A theory of second occurrence focus

This paper proposes to analyse second occurrence foci as foci whose domain is properly contained in the background of another focus domain, and linearly follows the last focus of that domain. It is shown that general assumptions about the representation and prosodic realisation of focus predict that foci with these properties will be realised by stress, but not pitch accent, i.e. as second occurrence foci. Furthermore, whether a focus domain is subordinated in this sense follows from general principles of focus assignment and interpretation. No assumptions specific to second occurrence foci are required to explain the phenomenon. The analysis relies on, and thus indirectly supports, the assumptions that focus/background, rather than new/given are the relevant concepts in stress and accent assignment, and that focus realisation is mediated by prosodic, particularly metrical, structure.

[1]  R. Schwarzschild.  Why Some Foci Must Associate 1 , 1997 .

[2]  Daniel Büring,et al.  Semantics, Intonation and Information Structure , 2007 .

[3]  T. Jaeger.  Only always associates audibly . Even if only is repeated The prosodic properties of second occurrence focus in English , 2022 .

[4]  Daniel Büring,et al.  Towards a Typology of Focus Realization , 2008 .

[5]  Eva Hajičová,et al.  Presupposition and allegation revisited , 1984 .

[6]  Maribel Romero,et al.  Disjunction, Focus, and Scope , 2004, Linguistic Inquiry.

[7]  Elisabeth Selkirk,et al.  The Interaction of Constraints on Prosodic Phrasing , 2000 .

[8]  Daniel Büring,et al.  What’s New (and What’s Given) in the Theory of Focus? , 2008 .

[9]  David I. Beaver,et al.  Always and Only: Why Not All Focus-Sensitive Operators Are Alike , 2003 .

[10]  Jason Merchant,et al.  Fragments and ellipsis , 2005 .

[11]  Mats Rooth,et al.  Second Occurrence Focus and Relativized Stress F , 2009 .

[12]  Randolph Quirk,et al.  Message and emphasis : on focus and scope in English , 1984 .

[13]  R. Sandt,et al.  Focus: Linguistic, Cognitive, and Computational Perspectives , 1999 .

[14]  David Odden.  Kimatuumbi phrasal phonology , 1987 .

[15]  Mats Rooth.  On the Interface Principles for Intonational Focus , 1996 .

[16]  Hubert Truckenbrodt,et al.  Phonological phrases : their relation to syntax, focus, and prominence , 1995 .

[17]  B. Partee.  Topic, Focus and Quantification , 1991 .

[18]  J. Pierrehumbert,et al.  Intonational structure in Japanese and English , 1986, Phonology.

[19]  Craige Roberts.  Information structure in discourse: Towards an integrated for-mal theory of pragmatics , 1996 .

[20]  Hubert Truckenbrodt,et al.  On the Relation between Syntactic Phrases and Phonological Phrases , 1999, Linguistic Inquiry.

[21]  David I. Beaver,et al.  When Semantics Meets Phonetics: Acoustical Studies of Second-Occurrence Focus , 2007 .

[22]  Stefan Baumann,et al.  Expressions of second occurrence focus in German , 2010 .

[23]  Barbara H. Partee,et al.  Context-Dependence in the Analysis of Linguistic Meaning , 2002 .

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

[25]  Joachim Jacobs,et al.  Focus Ambiguities , 1991, J. Semant..

[26]  C. Féry,et al.  The phonology of Second Occurrence Focus1 , 2009, Journal of Linguistics.

[27]  E. Williams.  Blocking and anaphora , 1997 .

[28]  P. Sgall,et al.  Topic-focus articulation, tripartite structures, and semantic content , 1998 .

[29]  Angelika Kratzer,et al.  The Representation of Focus , 1991 .

[30]  Manfred Krifka,et al.  Semantic and Pragmatic Conditions for the Dative Alternation , 2004 .

[31]  Roger Schwarzschild,et al.  GIVENNESS, AVOIDF AND OTHER CONSTRAINTS ON THE PLACEMENT OF ACCENT* , 1999 .

[32]  Dag E. Wold.  Long Distance Selective Binding: The Case of Focus , 1996 .

[33]  C. Gussenhoven,et al.  On the Grammar and Semantics of Sentence Accents in Dutch , 1982 .