Abstract
This paper strives to characterize the relation between accent placement and discourse in terms of independent constraints operating at the interface between syntax and interpretation. The Givenness Constraint requires un-F-marked constituents to be given. Key here is our definition of givenness, which synthesizes insights from the literature on the semantics of focus with older views on information structure. AvoidF requires speakers to economize on F-marking. A third constraint requires a subset of F-markers to dominate accents.
The characteristic prominence patterns of "novelty focus" and "contrastive focus" both arise from a combination of the Givenness Constraint and AvoidF. Patterns of prominence in questions as well as in answers to questions are explained in terms of the constraints, thanks in part to the way in which the Givenness relation is defined. Head/argument asymmetries noted in the literature on Focus Projection are placed in the phonology-syntax interface, independent of discourse conditions. Deaccenting follows when AvoidF is ranked higher than constraint(s) governing head/argument asymmetries.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
Akmajian, A. and R. Jackendoff: 1970, ‘Coreferentiality and Stress’, Linguistic Inquiry 1, 124–126.
Allerton, D. J.: 1978, ‘The Notion of “Givenness” and Its Relations to Presupposition and to Theme’, Lingua 44, 133–168.
Bäuerle, R.: 1979, ‘Questions and Answers’, in R. Bäuerle, U. Egli, and A. von Stechow (eds.), Semantics from Different Points of View, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp. 61–74.
Büring, D.: 1996, ‘On (De)Accenting’,, talk given at the 'Interfaces of Grammar’ conference, Universität Tübingen, Sept./Oct. 1996.
Chomsky, N. and M. Halle: 1968, The Sound Patterns of English, Harper & Row, New York.
Cinque, G.: 1991, ‘A Null Theory of Phrase and Compound Stress’, Linguistic Inquiry 24(2), 239–297.
Cresswell, M. J.: 1973, Logics and Languages, Methuen & Co., London.
Gussenhoven, C.: 1983, ‘Focus, Mode and Nucleus’, Journal of Linguistics 19, 377–417.
Gussenhoven, C.: 1984, On the Grammar and Semantics of Sentence Accents, Foris, Dordrecht.
Gussenhoven, C.: 1992, ‘Sentence Accents and Argument Structure’,, in I. M. Roca (ed.), Thematic Structure: Its Role in Grammar, pp. 79–106, Foris, New York.
Halliday, M. A. K.: 1967, ‘Notes on Transitivity and Theme in English (Part 2)’,, Journal of Linguistics 3, 199–244.
Jackendoff, R., 1972, Semantic Interpretation in Generative Grammar, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Jacobs, J.: 1991, ‘Focus Ambiguities’, Journal of Semantics 8, 1–36.
Karttunen, L.: 1977, ‘The Syntax and Semantics of Questions’, Linguistics and Philosophy 1, 3–44.
Kratzer, A.: 1991, ‘The Representation of Focus’, in A. von Stechow and D. Wunderlich (eds.), Semantik/Semantics: An International Handbook of Contemporary Research, pp. 825–834, de Gruyter, Berlin.
Krifka, M.: 1992, ‘A Framework for Focus-Sensitive Quantification’,, in D. Dowty and C. Barker (eds.), Proceedings of the Second Conference on Semantics and Linguistics Theory, (Ohio State Working Papers in Linguistics No. 40), pp. 215–236, Columbus, Ohio.
Ladd, D. R.: 1980, The Structure of Intonational Meaning, Indiana University Press, Bloomington.
Ladd, D. R.: 1996, Intonational Phonology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Nooteboom, S. G. and J. G. Kruyt: 1987, ‘Accents, Focus Distribution, and the Perceived Distribution of Given and New Information: An Experiment’, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 82(5), 1512–1524.
Pierrehumbert, J.: 1993, ‘Alignment and Prosodic Heads’, in A. Kathol and M. Bernstein (eds.), Proceedings of the Tenth Eastern States Conference on Linguistics, Dept. of Linguistics, Cornell University.
Pierrehumbert, J. and J. Hirschberg: 1990, ‘The Meaning of Intonational Contours in the Interpretation of Discourse’,, in P. R. Cohen, J. Morgan, and M. E. Pollock (eds.), Intentions in Communication, pp. 271–311, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Prince, E. F.: 1981, ‘Toward a Taxonomy of Given/New Information’,, in P. Cole (ed.), Radical Pragmatics, pp. 223–255, Academic Press, New York.
Prince A. and P. Smolensky: 1993, Optimality Theory: Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar, RuCCS Technical Report #2, Rutgers University Center for Cognitive Science.
Rochemont, M.: 1986, Focus in Generative Grammar, Benjamins, Amsterdam.
Rochemnot, M.: 1997, ‘Phonological Focus and Structural Focus’, in P. Culicover and L. McNally (eds.), The Limits of Syntax, Syntax and Semantics 29, Academic Press, San Diego.
Rooth, M.: 1985, Association with Focus, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Distributed by GLSA, Amherst.
Rooth, M.: 1992, ‘A Theory of Focus Interpretation’, Natural Language Semantics 1, 75–116.
Rooth, M.: 1995, ‘Focus’, in S. Lappin (ed.), The Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory, Blackwell, London.
Schmerling, S. F.: 1976, Aspects of English Sentence Stress, University of Texas Press, Austin.
Schwarzschild, R.: 1993, ‘The Contrastiveness of Associated Foci’, Talk presented at ‘Workshop on Focus and Quantification’, Fifth European Summer School in Logic, Language and Information, Universidade de Lisboa, Portugal.
Schwarschild, R.: 1998, ‘Interpreting Accent’, ms., Rutgers University. [http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~tapuz/]
Selkirk, E. O.: 1984, Phonology and Syntax: The Relation between Sound and Structure, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Selkirk. E. O.: 1996, ‘Sentence Prosody: Intonation, Stress and Phrasing’,, in J. A. Goldsmith (ed.), The Handbook of Phonological Theory, Blackwell, London.
Taglicht, J.: 1982, ‘Intonation and the Assessment of Information’, Journal of Linguistics 18(2), 213–230.
Taglicht, J.: 1984, Message and Emphasis, Longman, London.
Terken, J. and J. Hirschberg: 1994, ‘Deaccentuation of Words Representing “Given” Information: Effects of Persistence of Grammatical Function and Surface Position’, Language and Speech 37(2), 125–145.
Truckenbrodt, H.: 1995, Phonological Phrases: Their Relation to Syntax, Focus and Prominence, PhD dissertation, MIT.
Truckenbrodt, H.: 1998, ‘Phrasal Stress’, ms., Rutgers University.
Vallduví, E. and E. Engdahl: 1996, ‘The Linguistic Realization of Information Packaging’, Linguistics 34, 459–516.
Deemter, K., van: 1994, ‘What's New? A Semantic Perspective on Sentence Accent’, Journal of Semantics 11 (1–2), 1–31.
Fintel, K., von: 1994, ‘Restrictions on Quantifier Domains’, PhD Dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
Williams, E.: 1980, ‘Remarks on Stress and Anaphora’,, Journal of Linguistic Research 1(3), 1–16.
Zucchi, A.: 1995, ‘The Ingredients of Definiteness and the Definiteness Effect’, Natural Language Semantics 3(1), 33–78.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Schwarzschild, R. GIVENNESS, AVOIDF AND OTHER CONSTRAINTS ON THE PLACEMENT OF ACCENT*. Natural Language Semantics 7, 141–177 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008370902407
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008370902407