Informationsstruktur und Grammatik pp 17-53

Part of the Linguistische Berichte Sonderhefte book series (LINGB, volume 4)

A Compositional Semantics for Multiple Focus Constructions

  • Manfred Krifka

Abstract

The subject of this article is the semantics of focus, i.e. the development of a framework in which we can formulate the influence of focus on the semantic and pragmatic interpretation. In section (1), I will discuss such a framework, structured meanings. In section (2), I will point out some of its shortcomings, as it is currently worked out; they have to do with cases involving multiple foci. In (3), I develop a general representation format in which we can cope with these problematic cases. Finally, in (4) I will discuss some extensions and possible problems, among others a combined semantic treatment of focus and topic.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Chomsky, N. (1977): “On Wh-Movement”. In: Formal Syntax, ed. by P.W. Culicover, T. Wasow, & A. Akmajian. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  2. Dahl, Ö. (1974): “Topic-comment structure revisited”. In: Topic and comment, contextual boundedness and focus, ed. by Ö. Dahl. Hamburg: Buske Verlag.Google Scholar
  3. Dowty, D. (1987): “Type raising, functional composition, and non-constituent conjunction”. In: Categorial Grammar and Natural Language Structures, ed. by R. Oerle, E. Bach, & D. Wheeler. Dordrecht: Reidel, 153–198.Google Scholar
  4. Horn, L.A. (1969): “A presuppositional analysis of only and even”. In: CLS 5, Papers from the Fifth Regional Meeting. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society, 98–107.Google Scholar
  5. Jackendoff, R. (1972): Semantic Interpretation in Generative Grammar. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  6. Jacobs, J. (1983): Fokus und Skalen, Zur Syntax und Semantik von Gradpartikeln im Deutschen. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
  7. Jacobs, J. (1984): “Funktionale Satzperspektive und Illokutionssemantik”. Linguistische Berichte 91, 25–28.Google Scholar
  8. Jacobs, J. (1986): “The Syntax of Focus and Adverbials in German”. In: Topic, focus and configurationality, ed. by W. Abraham & S.D. Meij. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  9. Jacobs, J. (1988): “Fokus-Hintergrund-Gliederung und Grammatik”. In: Intonationsforschungen, ed. by H. Altmann. Linguistische Arbeiten. Tübingen: Niemeyer, 89–134.Google Scholar
  10. Jacobs, J. (to appear): “Focus ambiguities”. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Focus and Intonation, Fraunhofer Institut Stuttgart, ed. by J. Hoepelman.Google Scholar
  11. Karttunen, L. & S. Peters (1979): “Conventional Implicature”. In: Syntax and Semantics 11: Presuppositions, ed. by Ch.-K. Oh & D.A. Dinneen. New York: Academic Press, 1–56.Google Scholar
  12. Kay, P. (1990): “Even”. Linguistics and Philosophy 13, 59–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kefer, M. (1989): Satzgliedstellung und Satzstruktur im Deutschen. Tübingen: Nan. Kiss, K.E. ( 1986 ): Configurationality in Hungarian. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
  14. Klein, W. & A. von Stechow (1982): Intonation und Bedeutung von Fokus. Arbeitspapier des SFB 99, No. 77. Konstanz.Google Scholar
  15. Kratzer, A. (1989): “The representation of focus”. Manuscript. Tucson.Google Scholar
  16. Krifka, M. (1990): “Polarity phenomena and alternative semantics”. In: Proceedings of the Seventh Amsterdam Colloquium, ed. by M. Stokhof & L. Torenvliet. Amsterdam: Institute for Language, Logic and Information, Universiteit van Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  17. Krifka, M. (to appear): “Focus and the Interpretation of Generic Sentences”. In: The Generic Book, ed. by G. Carlson & R Pelletier. Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Ladd, D. (1980): The Structure of Intonational Meaning: Evidence from English. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Lerner, J.-Y. & T.E. Zimmermann (1983): “Presupposition and quantifiers”. In: Meaning, Use and the Interpretation of Language, ed. by R. Bäuerle, C. Schwarze & A. von Stechow. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 290–301.Google Scholar
  20. Lewis, D (1979): “Scorekeeping in a language game”. Journal of Philosophical Logic 8, 339–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Link, G. (1983): “The logical analysis of plurals and mass terms”. In: Meaning, Use and the Interpretation of Language, ed. by R. Bäuerle et al. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  22. Lötscher, A. (1983): Satzakzent und funktionale Satzperspektive im Deutschen. Tübingen: Niemeyer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lujan, M. (1986): “Stress and bindings of pronouns”. Chicago Linguistics Society Meeting 22, Vol. 2.Google Scholar
  24. Lyons, D. & G. Hirst (1990): “A Compositional Semantics for Focusing Subjuncts”. In: Proceedings of the 28th Annual Meeting of the Association of Computational Linguistics, 54–61.Google Scholar
  25. Rochemont, M.S. (1986): Focus in Generative Grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  26. Rooth, M.E. (1985): Association with Focus. Ph.D.-Dissertation, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.Google Scholar
  27. Rooth, M.E. (1988): “Restrictive Quantificational Adverbials with Focus Semantics”. Talk presented at the Tübingen Conference on Genericity.Google Scholar
  28. Sag, I.A. (1977): Deletion and Logical Form. IULC, Bloomington.Google Scholar
  29. Selkirk, E.O. (1984): Phonology and Syntax. The Relation between Sound and Structure. MIT Press.Google Scholar
  30. Stalnaker, R. (1979): “Assertion”. In: Syntax and Semantics 9–Pragmatics, ed. by P. Cole. New York: Academic Press, 315–332.Google Scholar
  31. Stechow, A. v. (1989): Focusing and backgrounding operators. Universität Konstanz, Fachgruppe Sprachwissenschaft, Arbeitspapier Nr. 6. Konstanz.Google Scholar
  32. Stechow, A. v & S. Uhmann (1986): “Some remarks on focus projection”. In: Topic, Focus and Cofigurationality, ed. by W. Abraham & S. de Meij. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  33. Steedman, M. (1985): “Dependency and coordination in the grammar of Dutch and English”. Language 61, 523–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Taglicht, J. (1984): Message and Emphasis. London: Longman.Google Scholar
  35. Truckenbrodt, H. (1988): “Zur Syntax der Koordination”. SNS-Bericht 88–41. Seminar fur natürlich-sprachliche Systeme, Universität Tübingen.Google Scholar
  36. Williams, E. (1980): “Remarks on stress and anaphora”. Journal of Linguistic Research 1, 1–6.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Manfred Krifka
    • 1
  1. 1.Austin/SaarbrückenDeutschland

Personalised recommendations