Abstract
The paper discusses the tenets of the complex interaction between syntax, prosody and information structure in German. A prominence-based approach to the interface is proposed in an account that crucially extends the object of syntax from the sentence level to the discourse level. The latter move allows to reconcile formal approaches and functional approaches to grammar and solves an old problem posed by the parallel impact of information structural categories on the phonological and semantic interpretation of the clause in generative grammar.
Highlights
In intonational languages, like English, Italian and German, information structural categories ( information structure (IS)-categories), like topic and focus, are very often signalled exclusively by prosodic means, that is by specific tones, metrical prominence or differences in phonological phrasing
The reader here is referred to the vast empirical studies of Cresti (2012), Cresti and Moneglia (2010), Moneglia and Raso (2014). These phenomena seem to imply a direct interaction between phonological form (PF), where prosody is taken to be dealt with, and logical form (LF), where the impact of information structure on meaning is taken to be dealt with
A direct interaction between PF and LF is excluded, leading to the importation of interface features into the syntax, which are interpreted in both interfaces
Summary
Like English, Italian and German, information structural categories ( IS-categories), like topic and focus, are very often signalled exclusively by prosodic means, that is by specific tones, metrical prominence or differences in phonological phrasing. His proposal has changed categorically the generative approach to language, shifting the focus from pure sentence grammar to text grammar and has the potential to reconcile generative grammar with functional approaches of the type represented by Cresti and Moneglia This move is complete if Rizzi’s proposal is combined with work from Krifka (2014: 134) who argues for the syntactic representation of speech acts. He argues that Rizzi’s ForceP hosts different speech act operators, like ASS for assertion, Q for question and so on, with the IP constituting the proposition, the former object of sentence grammar, as is illustrated in (3).
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
