2015
DOI: 10.1146/annurev-linguist-030514-125134
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Variation in Information Structure with Special Reference to Africa

Abstract: Information structure has been one of the central topics of recent linguistic research. This review discusses a wide range of current approaches with particular reference to African languages, as these have been playing a crucial role in advancing our knowledge about the diversity of and recurring patterns in both meaning and form of information structural notions. We focus on cross-linguistic functional frameworks, the investigation of prosody, formal syntactic theories, and relevant effects of semantic inter… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 102 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…traditional abstract Case or what we have referred to as Vergnaud licensing) and search for an alternative nominal licensing system in these languages. Since information structure is known to play a pervasive role in the syntax of Bantu languages (Downing & Hyman 2015, Van der Wal 2015c, Güldemann, Zerbian & Zimmermann 2015), the alternative licensing system might be hypothesised to be based upon one or more categories in information structure. For example, argument indexing on the verb and movement to the preverbal position need not be related to subject licensing: The preverbal position in many Bantu languages has been argued to be restricted to topical/non-focal elements (see, among others, Bokamba 1976; Morimoto 2000; Sabel & Zeller 2006; Zerbian 2006, 2007; Van der Wal 2009; Yoneda 2011), and ‘subject’ agreement has been argued to be directly related to topicality (Morimoto 2006 for Kirundi), or indirectly via the requirement to agree with a higher, preverbal element (Baker 2003, 2008; Collins 2004; Carstens 2005; Diercks 2011).…”
Section: Summary Of Results and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…traditional abstract Case or what we have referred to as Vergnaud licensing) and search for an alternative nominal licensing system in these languages. Since information structure is known to play a pervasive role in the syntax of Bantu languages (Downing & Hyman 2015, Van der Wal 2015c, Güldemann, Zerbian & Zimmermann 2015), the alternative licensing system might be hypothesised to be based upon one or more categories in information structure. For example, argument indexing on the verb and movement to the preverbal position need not be related to subject licensing: The preverbal position in many Bantu languages has been argued to be restricted to topical/non-focal elements (see, among others, Bokamba 1976; Morimoto 2000; Sabel & Zeller 2006; Zerbian 2006, 2007; Van der Wal 2009; Yoneda 2011), and ‘subject’ agreement has been argued to be directly related to topicality (Morimoto 2006 for Kirundi), or indirectly via the requirement to agree with a higher, preverbal element (Baker 2003, 2008; Collins 2004; Carstens 2005; Diercks 2011).…”
Section: Summary Of Results and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In Vietnamese, the low-falling tone huyền is realized with a rise in pitch to mark narrow focus. Some African tonal languages also use prosodic cues to indicate new or contrastive information, whereas others show no sign of using intonation for information structure (for an overview, see Zerbian et al, 2010;Güldemann et al, 2015). Tonal languages that use intonation for structuring discourse do not all employ the same strategy.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In Vietnamese, the low-falling tone huyền is realized with a rise in pitch to mark narrow focus. Some African tonal languages also use prosodic cues to indicate new or contrastive information, whereas others show no sign of using intonation for information structure (for an overview, see Zerbian et al 2010;Güldemann et al 2015). Tonal languages that use intonation for structuring discourse do not all employ the same strategy.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%