On links and tails in Italian

Abstract Adopting Vallduvi’s partition of the background into link and tail , I provide an account for Italian data. Being links pre-focal expressions, and tails post-focal, right dislocated expressions, I claim that links are shifting topics, while tails are discourse-given material. I show that a link is not iterated in discourse as long as the topic does not shift. If a link appears to refer to the current topic, topic shift is still visible in the interpretive effects that arise. In particular, topic shift explains why a link is sometimes contrastive. A link implies an alternative set, because a shifting topic is always sorted among alternatives. Contrast derives from the possibility to evoke alternatives and from the contextual conditions that make alternatives relevant. Since a tail never evokes alternatives, trivially there is no context where it can be contrastive. I compare Italian and other languages and observe the reduced role of intonation in the linguistic marking of Italian links. I further show that the properties of tails are shared by all post-focal material, also material not commonly analyzed as right dislocated. Independent support is given by recent syntactic accounts of post-focal background, which treat it precisely as right dislocated material.

[1]  Marilyn A. Walker,et al.  Japanese Discourse and the Process of Centering , 1994, Comput. Linguistics.

[2]  Mara Frascarelli,et al.  The Syntax-Phonology Interface in Focus and Topic Constructions in Italian , 2000 .

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

[4]  Valéria Molnár,et al.  Contrast from a Contrastive Perspective , 2001 .

[5]  A. Cardinaletti.  Subjects and clause structure , 1996 .

[6]  Sven Strömqvist,et al.  Relating events in narrative. vol. 2, typological and contextual perspectives , 2004 .

[7]  A. Cardinaletti.  Against optional and null clitics. Right dislocation vs. marginalization , 2002 .

[8]  P. Strawson.  Identifying reference and truth‐values , 2008 .

[9]  Ray Jackendoff,et al.  Semantic Interpretation in Generative Grammar , 1972 .

[10]  M. Walker,et al.  Centering Theory in Discourse , 1998 .

[11]  Elisabeth Delais-Roussarie,et al.  The Prosody of post-focus sequences in French , 2004 .

[12]  C. Reiss,et al.  The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Interfaces , 2007 .

[13]  C. Cecchetto.  A comparative analysis of left and right dislocation in Romance , 1999 .

[14]  G. Cinque.  A null theory of phrase and compound stress , 1993 .

[15]  Knud Lambrecht,et al.  Information structure and sentence form , 1994 .

[16]  H. D. Koot,et al.  Dutch scrambling and the nature of discourse templates , 2008 .

[17]  Elizabeth M. McNally,et al.  On the linguistic encoding of information packaging instructions , 1998 .

[18]  Liliane Haegeman,et al.  Elements of Grammar: Handbook In Generative Syntax , 1998 .

[19]  E. D. Roberto,et al.  La frase semplice , 2010 .

[20]  Scott Weinstein,et al.  Centering: A Framework for Modeling the Local Coherence of Discourse , 1995, CL.

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

[22]  G. Ward,et al.  On the topicalization of indefinite NPs , 1991 .

[23]  Jean-Marie Marandin,et al.  Discourse Marking in French: C-accents and Discourse Moves , 2002 .

[24]  L. Brunetti.  Italian background: links, tails, and contrast effects , 2006 .

[25]  Luigi Rizzi,et al.  On some properties of subjects and topics , 2005 .

[26]  L. Brunetti.  On the semantic and contextual factors that determine topic selection in Italian and Spanish , 2009 .

[27]  Cecilia Poletto,et al.  The Higher Functional Field: Evidence from Northern Italian Dialects , 2000 .

[28]  Charles N. Li,et al.  Subject and topic , 1979 .

[29]  S. Thompson,et al.  Discourse description : diverse linguistic analyses of a fund-raising text , 1992 .

[30]  G. Salvi,et al.  Current Studies in Italian Syntax , 2001 .

[31]  Cornelia Endriss.  Quantificational Topics: A Scopal Treatment of Exceptional Wide Scope Phenomena , 2010 .

[32]  Barbara Di Eugenio,et al.  Centering theory and the Italian pronominal system , 1990, COLING.

[33]  Vieri Samek-Lodovici,et al.  When right dislocation meets the left-periphery.: A unified analysis of Italian non-final focus , 2006 .

[34]  Lisa Brunetti,et al.  A Unification of Focus , 2004 .

[35]  Richard S. Kayne.  The Antisymmetry of Syntax , 1994 .

[36]  Cathrine Fabricius-Hansen,et al.  Information Structure in a Cross-linguistic Perspective , 2002 .

[37]  Dan Wedgwood,et al.  Identifying inferences in focus , 2007 .

[38]  R. Geluykens.  From Discourse Process to Grammatical Construction: On Left-Dislocation in English , 1992 .

[39]  Enric Vallduví,et al.  The Informational Component , 1990 .

[40]  Donna Jo Napoli,et al.  Review Of "Linguistic Perspectives On The Romance Languages" Edited By W. J. Ashby, M. Mithun, G. Perissinotto, And E. Raposo , 1994 .

[41]  Mara Frascarelli,et al.  "Dislocation, Clitic Resumption and Minimality: A comparative analysis of left and right Topic constructions in Italian." , 2004 .

[42]  M. Frascarelli,et al.  Types of topics in German and Italian , 2007 .

[43]  Vieri Samek-Lodovici,et al.  Constraints on subjects : an optimality theoretic analysis , 1996 .

[44]  Mariapaola D’Imperio.  Italian intonation: An overview and some questions , 2002 .

[45]  Massimo Moneglia,et al.  C-ORAL-ROM: Integrated Reference Corpora for Spoken Romance Languages , 2005 .

[46]  L. Rizzi.  The Fine Structure of the Left Periphery , 1997 .

[47]  J. Pierrehumbert.  The phonology and phonetics of English intonation , 1987 .

[48]  Liliane Haegeman,et al.  The new comparative syntax , 2000 .

[49]  Daniel Büring,et al.  On D-Trees, Beans, And B-Accents , 2003 .

[50]  Ken Turner,et al.  The semantics/pragmatics interface from different points of view , 1999 .

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

[52]  Vieri Samek-Lodovici.  Constraints on Subjects , 1996 .

[53]  Karlos Arregi,et al.  Clitic Left Dislocation is Contrastive Topicalization , 2003 .

[54]  Enric Vallduví,et al.  Catalan as VOS: evidence from information packaging , 1993 .

[55]  Christoph Schwarze,et al.  Meaning, Use, and Interpretation of Language , 1983 .

[56]  L. Renzi,et al.  Grande grammatica italiana di consultazione , 2001 .

[57]  Caroline Féry,et al.  Contrastive Topics in Pairing Answers : a Cross-Linguistic Production Study , 2007 .

[58]  Laura A. Michaelis,et al.  Sentence Accent in Information Questions: Default and Projection , 1998 .

[59]  Barbara Di Eugenio,et al.  Centering in Italian , 1996, ArXiv.

[60]  Noam Chomsky,et al.  The Minimalist Program , 1992 .

[61]  Irene Heim,et al.  File Change Semantics and the Familiarity Theory of Definiteness , 2008 .

[62]  J. Vizmuller-Zocco,et al.  Lessico di frequenza dell'italiano parlato , 1994 .

[63]  T. Reinhart.  Pragmatics and Linguistics: an analysis of Sentence Topics , 1981, Philosophica.

[64]  E. Prince.  The ZPG Letter: Subjects, Definiteness, and Information-status , 1992 .

[65]  E. Anagnostopoulou,et al.  Parametrizing Agr: Word Order, V-Movement and Epp-Checking , 1998 .

[66]  P. Sleeman,et al.  Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2017 , 2021, Current Issues in Linguistic Theory.

[67]  Daniel Büring,et al.  The Meaning of Topic and Focus: The 59th Street Bridge Accent , 1997 .

[68]  Lisa Brunetti,et al.  Discourse functions of fronted foci in Italian and Spanish , 2009 .

[69]  K. Kiss.  Identificational focus versus information focus , 1998 .

[70]  Margarita Suñer,et al.  The lexical preverbal subject in a Romance Null Subject Language , 2003 .

[71]  Luigi Rizzi,et al.  The Cartography of Syntactic Structures , 2009 .

[72]  Christopher Tancredi.  Deletion, deaccenting and presupposition , 1992 .

[73]  Katalin É. Kiss,et al.  Discourse configurational languages , 1995 .