Contrast and Information Structure: A Focus-Based Analysis of but

Abstract This article presents a novel analysis of the contrastive connector but based on the observation that (i) the contrast induced by but relates to the information structure of the conjuncts, and (ii) the use of but requires a denial with respect to an implicit question. It is shown that but combines additivity, as in and/also, and exclusion, as in only. This analysis provides a uniform basis to explain the apparently different uses of but, including semantic opposition, denial-of-expectation, and topic change. Moreover, it sheds new light on the concessive use of but.

[1]  Mark Steedman,et al.  Information Structure and the Syntax-Phonology Interface , 2000, Linguistic Inquiry.

[2]  Tilman N. Höhle.  Über Verum-Fokus im Deutschen , 1992 .

[3]  Ekkehard König,et al.  Concessive Relations as the Dual of Causal Relations , 1991 .

[4]  Gerhard Jäger,et al.  Topic‐Comment Structure and the Contrast Between Stage Level and Individual Level Predicates , 2001, J. Semant..

[5]  R. Posner,et al.  Semantics and Pragmatics of Sentence Connectives in Natural Language , 1980 .

[6]  Ewald Lang,et al.  The semantics of coordination , 1984 .

[7]  Maria Vilkuna,et al.  On Rheme and Kontrast , 1998 .

[8]  J. V. Kuppevelt.  Discourse structure, topicality and questioning , 1995, Journal of Linguistics.

[9]  Yoad Winter,et al.  Contrast and Implication in Natural Language , 1994, J. Semant..

[10]  Bonnie L. Webber,et al.  D-LTAG System: Discourse Parsing with a Lexicalized Tree-Adjoining Grammar , 2003, J. Log. Lang. Inf..

[11]  Kerstin Schwabe.  Coordinate Ellipsis and Information Structure , 2000 .

[12]  E. Engdahl,et al.  The linguistic realization of information packaging , 2013 .

[13]  Manfred Krifka,et al.  Focus and Presupposition in Dynamic Interpretation , 1993, J. Semant..

[14]  Mats Rooth.  A theory of focus interpretation , 1992, Natural Language Semantics.

[15]  Rob A. van der Sandt,et al.  Presupposition Projection as Anaphora Resolution , 1992, J. Semant..

[16]  K. Sæbø.  PRESUPPOSITION AND CONTRAST: GERMAN aber AS A TOPIC PARTICLE , 2003 .

[17]  Peter Gärdenfors.  The Role of Expectations in Reasoning , 1992, Logic at Work.

[18]  Michael Rochemont,et al.  Focus in Generative Grammar , 1986 .

[19]  Craige Roberts,et al.  Focus, the Flow of Information, and Universal Grammar , 1998 .

[20]  Talmy Givón,et al.  LOGIC VERSUS LANGUAGE: negation in language: pragmatics, function, ontology , 1979 .

[21]  A. Foolen,et al.  Polyfunctionality and the semantics of adversative conjunctions , 1991 .

[22]  Leo G. M. Noordman,et al.  Toward a taxonomy of coherence relations , 1992 .

[23]  Nicholas Asher,et al.  Reference to abstract objects in discourse , 1993, Studies in linguistics and philosophy.

[24]  Ewald Lang,et al.  Semantik der koordinativen Verknüpfung , 1977 .

[25]  William C. Mann,et al.  Rhetorical Structure Theory: Toward a functional theory of text organization , 1988 .

[26]  C. Umbach.  ANAPHORIC RESTRICTION OF ALTERNATIVE SETS : ON THE ROLE OF BRIDGING ANTECEDENTS , 2003 .

[27]  Manfred Stede,et al.  Ma(r)king concessions in English and German , 1995, ArXiv.

[28]  J. Ginzburg.  Interrogatives: questions, facts and dialogue , 1996 .