1. Presupposition and assertion

Basics of Information Structure

1. Presupposition and assertion

Terminology:

Presupposition sometimes = Background, sometimes background defined differently; also: Old Information, Salient Information

Assertion – also (rarely) New Information, Salient Information
(1) After he decided to quit smoking, he’s been feeling much better.
(2) Kepler died in poverty.

Kepler didn’t die in poverty.

„That the name ‘Kepler’ refers to something is the presupposition both for the claim Kepler died in poverty and for its counterpart. entgegengesetzte.“

(Frege 1892:40)

(3) Mary stopped beating her husband.
(4) I don’t regret that I went to that party/going to that party.

2. Topic and focus

also:

Theme-Rheme, Topic-Comment vs. Background-Focus or Presupposition-Focus,

Link-Tail-Focus-Contrast

(5) (a) The roses are red.

(b) Roses are red.

(6) (a) Peter opened the door, went inside and saw that nobody was home.

(b) Peter opened the door.
(7) (a) Peter I saw yesterday.

(b) Yesterday I saw Peter.

3. Some formal features

TOPIC

(8) (a) It’s been ages since I’ve seen Felix.

Felix, it’s been ages since I’ve seen him. (Left Dislocation)
(b) Matilda can’t stand Felix.

As for Matilda, she can’t stand Felix. (as-for construction)
(c) Modern Greek Clitic Doubling (clitic left dislocation)

To Janni ton aghapume. = Jannis we LIKE (we don’t hate him)

the Jannis the we-like

To Janni aghapume. = We like Janni (we don’t like anyone else)

*To Janni ton aghapume

*To Janni aghapume
(d) I like to read books.

Reading books I like. (word order permutation - topicalisation)

FOCUS

(9) (a) This book we were looking for yesterday (‘Yiddish movement’)

It was this book that we were looking for yesterday. (cleft)

What we were looking for yesterday was this book. (pseudo-cleft)
(b) I played the piano.

I did play the piano.(do-support)
(c) Hungarian focus movement

Le-mentem a pincébe. = I went down to the cellar.

down-went:1sg the cellar:to

A pincébe mentem le. = It was the cellar that I went down to.

the cellar:to went:1sg down

(d) Ancient Greek Hyperbaton (discontinuous phrases)

Ep’ arotēras kai ou nomadas strateoumetha andras.

to ploughman and not wandering march :1pl people

It is not wandering people that we march against, but the ones who till soil.

4. Pragmatic und semantic effects

4.1. Topic

(10) Who killed this man?

His /Wife was not here. [i.e. I don’t know about the others, but she is not the murderer]

(11) Organisiert hat die Demos die KPD.

organised has the demonstrations the KPD „The demonstrations were organised by the KPD.“

4.2. Fokus

(12) (a) [Even Peter] read Chomsky’s latest book.

Peter read [even Chomsky’s latest book].

Peter [even read [Chomsky’s latest book]].

(b) I drank beer [only with Peter].

I drank [only beer] with Peter.

I [only [drank] beer with Peter].

(13) Peter didn’t lie to me. [(x lied to me)   (x=Peter)]

Peter didn’t lie to me. [(x = Peter)   (x lied to me)]
(14) [Warning in the London Tube]

(a) Dogs must be carried.

(b) Dogs must be carried.
(15) I saw John yesterday.

I saw John yesterday. = I did see John yesterday.
(16) It was the red hat that I bought (? and also the blue one.) [English]

Piros kalapot vettem (*és kéket is.) [Hungarian]

red hat bought:1sg and blue also
(17) *It was nobody that I saw yesterday.

5. Topic and focus systems

5.1. Morphological topic marking

Japanese: topical wa vs. ga and other case markers

(18)
(a) Mukashi mukashi aru tokoro ni ojiisan to obaasan to ga

‚once upon a time’ one place lc old-man and old-woman and subj

sundeorimashita.

lived

‘Once upon a time there lived an old man and an old woman.’

(b) Ojisan wa yama e shibakari ni dekakemashita.

old-man top mountain to firewood-collecting for went-out

‘The old man went to the mountain to collect firewood.’

(c) Obaasan wa ojiisan o okuridasu to,

old-woman top old-man obj send-off when

‘The old woman saw the old man off,’

(d) “Dore, dore, watashi wa kawa e sentaku ni ikimashoo“, to

well well I top river to washing for go-will quot

‘and (said): „Well, I’ll go to the river to get some washing done“’ (Maynard 1987: 59)

5.2. Morphological focus marking

Yukaghir (isolate, Siberia): focus case and focus agreement vs. unmarked clauses

(19)
(i)(a) Met mēmē iŋī.

I bear fear(tr:1sg)

‘I am afraid of the bear.’ (Maslova 2003: 89)

(b) Met-ek iŋī-l mēmē.

I-foc fear-subj_foc bear

‘It is me who is afraid of the bear, I am afraid of the bear (sc. not you)’

(c) Who will go to make new places on Middle Earth?

Met-ek qon-te-l

Ich-foc geh-fut-subj_foc

‚I will go (It’s me that’ll go).’ (Maslova 2003: 460)
(ii)(a) Met tet-ul kudede-t.

I you-acc kill-fut(tr:1sg)

‚I will kill you’ (Maslova 2003: 95)

(b) Met tet-ek kudede-t-me.

I you-foc kill-fut-obj_foc:1sg

‚I will kill you (sc. not him)’

(c) Kenme, met mure kej-k – met tet-in jienbed-ek kej-te-me.

friend my shoe give-imp I you-dat other-fok give-fut-obj_fok:1sg

‚Friend, give me my schoe! – I will give you another one!’ (Maslova 2003: 466)

6. Some difficulties

6.1. The cognitive basis of topic, focus, presupposition and assertion

• 
  Given vs. New Information
  
• 
  ‚Salient meanings’
  
• 
  Semantic Presupposition/Assertion vs. pragmatic Presupposition/Assertion
  
• 
  Alternative Semantics, Assertion, Structured Meanings, Attention
  

6.2. The Scope of Topic and Focus

• 
  Topic vs. Focus
  
• 
  Topic + Comment vs. Presupposition/Background + Focus
  
• 
  Is information structure recursive?
  

6.3. Topic, Focus and Sentence Meaning

Can different ISs trigger different sentence meanings?

(20) (a) In India, English is spoken.

(b) English is spoken in India.  (?)

(21) (a) Beavers build dams.

(b) Dams are built by beavers.  (?)

(Chomsky 1975, 97: “Sentence (21), in its most natural interpretation, states that it is a property of dams that they are built by beavers. Under this interpretation, the sentence is false, since some dams are not built by beavers”.)
Quantifiers and Topic-Focus-Articulation:

(22) I read a book yesterday.

1. 
   I read only a book yesterday.
   
2. 
   I read a book only yesterday.
   
3. 
   Only I read a book yesterday.
   

But:

4. 
   ?? I read a book only yesterday.
   
5. 
   ?? Only I read a book yesterday.
   

6.4. Crosslinguistic comparability

Do all the different constructions in different languages which are labelled ‘topic’ and ‘focus’ denote the same thing?
(23) A: Where did you go on holiday?

B: (a) I went to Italy. [Englisch]

(b) ? It was Italy I went to.

(c) ?? It was me who went to Italy



B: (a) ? Jártam Olaszországban.

went:1sg Italy:iness

(b) Olaszországban jártam. [Ungarisch]

Italy:iness went:1sg

(c) ?? Én jártam Olaszországban.

I went:1sg Italy:iness
Literature:

Frege, Gottlob. 1892. “Über Sinn und Bedeutung”. Zeitschrift für Philosophie und philosophische Kritik 100: 25-50 (= G. F. 1967. Kleine Schriften, hrsg. von Ignacio Angelelli, 143-162, Darmstadt: WBG)

Grabski, Michael. 2000. “Satztopik und Diskurstopik in Elaboration-Kontexten.” ZAS Papers in Linguistics 20: 173-207.

Jacobs, Joachim. 2001. “The dimensions of topic-comment.” Linguistics 39: 641-681.

Maslova, Elena. 2003. A Grammar of Kolyma Yukaghir. Berlin etc.: Mouton de Gruyter.

Maynard, Senko K. 1987. “Thematization as a staging device in the Japanese narrative”. In: J. Hinds et al. (eds.), Perspectives on Topicalization: The Case of Japanese wa, 57-82. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Reinhart, Tanya. 1982. Pragmatics and Linguistics : An Analysis of Sentence Topics. Bloomington, Indiana: IULC.

Russell, Bertrand. 1905 “On denoting”. Mind, 14: 479-493.

Strawson, Peter F. 1964. “Identifying reference and truth-values”. Theoria, 30 (= P.F.S., Logico-Linguistic Papers, 75-95, London: Methuen)