mailto:maia.ponsonnet at uwa.edu.au>>
Sent: Friday, August 2, 2019 1:24:45 PM
To: lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org<mailto:lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org> <lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org<mailto:lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>>
Subject: Re: [Lingtyp] Topic and focus markers with other functions

Hello, I'm not sure I fully understand the scope of your query, but would the discourse functions of optional ergative markers fall into your target category?

I'm attaching a paper that I recently coauthored just because it's handy, but of course many, many authors have written about this for many languages (see the reference list).

Kind regards, Maïa

Dr Maïa Ponsonnet
Senior Lecturer and Chair, Discipline of Linguistics

Social Sciences Building, Room 2.36

Faculty of Arts, Business, Law and Education
The University of Western Australia
35 Stirling Hwy, Perth, WA (6009), Australia
P.  +61 (0) 8 6488 2870 - M.  +61 (0) 468 571 030

________________________________
From: Lingtyp <lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org<mailto:lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org>> on behalf of Jeff Siegel <jsiegel2 at une.edu.au<mailto:jsiegel2 at une.edu.au>>
Sent: Friday, 2 August 2019 10:31 AM
To: Frederick J Newmeyer <fjn at uw.edu<mailto:fjn at uw.edu>>
Cc: lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org<mailto:lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org> <lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org<mailto:lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>>
Subject: Re: [Lingtyp] Topic and focus markers with other functions

Greetings:

The focus marker is also the copula or a  development from it in Nama, a Papuan language of Southern New Guinea, and other languages in the Yam family.

Regards,
Jeff Siegel

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------

    Message: 1
    Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2019 08:03:08 +0000
    From: Patrick McConvell <patrick.mcconvell at anu.edu.au<mailto:patrick.mcconvell at anu.edu.au>>
    To: Kilu von Prince <kilu.von.prince at hu-berlin.de<mailto:kilu.von.prince at hu-berlin.de>>, Frederick J
         Newmeyer <fjn at uw.edu<mailto:fjn at uw.edu>>
    Cc: "<LINGTYP at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG<mailto:LINGTYP at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG>>"
         <LINGTYP at listserv.linguistlist.org<mailto:LINGTYP at listserv.linguistlist.org>>
    Subject: Re: [Lingtyp] Topic and focus markers with other functions
    Message-ID:
         <SYXPR01MB18563B5ECCCCD780FDAD50CBC7DE0 at SYXPR01MB1856.ausprd01.prod.outlook.com<mailto:SYXPR01MB18563B5ECCCCD780FDAD50CBC7DE0 at SYXPR01MB1856.ausprd01.prod.outlook.com>>

    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

    There are quite a lot of languages in which the focus marker is the copula or a  development from it. I wrote about this in Hausa in my Ph.D thesis long ago:

    1973 Ph.D. awarded by SOAS, University of London, for thesis

    Cleft sentences in Hausa? A syntactic study of focus

    Pat McConvell

    ________________________________
    From: Lingtyp <lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org<mailto:lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org>> on behalf of Kilu von Prince <kilu.von.prince at hu-berlin.de<mailto:kilu.von.prince at hu-berlin.de>>
    Sent: Thursday, 1 August 2019 5:23 PM
    To: Frederick J Newmeyer <fjn at uw.edu<mailto:fjn at uw.edu>>
    Cc: <LINGTYP at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG<mailto:LINGTYP at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG>> <LINGTYP at listserv.linguistlist.org<mailto:LINGTYP at listserv.linguistlist.org>>
    Subject: Re: [Lingtyp] Topic and focus markers with other functions

    Hi Frederick,

    the Chinese copula is an obvious candidate. I'm shamelessly self-promoting the article I wrote about its semantics in both functions, see attached.

    All the best,
    Kilu

    On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 1:09 AM Frederick J Newmeyer <fjn at uw.edu<mailto:fjn at uw.edu><mailto:fjn at uw.edu<mailto:fjn at uw.edu>>> wrote:

    Dear Lingtyp,

    I am looking for examples where topic markers or focus markers in some language are clearly members of some broad morphosyntactic category.

    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.

    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.

    Thanks,

    Fritz

    Frederick J. Newmeyer
    Professor Emeritus, University of Washington
    Adjunct Professor, U of British Columbia and Simon Fraser U
    _______________________________________________
    Lingtyp mailing list
    Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org<mailto:Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org><mailto:Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org<mailto:Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>>
    http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
Lingtyp Info Page - listserv.linguistlist.org<http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp>
listserv.linguistlist.org<http://listserv.linguistlist.org>
To see the collection of prior postings to the list, visit the Lingtyp Archives.. Using Lingtyp: To post a message to all the list members, send email to lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org<mailto:lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>. You can subscribe to the list, or change your existing subscription, in the sections below.

    --
    Dr. Kilu von Prince

    http://kiluvonprince.de/
    Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin
    Dorotheenstraße 24
    Raum 3.410
    10099 Berlin
    -------------- next part --------------
    An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
    URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20190801/8cc4d43a/attachment-0001.html>

    ------------------------------

    Message: 2
    Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2019 12:16:31 +0200
    From: Isabelle BRIL <isabelle.bril at cnrs.fr<mailto:isabelle.bril at cnrs.fr>>
    To: <lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org<mailto:lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>>
    Subject: Re: [Lingtyp] Topic and focus markers with other functions
    Message-ID: <dfe0d902-1352-1f54-9119-0e18a82bb320 at cnrs.fr<mailto:dfe0d902-1352-1f54-9119-0e18a82bb320 at cnrs.fr>>
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"

    Hi

    There are many cases of coordinators (sequential, additive,
    constrastive, disjunctive), of demonstratives as well as some
    case-markers used as topic and focus markers in a number of
    Austronesian-Oceanic languages.

    The attached article analyses such cases.

    2010, Bril I., “Informational and referential hierarchy: clause-linking
    strategies in Austronesian-Oceanic languages”. In Bril
    (ed.)./Clause-linking and clause hierarchy: syntax and pragmatics/.
    Amsterdam: Benjamins. 269-311.

    This article is part of the following volume :
    2010,Bril I. (éd.), /Clause-linking and clause hierarchy: syntax and
    pragmatics./ [Studies in Language Companion Series 121]. Benjamins

    in which other such cases are analysed in other language families, for
    instance,

    Frajzyngier in Wandala (Central Chadic) (Chapter 9),
    Vanhove in Yafi‘ Arabic (Yemen) (involving demonstratives and perception
    verbs) (Chapter 10),
    Taine-Cheikh (Chapter 11) in Zenaga (Berber) .

    TAM markers are another possible source analysed by:

    Verstraete in Umpithamu (Paman language, Australia), Chapter 14
    Robert in Wolof (Niger-Congo, Senegal) (Chapter 15)
    François in Hiw and Lo-Toga (Oceanic, Vanuatu),Chapter 16) .

    Hope this helps.

    Best
    Isabelle Bril

    Le 01/08/2019 à 01:08, Frederick J Newmeyer a écrit :
    >
    > Dear Lingtyp,
    >
    > I am looking for examples where topic markers or focus markers in some
    > language are clearly members of some broad morphosyntactic category.
    >
    > 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.
    >
    > 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.
    >
    > Thanks,
    >
    > Fritz
    >
    >
    > Frederick J. Newmeyer
    > Professor Emeritus, University of Washington
    > Adjunct Professor, U of British Columbia and Simon Fraser U
    >
    > _______________________________________________
    > Lingtyp mailing list
    > Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org<mailto:Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
    > http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp

    --
    Isabelle Bril
    Directeur de recherches (LACITO-CNRS)
    Directeur d'Etudes à l'EPHE (Typologie et Typologie des langues austronésiennes)

    Ecole de typologie ESSLT 2016
    https://typoling2016.sciencesconf.org/
    http://www.typologie.cnrs.fr/

    -------------- next part --------------
    An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
    URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20190801/71187a90/attachment.html>
    -------------- next part --------------
    A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
    Name: Bril_Inform_refer_hierar_Austron_Benjamins.pdf
    Type: application/pdf
    Size: 487071 bytes
    Desc: not available
    URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20190801/71187a90/attachment.pdf>

    ------------------------------

    Subject: Digest Footer

    _______________________________________________
    Lingtyp mailing list
    Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org<mailto:Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
    http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp

    ------------------------------

    End of Lingtyp Digest, Vol 59, Issue 2
    **************************************

_______________________________________________
Lingtyp mailing list
Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org<mailto:Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
_______________________________________________
Lingtyp mailing list
Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org<mailto:Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp

--

=======================================

John W. Du Bois
Professor of Linguistics
University of California, Santa Barbara
Santa Barbara, California 93106
USA
dubois at ucsb.edu<mailto:dubois at ucsb.edu>
http://www.linguistics.ucsb.edu/faculty/dubois/

_______________________________________________
Lingtyp mailing list
Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org<mailto:Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20190802/7c5e3764/attachment.htm>