The Information-Structural Status of Adjuncts: A Question-under-Discussion-Based Approach

L. Brunetti, K. Kuthy, Arndt Riester
{"title":"The Information-Structural Status of Adjuncts: A Question-under-Discussion-Based Approach","authors":"L. Brunetti, K. Kuthy, Arndt Riester","doi":"10.4000/discours.11454","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this paper we present an analysis of the information structural properties of different types of verb and sentence modifying adjuncts under a QUD (question under discussion) approach. Our study is based on naturalistic data from English, French and German containing adjuncts such as temporal, spatial, or manner prepositional phrases, as well as different types of adverbial clauses. The analysis relies on the approach by Riester et al. (2018), which identifies the (generally implicit, sometimes overt) QUD preceding each utterance of a text by means of pragmatic principles, and derives from it the information structure of the utterance. The analysis of adjuncts within this approach shows that in certain contexts, despite conveying new information, adjuncts do not answer the QUD that is answered by the sentence they syntactically depend on. We argue that these adjuncts answer a different QUD and behave as independent discourse units. As such, they have an information structure of their own and are in a rhetorical relation with their host clause. Our analysis sheds light on the similarities between adjuncts and Potts’ (2005) supplements. Both can be accounted for as independent discourse units; however, while supplements display projective behavior, adjuncts do not. Following Venhuizen et al. (2014), we ascribe this difference to their different semantic anchor (nominal vs. verbal). Our work therefore highlights a different way for an expression to be independent at a discourse level, other than being projective content.","PeriodicalId":51977,"journal":{"name":"Discours-Revue de Linguistique Psycholinguistique et Informatique","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Discours-Revue de Linguistique Psycholinguistique et Informatique","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4000/discours.11454","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this paper we present an analysis of the information structural properties of different types of verb and sentence modifying adjuncts under a QUD (question under discussion) approach. Our study is based on naturalistic data from English, French and German containing adjuncts such as temporal, spatial, or manner prepositional phrases, as well as different types of adverbial clauses. The analysis relies on the approach by Riester et al. (2018), which identifies the (generally implicit, sometimes overt) QUD preceding each utterance of a text by means of pragmatic principles, and derives from it the information structure of the utterance. The analysis of adjuncts within this approach shows that in certain contexts, despite conveying new information, adjuncts do not answer the QUD that is answered by the sentence they syntactically depend on. We argue that these adjuncts answer a different QUD and behave as independent discourse units. As such, they have an information structure of their own and are in a rhetorical relation with their host clause. Our analysis sheds light on the similarities between adjuncts and Potts’ (2005) supplements. Both can be accounted for as independent discourse units; however, while supplements display projective behavior, adjuncts do not. Following Venhuizen et al. (2014), we ascribe this difference to their different semantic anchor (nominal vs. verbal). Our work therefore highlights a different way for an expression to be independent at a discourse level, other than being projective content.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
辅助语的信息结构地位:一个基于问题讨论的方法
在本文中,我们采用QUD(讨论中的问题)方法分析了不同类型的动词和句子修饰附加词的信息结构特性。我们的研究基于英语、法语和德语的自然数据,这些数据包含时间、空间或方式介词短语等附加词,以及不同类型的状语从句。该分析依赖于Riester等人的方法。(2018),它通过语用原则识别了文本每一句话语之前的(通常是隐含的,有时是显性的)QUD,并从中推导出话语的信息结构。对这种方法中的附属词的分析表明,在某些情况下,尽管传递了新的信息,但附属词不会回答他们语法上所依赖的句子所回答的QUD。我们认为,这些附属词回答的是不同的QUD,并且表现为独立的话语单元。因此,它们有自己的信息结构,并与宿主从句存在修辞关系。我们的分析揭示了副刊和Potts(2005)副刊之间的相似之处。两者都可以被看作是独立的话语单元;然而,当补语表现出投射行为时,辅语却没有。继Venhuizen等人。(2014),我们将这种差异归因于它们不同的语义锚(名义与言语)。因此,我们的工作强调了一种表达在话语层面独立的不同方式,而不是投射内容。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Référence multimodale dans les narrations d’enfants : les gestes servent-ils à clarifier les expressions référentielles ambiguës ? Subject Clitics and the Dynamics of Writing: A Perspective Based on Bursts « Be proud, and loud » : marqueurs de fierté dans les discours oraux de drag queens Ancrage spatial d’un nouveau référent dans le récit en français et en chinois : perspective informationnelle et organisation discursive Anaphoric Distance in Oral and Written Language: Experimental Evidence
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1