“…As for European Portuguese, a recent study shows that contrastive FF is not categorically rejected by all speakers, and that a degree of variation must be acknowledged between a group of speakers that accept it (44) and a group of speakers that judge it ungrammatical or marginal . In contrast, contrastive FF seems to be generally available in Brazilian Portuguese (Mioto 2003, Kato and Ribeiro 2009, Kato and Martins 2016.…”
Section: Focus Fronting (Ff)mentioning
confidence: 80%
“…a direct or indirect object) is dislocated, so that the focus constituent is adjacent to the verb. This requirement, however, is subject to variation across Romance: it is stronger in Catalan and in Italian, 7 but is weaker or even absent in Spanish, in European (but not Brazilian) Portuguese, and in Romanian, where the order VOS, with narrow focus on the subject, is possible even if the object is part of the presupposition together with the verb (Belletti and Shlonsky 1995, Belletti 2001, Costa 2004, López 2009, Leonetti 2010, Sheehan 2010, Kato and Martins 2016 A venit acasă mama. has come home mother-the 'Mum came home.'…”
Focus is key to understanding processes of syntactic and prosodic readjustments in the Romance languages. Since, prosodically, it must be the most prominent constituent in the sentence, focus associates with the nuclear pitch accent, which may be shifted from its default rightmost position when the syntactic position of the focus also changes. The application of specific syntactic operations depends both on the size and on the subtype of focus, although not always unambiguously. Subject inversion characterizes focus structures where the domain of focus covers either the whole sentence (broad-focus) or a single constituent (narrow-focus). Presentational constructions distinctively mark broad focus, avoiding potential ambiguity with an SVO structure where the predicate is the focus and the subject is interpreted as topic. In narrow-focus structures, the focus constituent typically occurs sentence-final (postverbal focalization), but it may also be fronted (focus fronting), depending on the specific interpretation associated with the focus.
Semantically, focus indicates the presence of alternatives, and the different interpretations arise from the way the set of alternatives is pragmatically exploited, giving rise to a contextually open set (information focus), to contrast or correction (contrastive or corrective focus), or to surprise or unexpectedness (mirative focus). Whether a subtype of focus may undergo fronting in a Romance language is subject to variation. In most varieties it is indeed possible with contrastive or corrective focus, but it has been shown that focus fronting is also acceptable with noncontrastive focus in several languages, especially with mirative focus.
Finally, certain focus-sensitive operators or particles directly interact with the narrow-focus constituent of the sentence and their association with focus has semantic effects on the interpretation of the sentence.
“…As for European Portuguese, a recent study shows that contrastive FF is not categorically rejected by all speakers, and that a degree of variation must be acknowledged between a group of speakers that accept it (44) and a group of speakers that judge it ungrammatical or marginal . In contrast, contrastive FF seems to be generally available in Brazilian Portuguese (Mioto 2003, Kato and Ribeiro 2009, Kato and Martins 2016.…”
Section: Focus Fronting (Ff)mentioning
confidence: 80%
“…a direct or indirect object) is dislocated, so that the focus constituent is adjacent to the verb. This requirement, however, is subject to variation across Romance: it is stronger in Catalan and in Italian, 7 but is weaker or even absent in Spanish, in European (but not Brazilian) Portuguese, and in Romanian, where the order VOS, with narrow focus on the subject, is possible even if the object is part of the presupposition together with the verb (Belletti and Shlonsky 1995, Belletti 2001, Costa 2004, López 2009, Leonetti 2010, Sheehan 2010, Kato and Martins 2016 A venit acasă mama. has come home mother-the 'Mum came home.'…”
Focus is key to understanding processes of syntactic and prosodic readjustments in the Romance languages. Since, prosodically, it must be the most prominent constituent in the sentence, focus associates with the nuclear pitch accent, which may be shifted from its default rightmost position when the syntactic position of the focus also changes. The application of specific syntactic operations depends both on the size and on the subtype of focus, although not always unambiguously. Subject inversion characterizes focus structures where the domain of focus covers either the whole sentence (broad-focus) or a single constituent (narrow-focus). Presentational constructions distinctively mark broad focus, avoiding potential ambiguity with an SVO structure where the predicate is the focus and the subject is interpreted as topic. In narrow-focus structures, the focus constituent typically occurs sentence-final (postverbal focalization), but it may also be fronted (focus fronting), depending on the specific interpretation associated with the focus.
Semantically, focus indicates the presence of alternatives, and the different interpretations arise from the way the set of alternatives is pragmatically exploited, giving rise to a contextually open set (information focus), to contrast or correction (contrastive or corrective focus), or to surprise or unexpectedness (mirative focus). Whether a subtype of focus may undergo fronting in a Romance language is subject to variation. In most varieties it is indeed possible with contrastive or corrective focus, but it has been shown that focus fronting is also acceptable with noncontrastive focus in several languages, especially with mirative focus.
Finally, certain focus-sensitive operators or particles directly interact with the narrow-focus constituent of the sentence and their association with focus has semantic effects on the interpretation of the sentence.
“…EXPL vomitou um rapaz ao lado da nossa mesa o que sabes sobre três raparigas EXPL chegou três raparigas (adaptado de Belletti & Bianchi, 2016: fn45) Ao contrário do que acontece em inglês e francês, em PE, não existe inversão com expletivo expresso (9), porque esta língua tem um valor positivo para o parâmetro de sujeito nulo. Em PE, os juízos téticos são tipicamente expressos através da ordem VS(XP) (Kato & Martins, 2016;Lobo & Martins, 2017;Martins & Costa, 2016), que, segundo análises de Costa (2004) e Sheehan (2007), envolve um expletivo nulo. A ordem VS(XP) é permitida com todo o tipo de verbos intransitivos, incluindo inacusativos de mudança de estado (10a) e inergativos não redundantes (10b).…”
Section: Inversão Com Sujeito Expletivo Em Inglês Francês E Peunclassified
This study investigates the acquisition of there-constructions (with verbs other than be) in L2 English by native speakers of European Portuguese (EP) and French. Its main purpose is to test two opposing hypotheses on the end-state of L2 acquisition at the interfaces: the Interface Hypothesis (IH) and the L1+input Hypothesis (LIH). The former proposes that internal interfaces are, generally, unproblematic at the end-state of L2 acquisition, whereas external interfaces, like the syntax-discourse interface, are areas of permanent optionality due to processing inefficiencies associated with bilingualism. The latter, in contrast, advocates that structures at external interfaces generate problems at a near-native level iff their properties are different in the L1 and the L2 and they are infrequent in the input. By administering 2 untimed drag and drop tasks, 3 speeded acceptability judgement tasks and 1 syntactic priming task to a total of 80 participants, we tested the types of overt expletives, the types of intransitive verbs and the types of discourse contexts compatible with thereconstructions in advanced and near-native English. The results confirm the IH, but suggest that the LIH is not completely wrong.
“…?Il a vomi un garçon à côté de notre o que sabes sobre três raparigas EXPL chegou três raparigas (adaptado de Belletti & Bianchi, 2016: fn45) Ao contrário do que acontece em inglês e francês, em PE, não existe inversão com expletivo expresso (9), porque esta língua tem um valor positivo para o parâmetro de sujeito nulo. Em PE, os juízos téticos são tipicamente expressos através da ordem VS(XP) (Kato & Martins, 2016;Lobo & Martins, 2017;Martins & Costa, 2016), que, segundo análises de Costa (2004) e Sheehan (2007), envolve um expletivo nulo. A ordem VS(XP) é permitida com todo o tipo de verbos intransitivos, incluindo inacusativos de mudança de estado (10a) e inergativos não redundantes (10b).…”
Section: Inversão Com Sujeito Expletivo Em Inglês Francês E Peunclassified
This study investigates the acquisition of there-constructions (with verbs other than be) in L2 English by native speakers of European Portuguese (EP) and French. Its main purpose is to test two opposing hypotheses on the end-state of L2 acquisition at the interfaces: the Interface Hypothesis (IH) and the L1+input Hypothesis (LIH). The former proposes that internal interfaces are, generally, unproblematic at the end-state of L2 acquisition, whereas external interfaces, like the syntax-discourse interface, are areas of permanent optionality due to processing inefficiencies associated with bilingualism. The latter, in contrast, advocates that structures at external interfaces generate problems at a near-native level iff their properties are different in the L1 and the L2 and they are infrequent in the input. By administering 2 untimed drag and drop tasks, 3 speeded acceptability judgement tasks and 1 syntactic priming task to a total of 80 participants, we tested the types of overt expletives, the types of intransitive verbs and the types of discourse contexts compatible with thereconstructions in advanced and near-native English. The results confirm the IH, but suggest that the LIH is not completely wrong.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.