Chapter 1
Investigating information structure in lesser-known and endangered languages
An introduction
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.How can information structure be analysed based on corpora of spoken language?
- 3.Prosodic encoding of information structure categories
- 4.Syntactic encoding of information structure categories
- 5.Concluding remarks
-
Acknowledgements
-
References
References (47)
References
Aissen, Judith. 1992. Topic and focus in Mayan. Language 68(1): 43–80. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Aldridge, Edith. To appear. Predicate, subject, and cleft in Austronesian languages. In Proceedings of AFLA 17, Andrei Antonenko, Daniel Finer, Yu-an Lu, Ileana Paul & Maria Polinsky (eds). <[URL]>
Arvaniti, Amalia, Ladd, Robert D. & Mennen, Ineke. 2006. Tonal association and tonal alignment: Evidence from Greek polar questions and contrastive statements. Language and Speech 49: 421–450. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Baumann, Stefan & Grice, Martine. 2006. The intonation of accessibility. Journal of Pragmatics 38(10): 1636–1657. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Breen, Mara, Fedorenko, Evelina, Wagner, Michael & Gibson, Edward. 2010. Acoustic correlates of information structure. Language and Cognitive Processes 25(7): 1044–1098. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Büring, Daniel. 2009. Towards a typology of focus realization. In Information Structure: Theoretical, Typological, and Experimental Perspectives, Malte Zimmermann & Caroline Féry (eds), 177–205. Oxford: OUP. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Calhoun, Sasha. 2010. The centrality of metrical structure in signalling information structure: A probabilistic perspective. Language 86(1): 1–42. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Calhoun, Sasha. 2012. The theme/rheme distinction: Accent type or relative prominence? Journal of Phonetics 40: 329–349. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Chen, Yiya. 2008. The acoustic realization of vowels of Shanghai Chinese. Journal of Phonetics 36(4): 629–648. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Chen, Yiya. 2010. Post-focus F0 compression – Now you see it, now you don’t. Journal of Phonetics 38: 517–525. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Chen, Yiya & Gussenhoven, Carlos. 2008. Emphasis and tonal implementation in Standard Chinese. Journal of Phonetics 36: 724–746. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Clopper, Cynthia G. & Tonhauser, Judith. 2013. The prosody of focus in Paraguayan Guaraní. International Journal of American Linguistics 79(2): 219–251. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Comrie, Bernard. 1989. Language Universals and Linguistic Typology: Syntax and Morphology (2nd edition). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dahan, Delphine, Tanenhaus, Michael K. & Chambers, Craig G. 2002. Accent and reference resolution in spoken-language comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language 47: 292–314. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
D’Imperio, Mariapaola. 2001. Focus and tonal structure in Neapolitan Italian. Speech Communication 33: 339–356. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Féry, Caroline & Kügler, Frank. 2008. Pitch accent scaling on given, new and focused constituents in German. Journal of Phonetics 36: 680–703. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fowler, Carol A. & Housum, Jonathan. 1987. Talkers’ signaling of “new” and “old” words in speech and listeners’ perception and use of the distinction. Journal of Memory and Language 26: 489–504. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Frota, Sonia. 2000. Prosody and Focus in European Portuguese: Phonological Phrasing and Intonation. New York NY: Garland.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gundel, Jeanette K. 1988. Universals of topic-comment structure. In Studies in Syntactic Typology [Typological Studies in Language 17], Michael Hammond, Edith A. Moravcsik & Jessica Wirth (eds), 209–242. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gussenhoven, Carlos. 1983. A Semantic Analysis of the Nuclear Tones of English. Bloomington IN: Indiana University Linguistics Club.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hale, Ken. 1983. Warlpiri and the grammar of non-configurational languages. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 1(1): 5–47. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hartmann, Katharina & Zimmerman, Malte. 2009. Morphological focus marking in Gùrùntùm. Lingua 119(9): 1340–1365. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hartmann, Katharina & Veenstra, Tonjes. 2013. Introduction. In Cleft Structures [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 208], Katharina Hartmann & Tonjes Veenstra (eds), 1–32. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Heine, Bernd & Reh, Mechtild. 1984. Grammaticalization and Reanalysis in African Languages. Hamburg: Buske.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ito, Kiwako & Speer, Shari R. 2008. Anticipatory effects of intonation: Eye movements during instructed visual search. Journal of Memory and Language 58: 541–573. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Jun, Sun-Ah. 2005. Korean intonational phonology and prosodic transcription. In Prosodic Typology: The Phonology of Intonation and Phrasing, Sun-Ah Jun (ed.), 201–229. Oxford: OUP. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Jun, Sun-Ah & Fougeron, Cécile. 2000. A phonological model of French intonation. In Intonation: Analysis, Modeling and Technology, Antonis Botinis (ed.), 209–242. Dordrecht: Kluwer. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kahn, Jason M. & Arnold, Jennifer E. 2012. A processing-centered look at the contribution of givenness to durational reduction. Journal of Memory and Language 67: 311–325. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Katz, Jonah & Selkirk, Elizabeth. 2011. Contrastive focus vs. discourse-new. Evidence from phonetic prominence in English. Language 87(4): 771–816. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ladd, Robert D. 2008. Intonational Phonology. Cambridge: CUP. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lambrecht, Knud. 1994. Information Structure and Sentence Form: Topic, Focus and the Mental Representations of Discourse Referents. Cambridge: CUP. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Li, Charles N. & Thompson, Sandra A. 1976. Subject and topic: A new typology of languages. In Subject and Topic, Charles N. Li (ed.), 457–489. New York NY: Academic Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Matić, Dejan & Wedgwood, Daniel. 2013. The meanings of focus: The significance of an interpretation-based category in cross-linguistic analysis. Journal of Linguistics 49(1): 127–163. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Mithun, Marianne. 1992. Is basic word order universal? In Pragmatics of Word Order Flexibility [Typological Studies in Language 22], Doris L. Payne (ed.), 15–61. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pierrehumbert, Janet B. & Hirschberg, Julia. 1990. The meaning of intonational contours in the interpretation of discourse. In Intentions in Communication, Philip R. Cohen, Jerry Morgan, & Martha E. Pollack (eds), 271–311. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rialland, Annie & Robert, Stéphane. 2001. The intonational system of Wolof. Linguistics 39: 893–939. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Selkirk, Elisabeth O. 1984. Phonology and Syntax: The Relation Between Sound and Structure. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Selkirk, Elisabeth O. 1986. On derived domains in sentence phonology. Phonology 3: 371–405. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Silverstein, Michael. 1976. Hierarchy of features and ergativity. In Grammatical Categories in Australian Languages, Robert M. W. Dixon (ed.), 112–171. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Terken, Jacques & Noteboom, Sieb G. 1987. Opposite effects of accentuation and deaccentuation on verification latencies for Given and New information. Language and Cognitive Process 2: 145–163. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Van Valin Jr., Robert D. 2005. Exploring the Syntax-Semantics Interface. Cambridge: CUKP. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Venditti, Jennifer J., Maekawa, Kikuo & Beckman, Mary E. 2008. Prominence marking in the Japanese intonation system. In Handbook of Japanese Linguistics, Shigeru Miyagawa & Mamoru Saito (eds), 456–512. Oxford: OUP.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Verhoeven, Elisabeth & Skopeteas, Stavros. 2015. Licensing focus constructions in Yucatec Maya. International Journal of American Linguistics 81(1): 1–40. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Watson, Duane G., Tanenhaus, Michael K. & Gunlogson, Christine A. 2008. Interpreting pitch accents in online comprehension: H* vs. L H*. Cognitive Science 32: 1232–1244. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Welby, Pauline. 2003. Effects of pitch accent position, type, and status on focus projection. Language and Speech 46: 53–81. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Xu, Yi. 1999. Effects of tone and focus on the formation and alignment of F0 contours. Journal of Phonetics 27(1): 55–105. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
Simmul, Carl Eric
2024.
Information structure of converb constructions: Estonian -des, -mata and -maks constructions.
Folia Linguistica 58:1
► pp. 29 ff.
![DOI logo](//benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 june 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.