Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today (LA) Linguistik Aktuell!Linguistics Today (LA) provides a platform for original monograph studies into synchronic and diachronic linguistics. Studies in LA confront empirical and theoretical problems as these are currently discussed in syntax, semantics, morphology, phonology. and systematic pragmatics with the aim to establish robust empirical generalizations within a universalistic perspective.
General Editors
VVerneri\braharn
Elly van Gelderen
University ofVienna I
Arizona State University
Rijksuniversiteit Groningen
Advisory Editorial Board Josef Bayer University of Konstanz Cedric Boeckx ICRENUniversitat Autonoma de Barcelona
Christer Platzack University of Lund
Ian Roberts Cambridge University
Guglielmo Cinque
Lisa deMena Travis
University of Venice
McGill University
Liliane Haegeman
StenV!kner
University of Ghent
University of Aarhus
Hubert Haider
C. Jan- Wouter Zwart University of Groningen
University of Salzburg
Terje Lohndal University of Maryland
Volume 168 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan by Ingo Feldhausen
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan Ingo Feldhausen University of Hamburg
John Benjamins Publishing Company Amsterdam I Philadelphia
The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of Amerkan National Standard for Information Sciences - Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI z39.48-1984.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Feldhausen, Ingo. Sentential form and prosodic structure of Catalan I by Ingo Feldhau.sen. p. em. (Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, ISSN 0166-0829; v. 168) Includes bibliographical references and index.. Catalan language--Sentences.
1..
Catalan language--Syntax. 3· Catalan language--
Grammar. I. Title. PC3872.F45
2010 20100331.60
449:95--dC22 ISBN 978 90 272 55518
(Hb; alk. paper)
ISBN 978 90 272 8759 5 (Eb)
© 2010 -John Benjamins B.V. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form, by print, photoprint, microfilm, or any other means, without written permission from the publisher.
John Benjamins Publishing Co.· P.O. Box 36224 • 1020 ME Amsterdam -The Netherlands John Benjamins North America· P.O. Box 27519 ·Philadelphia PA 19118-0519 • usA
Table of contents
Acknowledgements
IX
Conventions for glosses and translations
XI
List of abbreviations
XIII
CHAPTER 1
Introduction Foundations and basic assumptions 3 1.1.1 Central Catalan 4 1.1.2 Clitic left- and clitic right-dislocations in Catalan 6 1.1.3 Information structure 8 1.1.4 Preverbal subjects are not dislocated 13 1.1.41 Preverbal subjects are in an A-position 14 1.1.42 All-new contexts 15 1.1.43 Islandhood 16 1.1.44 Subjects present for disambiguation 17 1.1.45 Non-referential QPs as preverbal subjects 18 1.1.46 Unambiguous wide scope 19 1.2 Outline of the empirical results and their theoretical analysis 21
1
1.1
CHAPTER 2
Fundamental aspects of Catalan intonation 2.1 Foundations of the theoretical model 27 2.1.1 The Autosegmental-Metrical (AM) model 28 2.1.2 The Tone and Break Indices transcription system (ToBI) 35 2.2 The Tone and Break Indices transcription system for Catalan 37 2.2.1 Pitch accents in Catalan 37 2.2.2 Suprasegmental prosodic levels in Catalan 40 2.3. Boundary cues in Catalan 43 2.3.1 Boundary cues in Romance languages 44 2.3.2 The continuation rise 45 2.3.3 The sustained pitch 50 2.3.4 Preboundary lengthening 51 2.3.5 Pauses 54 2.3.6 Complex boundary tones 55 2.3.7 Organization of boundary cues 56 2.4. Assumptions on phonological inventory of Catalan 58
27
vx
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan CHAPTER
3
Phrasing patterns in Catalan SVO structures 3.1 Background and experiment hypothesis 62 3.1.1 Detailed background of Catalan phrasing patterns 63 3.1.2 The hypotheses 65 3.2 General outline of the experiments 66 3·3 Experiments on simple and complex SVO phrasing 70 3.3.1 Specific experiment design 71 3.3.2 Results -boundary cues 74 3·3·3 Results - phrasing patterns 8o 3·3·3·1 The simple SVO experiment 8o 3·3·3·2 Discussion 84 3·3·3·3 The complex SVO experiment 85 3·3·3·4 Discussion 93 3·3·4 Conclusion 94 3·4 An analysis for SVO and embedded SVO phrasing 95 3.4.1 Optimality-theoretic constraints of the Syntax-Prosody interface 96 3.4.2 Accounting for simple SVO structures in Catalan 102 3.4.2.1 The relevant constraints 102 3.4.2.2 Motivation for the constraint hierarchy 104 3.4.2.3 Prieto's (2005) OT tables for SVO phrasing 107 3.4.2.4 Modifications of Prieto's approach to SVO phrasing 109 3·4·3· Accounting for complex SVO structures in Catalan 112 3·4·3·1 The relevant constraints and their rankings 113 3·4·3·1.1 Reconciling long objects and MAx-BIN-END- a tentative approach 117 3·4·3·2 Optionality in Optimality Theory 120 3·4·3·3 Stochastic Optimality Theory 121 3·4·3·4 Applying stochastic Optimality Theory to the phrasing of complex sentences 124 3·4·3·5 Conclusion 126 CHAPTER
61
4
Syntactic aspects of Catalan ditic left- and ditic right-dislocation 4.1 Syntactic aspects of clitic left-dislocations (CLLD) and clitic right-dislocations (CLRD) 127 4.1.1 Three syntactic approaches to CLLD and CLRD 127 41.2 CLLD and CLRD asymmetries 131
127
Table of contents vu Licensing of negative words 132 Binding 136 Obviation effects 140 4-1.2.3.1 A theoretical approach to the influence of CLLD on obviation 145 Conclusion 147 4.1.2.1 4.1.2.2 4.1.2.3
4-1.3
5 Prosodic phrasing of Catalan clitic left- and elitic right -dislocation 5.1 Background 150 5.2 The hypotheses 151 5·3 The experiment 156 5·4 Results 159 5·4·1 Results 160 5·4·2 Summary 169 5·4·3 Discussion 171 5·5 A theoretical approach to Catalan dislocation structures 174 5.5.1 Two further constraints: ALIGN-ToP,R and ALIGN-vP,R 174 5·5·2 The constraint hierarchy 177 5.6 Conclusion 182 CHAPTER
6 Left-dislocations and preverbal subjects 6.1 The hypotheses 183 6.2 The experiment 185 6.3 Results 187 6.4 Discussion and conclusion 191
149
CHAPTER
183
CHAPTER7
Conclusion and outlook
197
References
203
Appendices
217
Inde."
281
Acknowledgements
A great number of people supported and influenced this work. I am extremely grateful to all of them. Very special thanks are due to Caroline Fery and Pilar Prieto as well as to Shinichiro Ishihara and Xavier Villalba for their support throughout the years including constant availability for questions and detailed comments on the book in general or on specific sections. Special thanks to Ariadna Benet, Kerstin Blume, Mariapaola D'Imperio, Laura J. Downing, Gisbert Fanselow, Christoph Gabriel, Izarbe Garcia Sanchez, James German, Luis L6pez, Markus Meyer, and Hubert Truckenbrodt for different kinds of substantial support. I wish also to thank Llu'isa Astruc, Joanna Blasczcak, Paul Boersma, Eva Brehm-Jurish, Daniele Clement, Francesco Costantini, Susana Cortes, Jorg Dreyer, Martin Elsig, Mara Frascarelli, Marco Garda Garda, Joachim Jacobs, Stefimie Jannedy, Frank JanBen, Sam Hellmuth, Elena Kireva, Marije Michel, Nina Nanula, Daniela Lentge, Jiirgen Meisel, Cedric Patin, Gisa Rauh, Philip Rausch, Gemma Rigau, Esther Rinke, Paolo Roseano, Franziska Scholz, Elisabeth Selkirk. Barbara Stiebels, Maria del Mar Vanrell, Anna Vilanova, Ralf Vogel and Malte Zimmermann. I am indebted to my family and friends and to the participants of my experiments. Further, I would like to acknowledge the support of the German Research Foundation (DFG) through an important grant during the early stages of the research (GK 275: Okonomie und Komplexitiit in der Sprache). Finally, I am grateful to Jackie Adams for her assistance with editing and I owe special thanks to Werner Abraham, Elly van Gelderen, Patricia Leplae, and Kees Vaes at John Benjamins for their interest in my book and for the efficiency they brought to the collaboration.
Conventions for glosses and translations
The interlinear glosses used throughout this work are based on the Leipzig Glossing Rules (LGR), 1 a standard set of conventions proposed to the community of linguists. Hence, my glosses are left-aligned vertically, word by word, with the example. If segmental morphemes are separated in the examples, they are done so by hyphens('-'), both in the example and in the gloss. If clitic boundaries are marked, they are marked with an equals sign ('='), both in the object language and in the gloss. Grammatical morphemes are generally rendered by abbreviated grammatical category labels which are printed in small capitals ('CAPITALs'). A list of abbreviations is given at the end of this section. Instead of category labels a word from the meta-language can also be used ('lPL' or 'we'; 'ART' or 'the'). When a single object-language element is rendered by several meta-language elements (words or abbreviations), these are separated by periods(' ';e.g.: '2PL.PsT'). Person and number are not separated by a period ('lPL'). Deviations from the LGR: The LGR is not applied entirely in every example. I include a minimum of information along the lines proposed in L6pez (2009a: 20): Clitics (i.e. weak pronouns) in Catalan may appear in an invariant form (e.g. the adverbial pronouns en or hi) or they may inflect for cp-features (number, gender, and person). I include the minimum of information in order that a ditic can be easily identified with the associate: the Catalan clitic for the masculine, plural direct object, els, is glossed only as 'cL.Acc: so the reader sees it is associated with the accusative argument. Additionally, clitics and their associates are co-indexed in the original example. This becomes important in cases where the dislocated element is not marked with Case (i.e. where they are merely glossed by 'cL'). Verbal morphology may inflect for tense, person, number, aspect, and mood. However, if a verb is infinite, it is glossed by '.INF: otherwise it is finite (Subjunctive is glossed by SBJ; aspect is not of relevance here). Ifl do not indicate tense on a finite verb, it should be understood to be present. Likewise, if person and number are not indicated on the finite verb, it should be understood to be third singular (3sG). Determiners, for example, are not glossed for grammatical morphemes. The indefinite, plural article for masculine nouns uns is rendered by the word form 'a' of the meta-language English.
1.
http ://www.eva.mpg.de/lingua/pdf/LGR04.09.21.pdf
xn Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
The English translations are nearly always in a neutral word order. As a native speaker of German, I do not try to reproduce the information structure of the original example (mostly Catalan) in the English translation. In general it is difficult to translate the information structure. For example is the Romance CLLD identical to that of an English topicalization (as proposed in Rochemont 1989: 154ff.); or is CLRD better translated into an 'as for'- construction (e.g. Frascarelli 2000: 160: ex.206b) or into a cleft-construction (e.g. Cecchetto 1999: 58: ex.40)?! I find the translation into neutral word order is a prudent approach, and is the least misleading choice. With respect to quoted references and page numbers (as previous in the preceding paragraph), they should be understood as follows: Prieto etal (2009: 288&301) Frascarelli (2000: 160: ex.206b) Astruc (2005: 154: Table 4.3)
=>Page 288 and page 301 of Prieto et al. (2009) => Example 206b on page 160 of Frascarelli (2000) =>Table 4.3 on page 154 of Astruc (2005)
List of abbreviations 1 2
first person second person 3 third person ACC accusative AL-CP,L ALIGN-CP,L (OT constraint) AL-XP,R ALIGN-XP,R (OT constraint) BP Brazilian Portuguese CAT Catalan CL clitic clitic left-dislocation CLLD CLRD clitic right-dislocation COND conditional COMP complementizer DAT dative EP European Portuguese F feminine FOC focus FUT future GLA Gradual Learning Algorithm intonational phrase IND indicative INF infinitive IntP intonational phrase intermediate phrase ip ITAL Italian LOC locative
M MBE M-N-P NEG NOM NSR OT PL PRF PrP PRS PST PTCP REFL SBJ SG Se Sm SP
svo ToBI TOP
cp w
masculine MAx-BIN-END (OT constraint) MIN-N-PHRASES (OT constraint) negation, negative nominative Nuclear Stress Rule Optimality Theory plural perfect prosodic phrase present past participle reflexive subjunctive singular Subject (of the embedded clause) Subject (of the matrix clause) Spanish Subject, Verb, Object Tone and Break Indices topic phonological phrase prosodic word
CHAPTER 1
Introduction
The present work deals with the intonational phrasing of preverbal subjects. object clauses and clitic left- and right-dislocations in the Catalan language and thus deals with complex syntactic structures. Since the late 1970s the intonational grouping of sentences as a topic of linguistic research has received more and more attention, in the scope ofthe prosodic hierarchy. Although the research often deals with relative clauses and parentheticals in regular intervals, the literature concentrates mostly on simple clauses. The studies of the last decade that are especially concerned with the placement of intonational boundaries in Romance languages have often not inquired into complex structures. For this reason the present study is devoted to embedded object clauses, a special type of complex sentence. The intonational grouping of such sentences is approached from two angles. First, the influence of sentential objects on the phrasing ofthe matrix subject and verb is discussed (Chapter 3). Second, the grouping of the embedded clauses themselves is discussed. It is shown that embedded clauses are usually intonationally separated from the matrix clause (Chapter 3). This characteristic changes. however, when the embedded clause includes a left-dislocated element. Embedded left-dislocations phrase with the preceding matrix clause (Chapter 5). Despite these main characteristics, the intonational grouping ofcomplex sentences allows for variation. The theoretical approach proposed in the present work accounts for the data presented in this study (the approach is based on Boersma & Hayes' 2001 Stochastic OT; cf. below). When discussing preverbal subjects and left-dislocations in one study; the status of preverbal subjects must be considered (cf. Section 1.1.4). Several linguists argue that preverbal subjects are automatically left-dislocated. There are however other linguists who interpret them differently: they argue that preverbal subjects are not automatically left-dislocated. I am one of them. While the first chapters inquire into subjects and left-dislocations separately; Chapter 6 is dedicated to both. The empirical data in the present work is completely new. Four intonational experiments were conducted. The first on simple SVO structures. the second on complex SVO structures. The third experiment is concerned with clitic left- and right-dislocations. The fourth experiment compares preverbal subjects and leftdislocations. These experiments show several interesting results which are now briefly introduced. The most common phrasing in simple SVO structures is
2
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
(S)(VO), as in (la). However, (SV)(O) is possible when the object is branching, as in (lb). Moreover, the number of (SV)(O) phrasings increases significantly, when the object is not only branching but also sentential as in (2). Sentential objects intensify the effect of branching objects. Object clauses typically are separated from the matrix clause by a prosodic break, cf. (2). No break, however, precedes the object clause when it contains a left-dislocated element: an embedded leftdislocation phrases with the matrix clause and leaves out the remainder of the embedded clause in a separate prosodic phrase, as in (3). This signals in turn a strong right boundary. For this reason left-dislocations do not build a prosodic phrase of their own. This constitutes empirical counterevidence to the claim that focus is a prosodic domain of its own. Clitic right-dislocations are ahnost always separated from the preceding main clause by a prosodic boundary, as in (4). (1)
SVO-phrasing in simple clauses (i.e. DP object)
( a.
b.
(2)
S
)
(V
0
rAguila roba the.eagle steal.3sG.PST 'The eagle stole the mouse:
el the
)
<= Prosodic Grouping
ratoH. mouse
( s v 0 raguila rob a el ratoH del meu germa. the.eagle steal.3sG.PST the mouse of.the my brother 'The eagle stole my brother's mouse:
SVO-phrasing in complex structures (i.e. sentential object)
S V (q S ) (V 0 [La Barbara suposa [que !'aguila roba el ratoH]cp2 lcp1 • the B. assume.3so that the.eagle steal.3sG.PST the mouse (3)
Embedded clitic left-dislocation (CLLD) CLLD S V [La Maria va dir [que les taules, PST.3so say.INF that the table.PL the M.
v
pp
les va portar al pis lcp 2 1cp1• CL.ACC PST bring.INF to.the flat 'Mary said that (s)he brought the tables to the flat: (4)
Clitic right-dislocation (CLRD) v pp ) ( CLRD) Les1 vaig portar al pis, les taules1• CL.ACC PST.lSG bring to-the flat the tables 'I brought the tables to the flat:
(
Chapter 1. Introduction
SVO represents the canonical word order in Catalan: preverbal subjects are not inherently left-dislocated; they can be left-dislocated, but this is not always the case. Prosodic evidence for this statement is based on phrasing data. Nonbranching preverbal subjects which are contextually given show a strong rightboundary, typical of left-dislocations. In contrast, non-branching preverbal subjects that are not given clearly show the tendency for (SV)(O) phrasing when the object is long. The above empirical findings represent only the main characteristics. The actual groupings, however, differ in certain respects. A theoretical approach to the data must account for this variation. The analysis is grounded in the framework of Stochastic Optimality Theory (Boersma & Hayes 2001), a variant of Optimality Theory (Prince & Smolensky 1993/2004), for this reason. This model accounts for the variation, while a non-probabilistic constraint ranking is unable to do so. The analysis includes two important constraints: (1) ALIGN-CP,L, a constraint which accounts for the boundary preceding the embedded clause; and (2) ALIGN-ToP(Ic),R, a constraint which accounts for the obligatory right boundary of dislocations (i.e. topics). Furthermore, although right-dislocations appear clause final, their syntactic position is within the main clause (Chapter 4). Based on remnant movement of vP to a clause-internal FocP the surface order can be accounted for. The prosodic grouping is accounted for by a third constraint: ALIGN -vP ,R. This constraint aligns the right edge of vP to the right edge of a prosodic phrase. Chapter 1 is structured as follows. Section 1.1 introduces the foundations and the basic assumptions of the research, which represent the starting point of the study. In Section 1.2, an outline of the empirical findings and the proposed theoretical analysis is shown by presenting the main topics of the different chapters.
1.1
Foundations and basic assumptions
In this section the following foundations and basic assumptions of the present work are introduced which represent the starting point of the work. The research language Central Catalan is presented in Section 1.1.1. A brief description of the constructions called clitic left-dislocation (CLLD) and clitic right-dislocation (CLRD) is given in Section 1.1.2. In Section 1.1.3, two aspects of the component called information structu1-e (IS) important for my work are introduced; namely: (a) The relation between focus and question/answer pairs and (b) Givenness. In Section 1.1.4, several arguments are given for the basic assumption of the thesis that preverbal subjects are not (necessarily) left-dislocated.
3
4
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
1.1.1
Central Catalan
Catalan is a Romance language spoken in northeastern Spain (cf. Figure 1 at the end of this section). It is spoken in the autonomous communities of Balearic Islands, Catalonia, and Valencia. It has the status of a co-officiallanguage in these communities. It is the official language in Andorra. It is also spoken in the French department Pyrenees-Orientales (i.e. Rossell6 region) and in the city of :C Alguer located on the western coast of the Italian island of Sardinia. The language has between 7 and 10 million speakers, depending on the method of definition. The territories of the Catalan language and culture are often called Paisos Ca.talans 'Catalan Countries' (presented by the shaded area in Figure 1). During the history of the Catalan language it has often been degraded as a mere dialect of Spanish. This view is incorrect. The degradation of the language was especially pronounced during the last dictatorship in Spain (1939-1975). The acknowledgement of Catalan as language in its own right is not a concession to ideological and political demands but is based on linguistic data. The most noticeable differences between Spanish (Castilian) and Catalan concern the sound system, the lexicon, and other less grammatical aspects (typical in Romance languages). 1 One example of these differences is the initial/- in Latin which under certain circumstances became h- in Spanish. Later it became silent but remained orthographically: FA CERE> hacer 'do: FOLIA> hoja 'leaf: FUGERE> huir 'flee'. It is supposed that this change was due to the influence of the Basque substratum during the Roman Empire. Catalan, in contrast, did not undergo the development: fer, fulla, fugir. In addition, some Latin vowels became a diphthong in Spanish: SEPTEM > siete 'seven', TERRA > tierra 'eartli, GROSSUM > grueso 'thick: PONTEM > puente 'bridge'. Again, Catalan did not undergo the phenomenon: set, terra, gros, pont. Furthermore, many Spanish words kept a final -n after the transformation from Latin, whereas Catalan dropped the-n: be 'good',_fi 'End', ra6 'reason'. This in contrast to Spanish bien, fin, raz6n. The Catalan lexicon has more words in common with Occitan (and French) than with Spanish. According to Schlosser (2005: 61) nearly70% correspond with Occitan, andonly20% correspond with Spanish. Some examples of the basic vocabulary that do not correspond with Spanish are: arribar 'arrive' (sp. llegar, fr. arriver), blau 'blue' (sp. azul, fr. bleu), cercar 'search' (sp. buscar, fr. chercher), formatge 'cheese' (sp. queso, fr. fromage), menjar 'eat' (sp. come1·, fr. manger), res 'nothing' (sp. nada, fr. rien).Z
1.
This paragraph is based mainly on Schlosser (2005: 60£).
2. For detailed information on the lexical relationship between Catalan and other Romance languages cf. Melchor & Branchadell (2002: 43&51)
Chapter 1. Introduction
Catalan comprises a collection of dialects which are mutually intelligible. The main dialects are organized into two major dialect blocks: Eastern Catalan (catala. oriental) and Western Catalan (catala occidental); the division is marked by the bold black line in Figure 1. Each block encompasses several regional varieties. The Western Catalan block comprises the two dialects Northwestern Catalan and Valencian. The Eastern Catalan block comprises four dialects: Central Catalan (marked by the italic lines in Figure 1), Balearic, Rossellonese, and Alguerese. The dialects can further be divided into difierent subdialects (e.g. Central Catalan is subdivided into Barcelonl (in the area of Barcelona), Tarragon{ (in the eastern half ofTarragona province), and Septentrional de tra.nsici6 (in the transition zone to Northern Catalan)). Central Catalan can be considered the standard pronunciation of the language and has the highest number of speakers. It is commonly spoken in densely populated regions such as the province of Barcelona, the eastern half of the province of Tarragona and most of the province of Girona. In the northern part of Girona a transition to Northern Catalan begins. Typical cities where Central Catalan is spoken in addition to Barcelona are Berga, Cerdanyola, Granollers, Igualada, Manresa, Matar6, Sabadell, Sant Celani, Sitges, Terrassa, and Vic. The domain of Central Catalan does not equal the territory of Catalonia. The western part of Catalonia (e.g. the area around Lleida) belongs to the Western Catalan block. The most striking differences between catala oriental (Eastern Catalan) and catala occidental (Western Catalan) are primarily of a phonetic nature. The occidental dialects distinguish clearly between unstressed [a] and [e]. The oriental dialects, in general merge them into one sole vowel [;)] ('schwa'), cf. Table 1. A further distinction concerning unstressed vowels is the fact that [o] is substituted by [u] in the oriental dialects, but not in the occidental dialects (nor in Majorcan), cf. Table 2. These phenomena are comprised under the term vowel reduction. In addition to these phonetic aspects, there are also morphological syntactic and lexical differences (cf. Melchor & Branchadel12002: 71f.).
Table 1. Catalan dialects and the existence of the neutral vowel[~] (taken from Melchor & Branchadell2002: 71) Northwestern Catalan, Valencian (Western/Occidental Catalan) mar[e) 'mother' c[a]nfo 'song'
Central Catalan, Balearic, Rossellonese (Eastern/Oriental Catalan) mar[<~]
cMnfo
Table 2. Catalan dialects and the existence of the neutral vowel [u] (taken from Melchor & Branchadell2002: 71) Northwestern Catalan, Valencian (Western/ Occidental Catalan), and Majorcan
Central Catalan, Balearic (not Majorcan), Rossellonese, Alguerese (Oriental Catalan)
p[o]sar'put' jerr[o1'iro.It
p[u]sar jerr[u]
5
6
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
Figure 1. Map of the Pa'isos Catalans (in dark grey) and their dialectal division (Western Catalan to the left of the bold black line; Eastern Catalan to its right). The italic black lines indicate the Central Catalan region3 1.1.2
Clitic left- and clitic right-dislocations in Catalan
Clitic Left- and Right-Dislocations are very common in Romance 4 languages. Dislocated elements are often doubled by a weak pronoun, a so-called resumptive clitic, within the clause. These clitics5 immediately precede the verb. Due to
3·
I would like to thank Joan Borras-Comes for creating the map.
4· There are similar constructions in other languages such as, for example, English or German. However, the appropriate term for these constructions in these languages might be Topicalization. There are also Left-Dislocation constructions, but they seem to be rather on a par with Romance Hanging Thpic constructions. Howeve:t; this issue is far beyond the goal of this paper. BUl: ct: Frey (2004) for a comparison between English and German Topicalization and Left-Dislocation and ct: Casielles-Suarez (2003) fortopicalization vs.left-dislocation in Spanish. 5· As Anderson (2000: 304) points out the notion of a 'ditic' merges two rather different kinds of behavior. Zwicky (1977) invented two terms reflecting the differences: on the one hand there are simple ditics, on the other hand there are special ditics. Simple ditics are elements which are phonologically dependent on an adjacent word Anderson considers them as prosodically deficient insofar as «they lack some of the higher-level prosodic organization (assignment to a phonological word, for example)" and must therefore "be incorporated into some adjacent element of an appropriate prosodic type" (Anderson 2000: 305). Simple ditics in English are e.g. the reduced auxiliary ~ (meaning is or has) or 'd (meaning would). Special ditics are
Chapter 1. Introduction
this doubling, these constructions are called clitic left-dislocation (CLLD) and clitic right-dislocation (CLRD) respectively. Catalan examples for CLLD and CLRD are given in (6) and (7). The normal word order is presented in (5). (5)
Normal word order (V-DO-PP) Vaig portar les taules al pis. PST.lsG bring the tables to-the flat 'I brought the tables to the flat:
(6)
Clitic Left-Dislocation (CLLD) Les taules1, les1 vaig portar al pis. the tables CL.ACC PST.lSG bring to-the flat 'I brought the tables to the flat:
(7)
Clitic Right-Dislocation (CLRD) les taules1• vaig portar al pis, PST.lSG bring to-the flat the tables 'I brought the tables to the flat: Les1
CL.ACC
The normal word order in Catalan is SVO (cf. Section 1.2.4).6 This order is typical for Romance languages (Hulk & Pollock 2001: 3).7 (5) reflects the canonical order for Catalan. In (6) the accusative object les taules 'the tables' is left-dislocated and precedes the clause; in (7) it is right-dislocated and follows the clause. In each case a weak pronoun (here: 'les') is placed before V. In Catalan, direct and indirect objects are obligatorily resumed by a clitic (Vallduvf 2002: 1233&1236).8 If the dislocated argument is a locative (as in the case of verbs such as put), clitics are also obligatory (Bonet 1991: 25).9 Dislocated subjects do not have clitics- there are no weak
"members of a class of (typically pronominal) forms, whose placement is unusual or unique in terms of the syntax of corresponding non-ditic elements. The paradigmatic exemplars of ditics in this sense are the non-subject pronominals of, e.g. French or Spanish. [ ... ] In most cases special ditics are also prosodically deficient elements" (Anderson 2000: 304t:). This prosodic deficiency of special ditics is also observable in Catalan ditics of CLLD and CLRD: they lack independent stress and do not count as prosodic words, and lean (at this level of the prosodic hierarchy) on another word, which is always the following verb(al complex). Ct: also Rigau & Mascar6 (2002) and Kuchenbrandt, Kupisch & Rinke (2005) for more information on Romance ditics. 6. Ct: Hernanz (2002: 1022) and L6pez (2003: 198); in ditransitive structures the canonical word order is S-V-D0-10(/PP). 7· "There is a consensus among both traditional and generative grammarians that the canonical surfuce word order of the Romance languages is subject -verb -object" (Hulk & Pollock 2001: 3). 8. The Catalan clitic resumption differs from Italian ditic resumption in that the resumption in Italian is obligatory only for DOs and optional for lOs (cf. Frascarelli 2000: 145). 9· Spanish,forexample,doesnothavelocativeclitics(Catalanhi,Frenchy,ltalianci),although dislocating a locative argument is acceptable - but it is not resumed by a clitic. Spanish also
7
8
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
nominative pronouns (Vallduvi 2002: 1242). 10 Adjuncts can also be dislocated and corresponding resumptive pronouns are optional (Vallduvi 2002: 126lf.). In the prosodic experiment on CLLD and CLRD (Chapter 5) I focus mainly on dislocated objects. Consequently there is always a preverbal clitic in the TP. In the cases where adjuncts are dislocated, I use a resumptive clitic. 11 1he general clitic order in Catalan is DAT-ACC-PART(itive)-LOC(ative), although there is also a lot of syncretism and dialectal variation (cf. Bonet 1991, Bonet 2002: 973, Brumme 1997: 135). The order in Catalan for elements in the left periphery ('Vorfeld') is as follows: Relative-wh > as for > H1tD 12 > CLLD > wh (interrogatives, exclamatives) (cf. Villalba 2000, 2004). This is shown for Hanging Topic Left-Dislocations, left-dislocations, and wh-interrogatives in (8). The left-dislocated object la Mcn·ia. precedes the wh-element quan 'when' in (8a), whereas the left-dislocated PP d'aquest tema 'about this subject' follows the hanging topic la Maria in (8b ). (8)
Order of elements in the Catalan left periphery (examples taken from Villalba 2004: 8) a. La Marial' quan hi1 has parlat? the M. when Loc have.2sG talk.PTCP 'Maria, when have you talked with her?' b.
La Maria 1, daquest tema2 no en2 parlis amb ellar the M. of.this subject not of.it talk.SBJ .2sG with her 'Maria, do not talk with her about this subject:
One important characteristic of CLLD and CLRD constituents is that they are contextually given. What this means is introduced in the following section on information structure. 1.1.3
Information structure
Two aspects of the component called infm·ma.tion sh-ucture (IS) are important for my work: (a) The relationship between focus and question/answer pairs
lacks a partitive clitic (Catalan and French en, Italian ne), ci Bonet (1991: 25&57), Zubizarreta (1998: 157). Thus, Spanish has fewer clitics than the other three Romance languages. Vallduvf (2002: 1242) notes that subject agreement takes over the resumptive function of object ditics (cf. also Alexiadou & Anagnostopoulou 1998: ch.6.2 ).
10.
u. In addition to the dislocation of objects and subjects, Villalba (2000: 45f.) points out that different maximal projections can be dislocated in Catalan: PPs, APs, AdvPs and even CPs [±tensed] (cf. also Cinque 1990: 57). Even verbal projections can dislocate (but for details cf. Vallduvf 2002: ch.4.6.1). 12.
HTID =Hanging Topic Left-Dislocation (ct: Ale.xiadou 2006)
Chapter 1. Introduction
and (b) Givenness. These two aspects are important because they guide the construction of the experimental data of the four prosodic experiments. All the simple and complex SVO sentences in Chapter 3 are all-new sentences. The sentences of the CLLD/CLRD experiment (Chapter 5) are clearly divided in terms of focus and givenness: CLLD/CLRD is maximally salient in the common ground (i.e. given), because they are mentioned in the preceding context. CLLD and CLRD thus fall into the concept of familiarity topic. The rest of the clause constitutes the focus domain. The preverbal subjects of the experiment described in Chapter 6 are either maximally salient or part of the focus domain. In what follows I briefly illustrate what is meant by information structure. After this, background information on two relevant aspects of my work is presented and the terms all-new focus, focus domain and given ness, and topic are introduced. Information structure (IS) is the phenomenon of information packaging (Chafe 1976, Vallduvf 1993, Krifk.a 2007) that responds to the demands of the communicative situation by organizing the constituents of the sentence according to communicative needs. The organization can be understood as a structuring of the sentence by syntactic, prosodic, or morphological means. These means constitute cues for the addressees to correctly interpret the intended meaning: they enable the listeners to easily identify two things. On the one hand the listeners can identify which part of the sentence is an actual contribution to their information state at the time of the utterance, and on the other hand, which part represents material already subsumed by this information state (Engdahl & Vallduvf 1996: 2). The clear restriction ofiS regarding the aspects that respond to the tempora.ry state of the listener's mind has been proposed in the seminal work by Chafe (1976). The information mutually known by the speakers/listeners and which is continuously modified in communication can be called common gmund (CG; Stalnaker 1974; cf. Krifk.a 2007: 15). The basic notions ofiS are Focus, Givenness, and Topic (Krifk.a 2007). These basic concepts are briefly presented in what follows. The concept of focus is illustrated by the relation of question/answer pairs. Such pairs are the foundation of the experimental data and thus also have a great importance for my work. In addition, the intersection of givenness and topic is likewise important: the notion of givenness subsumes the notion of topic, because all topics in my work are given. Nevertheless both notions are introduced separately. Focus: the first aspect concerns the classical pragmatic use of focus, which is to highlight the part of an answer that replies to the wh-part of a constituent question (Paul1880, Krifk.a 2007: 21). The question specifies the way in which the information state should develop in the immediate future. The answer connects an expression to the immediately preceding context. The expression which adds information to the immediately preceding context is the focus. The major principle
9
10
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
of focus interpretation at work in the grammar is that focus accommodates new information (Selkirk 1984: 213). 13 Focus is thus a device for information-packaging. In (9) I give a German example with different questions evoking answers which are different in respect to the actual contribution which is added to the information state of the addressee. (9)
Different focus domain a. Question: What happened? Answer: [Anna hat die ZEITschrift gekauft]p buy.PTCP A. has the magazine ~nna bought the magazine: b.
Question: What did Anna do? Answer: Anna [hat die ZEITschrift gekauft)p buy.PTCP A. has the magazine
c.
Question: What did Anna buy? Answer: Anna hat [die ZEITschrift]F gekauft A. has the magazine buy.PTCP
d.
Question: Who bought the journal? Answer: [Anna]p hat die ZEITschrift gekauft buy.PTCP A. has the magazine
The three examples (9a-c) differ neither with respect to word order, nor to the position of the sentence accent (marked by capitals), but their focus domain (marked by'[ ]p'), however, is difierent. The focus domain is the part of the answer that responds to the question. 14 The typical result of failing to select the right focus is incoherent communication (Krifka 2007: 21). In (9a) the complete clause is contained in the focus domain. This is called all-new focus, sentence focus, or whole focus reading. In (9b) only the constituent without the subject constitutes the focus domain, and in (9c) it is only the object DP. The latter case can be called narrow focus, whereas the former domain can be called broad focus. These two terms (cf. Selkirk 1984, Lambrecht 1994) are imprecise and can be used only when different focus alternatives are being discussed (Krifk.a 2007: 31). (9d) difiers with respect to the three previous examples in the location of the sentence accent, which is on the subject Anna. The obvious relation between sentence accent (i.e. prominence) and focus is expressed by the Focus Prominence Rule (FPR, Chomsky 1971,
For a critical argument on the interpretation of the notion of focus as new information cf. Krifka (2007: 29f.).
13.
The different size of the focus domain can be explained by assuming with Selkirk (1984, 1995a) that the focus feature F of a constituent can project to higher syntactic nodes (cf. Focus Projection Rule, Selkirk 1995a: 555; cf. also Selkirk 1984: 207ff.).
14.
Chapter 1. Introduction
Jack.endoff1972, Zubizarreta 1998: 88). According to this rule, the focused marked material must be more prominent than presupposed material; hence, focus bears the sentence stress. 15 Givenness: elements that are not part of the focus domain are, in general, already present in the common ground (CG) of the speakers/listeners, as is the case with CLLD and CLRD. Being present means that they are given. Givenness always refers to denotation, i.e. the denotation of the element, and the expression itself is not present in CG. Krifk.a (2007) offers the following definition of givenness, (10), and I adopt this definition for the present work. ( 10)
Definition of Givenness (Krifka 2007: 37):
A feature X of an expression a is a Givenness feature iff X indicates whether the denotation of a is present in the CG or not, and!orindicates the degree to which it is present in the immediate CG. 1his definition allows us to say that an expression is given to a particular degree. It can be either maximally salient or given only in the immediately preceding CG. It is also possible that it is given only in the general CG. Krifk.a's (2007) notion of givenness is different from that of focus. His definition of givenness allows focused constituents to be given (which becomes relevant in the case of second occurrence focus). 16 I am not concerned, however, with the transition zones of the notions. In my experimental work only constructions with a clear boundary between givenness and focus are used (as explained at the beginning of this section). Givenness can be indicated in several ways (Krifka 2007: 38). Some of them are the realization of an expression in a non -canonical position and deaccentuation (i.e. the reduction of the prosodic realization of given expressions). Typically the non-canonical position is before the canonical position. These two strategies are used in Catalan, where clitic left-dislocations as well as clitic right-dislocations are not in their canonical position (cf Section 1.2.2). In addition, the former
15. Sentence stress is a form of phrasal stress. Phrasal stress is the stress assigned beyond word stress (strongest stress in a prosodic word) in syntactic collocations of words. such as phrases. clauses. and sentences (Truckenbrodt 2007). The most well-known accounts of phrasal stress are the Nuclear Stress Rule (NSR) by Chomsky & Halle ( 1968) and the Sentence Accent Assignment Rule (SAAR) by Gussenhoven (1983, 1992). The important role of Focus in assigning sentence stress is mostly modeled by an abstract feature For FOC, which is assigned to a syntactic constituent. Rooth (1992) developed a theory (alternative semantics offocus) including the important role of focus. (For more information ct: Truckenbrodt 2007 and the references cited there).
For more details cf Schwarzschild (1999) who developed a detailed account on the interaction of givenness and focusation.
16.
11
11
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
is accented, but it does not bear sentence stress and the latter is deaccented (cf. Chapter 5). Vallduvf (1993: 119) notes that Catalan has a very straightforward way to represent information packaging. Left-dislocations precede the main clause and right dislocations follow the core clause (cf. (6) and (7) in the dislocation section). Whatever is left in the core clause must be interpreted as focal (with the exception of clitics). For this reason no dislocated element can be part of the focus domain (Vallduvi 2002: 1253). Topic: dislocations are often taken as topics (Alexiadou 2006: 686, Frascarelli 2000, Rizzi 1997, Zubizarreta 1998) and host the functional projection TopP (Rizzi 1997, Villalba 2000 and many more)P According to Reinhart (1981, 1995) there are two main schools of thought for the characterization of the concept topic. The two concepts are presented in (11) (based on Frey 2004). (11)
a.
Aboutness concept of topic: a topic is an expression whose referent the
b.
Familiarity concept of topic: a topic is that expression whose referent has
sentence is about. been already introduced into the discourse or is for other reasons already familiar to the interlocutors.
The aboutness concept of topic assumes that the notion of topic refers to the object the speaker is thinking about, whereas the rest of the utterance (the comment) refers to what the speaker is thinking about the object. Hence, topic can be understood in terms of aboutness: the comment is said about the topic (Hockett 1958: 201). 18 In conjunction with this concept the topic can also be new; it is only important that the sentence is about the topic (cf. Krifka 2007:41 for discussion). Due to the tact that CLLD and CLRD always must be given, I chose the familiarity concept of topic as the appropriate one. For the purpose of the study, givenness and familiarity are synonymous. Subsuming CLLD and CLRD under the notion of givenness (or familiarity topic) has the advantage of being able to move away from the differences which exist between Catalan CLLD- and CLRD constituents. Vallduvf (1993) and Villalba (2000) show that there are interpretational differences between these two kinds of dislocations. 19 The difterences, though, are not of importance for the work at
Cf. L6pez (2002, 2009a: 140) for a critical assessment of the functional projections FocP and TopP.
17.
"The most general characteristic of predicative constructions is suggested by the terms 'topic' and 'comment' for their ICs [immediate constituents, I.E]: the speaker announces a topic and then says something about it." (Hockett 1958: 20 1).
18.
19. The main difference is that right -dislocations cannot act as links to the previous discourse like left -dislocations. This is why Vallduvf (199 3) replaces the notion of topic by link for CLLD
Chapter 1. Introduction
hand because I am interested only in the main informational separation of the clause as presented in Vallduvf (1993: 119): given constituents must precede or follow the core clause. The question of why a constituent is located in the left or right periphery of the clause is too detailed for this study. The intent is to make a statement about the prosodic phrasing patterns of CLLD and CLRD. 1.1.4
Preverbal subjects are not dislocated
In this work I assume that SVO is the normal word order in Catalan. In this section several arguments are presented supporting this assumption. In Romance, there is a long lasting and involved discussion on the canonical position of subjects. The main issue is determining if the canonical word order (WO) is SVO or VOS. In Catalan, for example, there is consensus that the order of the verb and its internal arguments is fixed: V-DO-IO(IPP) (cf. L6pez 2003, 2009a, Vallduvf 1993, 2002: 1230, Villalba 2000, Wheeler, Yates & Dols 1999). Opinions differ when it comes to the subject position. Hernanz (2002: 1022) and Lopez (2003: 198, 2009a) assume that the preverbal position is the canonical one, whereas Vallduvi (1993: ch.5.2, 2002: 1245), Rossel16 (2000), and Sola (1992) assume that the canonical position is postverbal (i.e. VOS). Wheeler et al. (1999) have an intermediate position. They propose that the postverbal subject order is only compulsory with intransitive verbs (Venen h·ens 'Trains are coming') and optional in all other cases (depending on informativeness, phonological weight, etc.). Due to this discussion, it comes as a surprise that Hulk & Polio ck ( 2001: 3) state that" [t] here is a consensus among both traditional and generative grammarians that the canonical surface word order of the Romance languages is subject-verb-object': Nevertheless, this is exactly the word order argued for in this section. The approaches to preverbal subjects can be classified as being of two kinds: One group assumes that preverbal subjects are always left-dislocated (e.g. Alexiadou & Anagno stopo ulou 1998,20 Barbosa 1995, Contreras 1991, Ordonez & Trevino 1999, Sola 1992, and Vallduvf 1993, 2002: 1245), whereas the second group assumes that preverbal subjects can, but need not be, left-dislocated (Belletti 1990, Cardinaletti 1997, Costa 2004: ch.2, Gutierrez-Bravo 2007, 2008, L6pez 2003, 2009a: ch.3.7, Pires 2007, Sheehan 2006).
and tail for CLRD. In addition, left -dislocations can be contrastive, whereas right -dislocations can never be contrastive. For detailed information of differences between Catalan CLLD and CLRD cf. Villalba (2000: 60ff., 1441f.). 20.
A&A (1998) = Alexiadou & Anagnostopoulou (1998)
13
14
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
The syntactic literature on the status of preverbal subjects is endowed with many arguments for both groups. It shall be shown here that preverbal subjects are not left-dislocated, but rather part of the focus domain. I rely mainly on the work by Sheehan (2006) and L6pez (2009a). One of the most recent works on the status of preverbal subjects by Sheehan (2006), discusses at length that (Romance) preverbal subjects are not automatically CLLD (Sheehan 2006: ch.2). She draws the conclusion that "it is certainly the case that preverbal subjects are CLLD on some occasions in Romance, it need not be the case that they are always CLLD" (Sheehan 2006: 72), and adds that preverbal subjects in fact cannot always be CLLD. L6pez ( 2009a) draws in principal the same conclusion.21 The following six arguments for why preverbal subjects cannot always be clitic left-dislocated are introduced in the upcoming subsections: 1.1.4.1 1.1.4.2 1.1.4.3 1.1.4.4 1.1.4.5 1.1.4.6
Preverbal Subjects are in an A-Position (L6pez 2009a: 132, Sheehan 2006: 88) All-New Contexts (L6pez 2009a: 132, Sheehan 2006: 75) Islandhood (Sheehan 2006: 84) Subjects Present for Disambiguation (Sheehan 2006: 82) Non-Referential QPs as Preverbal Subjects (Sheehan 2006: 76) Unambiguous Wide Scope (Sheehan 2006: 55)
1.1.4.1
Preverbal subjects a¥e in an A-position
L6pez (2009a: 132) states that an experiencer argument can interfere with NP-raising in every Romance language, cf. (12), (13) [= his examples 3.122 and 3.123]. In (12a) the subject 'Joan' raises out of the infinitival complement clauses to the A-position of the raising verb semblar 'seem'. If an experience argument intervenes between the moved subject and the matrix verb (12b ), an intervention effect arises. As L6pez (2007) shows, such an intervention effect does not appear with a clear instance of dislocation, (13). Due to the finite verb 'is' in the embedded clause, an analysis in terms of raising to subject is not possible. Hence, the subject 'Juan' must be dislocated and the presence of the dative experiencer em 'me' does not change the grammaticality of the sentence.
es
(12) a.
El Joan sembla ser seem be.INF the J. 'John seems to be intelligent:
intelligent intelligent
[CAT]
However, there are at least two differences between L6pez (2009a) and Sheehan (2006). (A) L6pez (2009a) takes CLLD as a result of movement, whereas Sheehan (2006) assumes a base-generation approach, like Cinque (1990). (B) L6pez (2009a: 131) argues in the discussion on preverbal subjects that if they are dislocated, they are very likely HTLD and not CLLD. Nevertheless, they are dislocated 11.
Chapter 1. Introduction b.
(13)
*El Joan em sembla ser intelligent the J. CL.DAT seem be.INF intelligent 'John seems to me to be intelligent:
El Joan em sembla que es intelligent the J. CL.DAT seem that be intelligent 'John, it seems to me that he is intelligent:
[CAT]
[CAT]
L6pez (2009a) sees the contrast between (12) and (13) as evidence that an A-movement of the subject exists (from Spec,v to Spec,T). Sheehan (2006: 88) also states that many preverbal subjects must be in an A-position. Relying on Sufier (2002) she says that Spanish ad sensum agreement supports this view. Suiier (2002) shows that true CLLD subjects allow optional ad sensum agreement. Ad sensum agreement refers to the fact that subject and verb differ in number as in (14): whereas the predicate estaban presionados 'be pressured' has 3pl agreement, the subject el jurado 'the jury' is grammatically singular but semantically plural (examples taken from Sheehan 2006: 88). (14)
El jurado, Marla nos asegur6 que estaban presionados the jury.3sG M. us assured.3sG that were.3PL pressured.3PL 'The jury, Maria assured us that they felt pressured:
[SP]
(15)
El jurado *estaban presionados I estaba presionado the jury.3sG were.3PL pressured.3PL were.3sG pressured.3sG 'The jury felt pressured:
[SP]
As can be seen in (15) ad sensum agreement is not possible with all preverbal subjects. In (15) the preverbal subject is directly adjacent to the finite verb. According to Sheehan, Sufier (2002) draws the conclusion from these data that ad sensum agreement is only possible with CLLD subjects. If, as in (15), ad sensum agreement is not possible, the preverbal subject is not an instance of CLLD. 1.1.4.2
All-new contexts
Vallduvf (1993: 119) notes that Catalan has a very straightforward representation of information pa.ckagi.ng (term by Chafe 1976): "All links are left-detached, all tails are right-detached, and whatever is left in the core clause (under the lowest IP) must be interpreted as focal (with the exception of clitics)': The general idea behind this description is that no dislocated element can be part of the focus domain because it is not part of the rheme (Vallduvf 2002: 1253). Consequently, as L6pez (2009a: 132) notes, a preverbal subject cannot be dislocated in an all-focus sentence.22 A sentence counts as all-new/all-focus if it is an appropriate answer to
:21. The all-focus context presented here constitutes counter evidence to the assumption that subjects are naturally topics (van Oosten 1986, Horn 1989: ch.7), where topic is understood in the sense of theme confl.ating with the notion of old information (Dan~ 1970 ).
15
16
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
the question "What happens?" (ct~ Krifka 2007: 23). The word order SVO in the answer is obligatory in the Catalan all-focus sentence in (16). (16)
[Context: What happened?] a. (que) el Joan finalement va portar that the J. finally PAST bring.INF '(that) John finally brought the books: b.
#(que) els llibres finalment els va that the books finally CL PAST '(that) John finally brought the books:
elsllibres. the book.PL
portar bring.INF
el Joan. the J.
[CAT] SVO
CLLD
(taken from L6pez 2009a: 132)
The concept that when a whole sentence is forced by the context to be a rheme, no constituent can be dislocated is also taken up by Sheehan (2006: 75), citing Costa (2001). Costa (2001) shows the same pattern for European Portuguese, (17). ( 17)
[EP] SVO
[Context: What happened?] a. 0 Pedro partiu o bra~o the P. broke the arm 'Pedro broke his
arm:
b.
vso
#Partiu o Pedro o b~o broke the P. the arm 'Pedro broke his
arm:
c.
#0 bra~, o Pedro partiu-o the arm the P. broke-cL 'The arm, Pedro broke
CLLD
it:
(taken from Sheehan 2006: 75) 1.1.4.3
Islandhood
Miiller &"Sternefeld (1993: 485) show that topics in German create an island for wh-extraction. Gutierrez-Bravo (2007) cites an argument from Goodall (2001) as evidence that preverbal subjects are not fronted topics based on the islandhood of embedded topics. Whereas fronted topics in Spanish create islands for extraction, (18a), preverbal subjects do not, (18b). (18)
a.
*A qui.Cn crees [que el premio se lo to whom think.2SG that the prize CL.DAT CL.ACC Ut. 'Who do you think that the prize they gave to?'
dieron] [SP] gave.3PL
b. A quien crees [que Juan le dio el premio] [SP] to whom think.2so that ]. CL.DAT gave.3so the prize 'Who do you think that Juan gave the prize to?' (taken from Sheehan 2006: 84; bold marking by I.F.)
According to Sheehan (2006: 85), approaches in which the preverbal subject occupies an A-position do not have any difficulty in explaining the data in (18):
Chapter 1. Introduction
The CLLD element in (18a) is in an A-bar-position and has thus a different status to the preverbal position of the embedded subject in (18b). The former blocks A-bar-movement of another more embedded element, whereas the preverbal subject, being in an A-position, does not block A-bar extraction. If the preverbal subject is treated like being in an A-bar position (as do A&A 1998) it should block wh-extraction, contrary to fact.
1.1.4.4 Subjects present for disambiguation Subject pronouns in Catalan are seldom used: the phonetically null form is the unmarked case regarding frequency and distribution (Vallduvi 1993: 99). Nevertheless, subject pronouns are used in the following circumstances. (a) When used without a verb, (19); (b) When accented (mostly in contrastive contexts), (20); (c) In combination with mateix '(same), i.e. myself, yourself, .. :, (21); and (d) When verb forms are ambiguous, i.e. when two possible antecedents are present, and the subject interpretation must be unambiguous, (22). (All examples taken from Brumme 1997: 123). (19)
Qui vol gelat? Jo. who want ice-cream I 'Who wants ice-cream?- Me:
[CAT]
(20)
Jo compra pa tu portes mantega I buy bread and you get.2so butter 'I will buy bread and you11 get butter:
[CAT]
(21)
M'ho va dir ella mateix me.CL PST say.INP she -self 'She said it to me herself.
[CAT]
(22)
Si
pro
hagues
arribat
primer
[CAT]
if have.SBJ.PST.l/3PS arrive.PTCP first 'If I/(s)he had arrived first, .. .' In the pastindicative (indicatiu imperfet), present subjunctive (subjuntiu present), past subjunctive (subjuntiu imperfet), and conditional (condicional) of Catalan, 1st and 3rd person singular verb endings are all syncretic. In cases such as (22) the subject pronoun is used in order to disambiguate between the possible antecedents, (23). (23)
a.
Si jo hagues arribat primer if I have.SBJ.PST.lPs arrive.PTCP first 'If I had arrived first, .. .'
[CAT]
b.
Si ell hagues arribat primer if he have.SBJ.PST.3PS arrive.PTCP first 'If he had arrived first, .. .'
[CAT]
17
18
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
Sheehan (2006: 82f.) shows similar examples for Italian (taken from Cardinaletti 1997). In Italian present subjunctive, 1st, 2nd, and 3rd person singular verb endings are syncretic; hence the ambiguity is three way. As for disambiguation, the 2nd person singular requires an overt pronoun. Sheehan argues that the 2nd person overt pronoun "is not a CLLD topic, but rather is merely required for functional/ pragmatics reasons to differentiate between ambiguous verb-forms~ (Sheehan 2006: 83). The same is true for (23). A CLLD approach to overt preverbal subjects cannot account for non-topical preverbal subjects whose only function is disambiguationP 1.1.4.5
Non-refenmtial QPs as preverbal subjects
Cinque (1990) claimed that robustly non-referential QPs or bare NPs in Italian, Spanish, EP, or French are not possible as CLLD with a resumptive clitic (cf. also Raposo 1986, Kato & Raposo 2006), cf. (24). Sheehan (2006: 77) states that similar phenomena are true with respect to subject left-dislocation in Brazilian Portuguese and French, (25). (24)
(25)
a.
*Uvros do Tintim, li-os antes de adormecer [EP] books of.the Tintin read:lso-cL.them before of sleep:INP.lso Lit. 'Books about Tintin, I read them before going to sleep:
b.
*Poucos candidatos, ouvi-os falar na televisao [EP] few candidates heard-them speak on.the TV 'Few candidates, I heard them speak on the television: (taken from Sheehan 2006: 48)
a.
*Ninguem1 ele1 gosta de chorar nobody he likes of cry.INP 'Nobody likes crying:
[BP]
b.
*Personne, il r1 aime pleurer nobody he not likes cry.INP 'Nobody likes crying:
[French]
(taken from Sheehan 2006: 77)
In contrast to (25) preverbal non-referential QPs, however, are normal in Romance NSLs, as can be seen in (26) for Spanish and Catalan.24 The conclusion is that
23. Cf. Mayol (2006: 76) for a further function of the use of overt pronouns, in which they could help to select the less accessible antecedent.
24· In contrast to the general assumption that QPs are not tolerated as topics,A&A ( 1998: 508) argue that CLID of QPs is possible (giving evidence from Italian). Cf. Sheehan (2006: 78) for a short discussion and rejection of ditic left-dislocated QPs.
Chapter 1. Introduction
if elements which cannot be topics appear as preverbal subjects, they cannot be left-dislocated. (26)
a.
[SP]
Nadie quiere ser politico Nobody wants be.INF politician 'Nobody wants to be a politician:
(taken from Sheehan 2006: 77) b.
1.1.4.6
NingU. vol ser el president del CF Badalona Nobody wants be.INF the president of.the CF Badalona 'Nobody wants to be the president of CF Badalona:
[CAT]
Unambiguous wide scope
Finally, I present the argument by Sheehan (2006) against the claim that Quantifier Phrases (QPs) in preverbal subject position have unambiguous wide scope (A&A 1998: 504ft~). i.e. they fail to reconstruct. If Alexiadou & Anagnostopoulou (1998) are correct with their claim that preverbal subjects in Null Subject Languages (NSLs) are always CLLD in an A'-position, then preverbal subjects should display the same syntactic and semantic properties as other CLLD elements.25 Sheehan (2006: 50) comes up with several relevant properties of CLLD as diagnostics in an empirical evaluation of the status of preverbal subjects. One of them is the unambiguous wide scope (i.e. failure to reconstruct) of CLLD elements. 26 According to Cinque (1990: 66) CLLD elements do not reconstruct. For this reason, they always take wide scope over IP internal elements. This means that they are not ambiguous between a narrow scope reading and a wide scope reading of the CLLD element. A&A (1998: 504.ff.) claim that preverbal QPs in Greek and Spanish always take wide scope over other quantifiers in the clause. This suggests that they are also CLLD, as in the Greek example (27a). (27b) shows the QP in postverbal position, where the subject can have either narrow or wide scope (cf. A&A 1998: 505). (27)
a.
Kapios :fititis sitihiothetise kathe arthro some student filed every article 'Some (particular) student filed every single article:
[Greek]
wide scope only
25. Due to the fact that A&A (1998) consider CLLD as base-generated in the peripheral position (cf Cinque 1990), Sheehan also asswnes that CLill constituents are base-generated in their surface position. She does so in order to fucilitate a comparison between the pattern of preverbal subjects and the approach taken inA&A (1998).
26. In addition to the diagnostic introduced here, Sheehan (2006: 50ff.) mentions "free positioning with respect to other fronted elements" and "restriction to referential XPs~ As for the latter, (26) shows that non-referential QPs are normal in Romance NSLs.
19
20
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
(28)
b.
Sitihiothetise kapios fititis kathe arthro [Greek] ambiguous filed some student every article i. 'Every article was filed by some student (or other): ii. 'Some (particular) student filed every single article: (taken from Sheehan 2006: 55)
a.
AlgUn. estudiante sac6 prestado todos los libros [SP] Some student took borrowed all the books i. ?tAll the books were borrowed by some student: narrow scope subject ii. 'Some (specific) student borrowed all the books: wide scope subject
b.
[SP] AlgUn. estudiante sac6 prestado cada libro Some student took lent each book i. 'Each book was borrowed by some student (or other): narrow scope subject ii. 'Some (particular) student borrowed each book: wide scope subject (taken from Sheehan 2006: 55)
The Spanish examples in (28) show a slightly different pattern. Whereas the marginality of the narrow scope reading in (28a) is by and large in line with A&A, the possible narrow scope reading in (28b) is not. It is Sufter (2002) who claims that preverbal subjects are ambiguous in Spanish and thus refutes A&Xs claim. Sheehan (2006: 56ff.) gives further examples from other NSLs showing that the preverbal subject position is often potentially ambiguous in scope. She concludes that there is little empirical support for A&Xs claim outside of Greek and that, like in the Spanish examples, scope seems to depend on pragmatic and semantic factors relating to the particular quantifiers used. As for the general claim that CLLD does not reconstruct, Zubi:zarreta (1998: 114) shows that Spanish CLLD reconstructs to an intermediate position, a position which is higher than its base position. Lopez (2009a: 116) translates her argument into Catalan, (29). (29)
a.
El se~ fill, cada mare1 haura d'accompanyar =lo el the her child each mother must.FUT of.accompany =CL.Acc the primer dia d'escola first day of.school 'Each mother must accompany her child on the first day of school:
d'accompanyar=lo cada mare 1 el b. *El se~ fill, haura the her child must.Fur of.accompany=cL.Acc each mother the primer dia d'escola first day of.school 'Each mother must accompany her child on the first day of school:
The subject quantifier cada 'each' in the preverbal position can bind the possessor seu 'her' in the CLLD, (29a). This is an indication that CLLD must reconstruct (L6pez 2009a: 117) at least below the high subject position. That CLLD does not
Chapter 1. Introduction
reconstruct to its initial merge position is shown in (29b), due to the fact that binding is impossible here. L6pez takes this as evidence that CLLD elements reconstruct to an intermediate position, where they are c-comrnanded by the preverbal subject on the one hand, but c-command the postverbal subject on the other hand. In summary, based on Sheehan (2006: ch.2) and L6pez (2009a: ch.3.7) I have shown that there are good reasons to claim that preverbal subjects are not intrinsically CLLD constituents. For this reason I take for granted that preverbal subjects can be non-left-dislocated as well as being left-dislocated. That preverbal subjects can have two functions is also supported by two possible structural positions for them. Pires (2007) argues that Brazilian Portuguese allows preverbal subjects to be realized either as left-dislocated elements (i.e. topics) or as arguments internal to the clause, i.e. in [Spec,TP]. Consequently, the functional division is mirrored by the structural position. Even Rossell6 (2000:105), who assumes that preverbal subjects are always left-dislocated, mentions that in Catalan preverbal subjects may merge in the Inflection Phrase or in the C-domain and that only in the latter position would they have a position similar to 'true' left-dislocated elements.
1.2
Outline of the empirical results and their theoretical analysis
Chapter 2 introduces fundamental aspects of Catalan intonation. The Cat_ToBI system (Aguilar, de-la-Mota & Prieto 2009, Prieto, Aguilar, Mascaro, Torres-Tamarit & Vanrell2009) is taken as the basic model for transcription and is explained in detail. The two prosodic levels Inter·mediate Phrase (i p) and Intonationa-l Phrase (IntP, 1) are assumed. The term prosodic phrase is used as a hypernym for ip and IntP. There are five different boundary cues used for detecting intonational boundaries: continuation rise, sustained pitch, preboundary lengthening, pauses, and complex boundary tones. Only the last two cues indicate IntP-boundaries, while the first three represent ip-boundaries. Each recorded sentence was analyzed based on these boundary cues. For this reason each cue is explained in detail. Several pitch tracks of recorded examples are given in order to illustrate the boundary cues. Chapter 3 is devoted to objects and their influence on the prosodic grouping of the (matrix) subject and verb. It is shown that sentential objects increase the number of matrix (SV) phrasing. The finding is modeled in the framework of stochastic Optimality Theory (Boersma & Hayes 2001) in order to account for different possible groupings. Previous research shows that in simple Catalan SVO structures, there is a tendency to produce (SV)(O) phrasings if the subject is short and the object long (i.e. number of prosodic words in Prieto 2005; number of syllables in D'Imperio, Elordieta, Frota, Prieto & Vigario 2005). Based on this,
21
:u Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
the hypothesis is set up that sentential objects compared to DP objects increase the number of (SV) phrasings. Although the (SV) phrasing is in line with Prieto (2005), her analysis cannot account for the variation in phrasing. Two experiments on SVO-phrasing in Catalan with ten native speakers of Central Catalan were conducted. One with 0 being branching and non -branching (simple SVO experiment), one with 0 being sentential (complex SVO experiment). The first experiment has the goal of reproducing the findings of D'Imperio et al. (2005). The second experiment has the goal of testing the hypothesis. I carefully controlled for the all-new status of the SVO structure via a context causing the structure to be entirely new, (30). (30)
Context (question): No et trobes be? Em sembla que estas de mal humor. Que No you feel.2so good Me seem that be.2so of bad mood What ha passat? have.3so happen.PTCP 'Do you feel bad? You seem to be in a bad mood What happened?' Target sentence (complex SVO): La Barbara suposa que rA.guila roba el ratoli assume that the.eagle steal.3so.PsT the mouse the B. 'Barbara assumes that the eagle stole the mouse:
The results of the first experiment show that the main phrasing pattern is (S)(VO), where the subject is prosodically separated from the following predicate. Nevertheless, the grouping (SV)(O) is possible, when the subject is short and the object branching. The results of the complex SVO experiment show that the matrix subject is phrased with (at least) the following matrix verb in around 66% of the examples, whereas it is phrased alone only in around 34% of the examples. This clearly supports the hypothesis. In addition, the embedded clause (including the complementizer que) is prosodically separated from the matrix clause in around 80% of the examples. The embedded clause is internally separated by a prosodic break after the embedded subject (100%). The most common prosodic grouping is (SV)(qS)(VO), where the matrix subject and the matrix verb are phrased together, followed by the group complementizer + embedded subject, and by the group embedded verb +embedded object. The next three most common groupings are (S)(V)(qS)(VO), (SVqS)(VO), and (S)(VqS)(VO). My analysis is based on Prieto's (2005) account for simple SVO and includes her three constraints MIN-N-PHRASES >> MAx-BIN-END >> ALIGN-XP,R. Due to the importance of Prieto's work, her approach and the constraints used are explained in detail. A short overview of my modifications is given here. Prieto (2005) accounts for the (SV) phrasing by both the binarity constraint MAx-BIN-END, which demands that the prosodic phrase that bears sentence stress consists of maximally
Chapter 1. Introduction
two prosodic words, and the constraint for avoiding boundaries MIN-N-PHRASES, which allows the subject to be not right-aligned (as demanded by ALIGN-XP,R). These constraints and their strict ranking cannot, however, explain the variation in phrasing. Thus, I depart from Prieto (2005) in three important aspects. First, MIN-N-PHRASES and MAx-BIN-END are re-ranked in the reverse order (MAx-BINEND >> MIN-N-PHRASEs). There-ranking still accounts for her results (cf. Prieto 2005: 216) and it enables one to maintain the same constraint order for complex SVO structures. Second, a new constraint is assumed: ALIGN -CP ,L. This constraint aligns the left edge of a CP with the left edge of a prosodic phrase and thus accounts for the pattern that the embedded clause is in general prosodically separated from the matrix clause. This constraint is based on Gussenhoven (2004: 167), who introduces the OT constraint ALIGN(S,t), which aligns the right edge of every sentence with the right edge of an Intonational Phrase. It is additionally based on de Lacy (2003:60), who argues that both constraints, ALIGN-LEFT and ALIGN-RIGHT, are presentin every grammar. Third, the analysis is modeled in a stochastic OT framework (Boersma & Hayes 2001), where the constraints are ranked on a continuous ranking scale. This model is explained in detail. A short distance between the constraints causes a less fixed order between them. I argue that ALIGN-CP,L, MIN-N-PHRASES, and AuGNXP,R are very close. The proposed general constraint hierarchy is given in (31). (31)
MAX-BIN-END>> ALIGN-CP,L >> MIN-N-PHRASBS >> ALIGN-XP,R
Due to these factors the actual ranking of the constraints will sometimes be the reverse of their 'normal' ranking. Consequently, the second, third, or fourth best candidate is able to win. Using this approach, the four most common groupings of the data (which comprise 80% of the data) can be modeled. Table 3 pictures the ranking of the most common pattern (SV)(qS)(VO).
Table 3. Actual ranking for the most common phrasing pattern (SV)(qS)(VO) (matrix subject = Sm; embedded subject = Se)
t-l
0.,
I
z ....
u
~
~
< ~
:::s
~
z 0
::l
<
z I
~
i "'1>1 z ~ ~ 0.,:I:
=>a.
56%
(SV)(qS)(VO)
3
b. c.
2496
(S)(V)(qS)(VO)
4!
10%
(SVqS)(VO)
*!
2
d.
10%
(S)(VqS)(VO)
*!
3
e.
(SVqSVO)
f.
(SVqSV)(O)
*!
..
*!
~z 0
::l
< Sm
Sm
1
Sm,Se
2
Sm,Se
23
24
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
Chapter 4 is devoted to syntactic aspects of clitic left- and clitic right -dislocations (CLLD and CLRD respectively). It sets up the syntactic assumptions underlying my optimality theoretic approach to the prosodic phrasing of these constructions (Chapter 5). I argue for a clause-internal analysis of Catalan CLRD based on CLLD/CLRD asymmetries and adopt the analysis by Villalba (2000). In such an approach the CLRD constituent occupies a position below TP and above vP (and does not move to CP). In order to appear at the right on the surface structure, remnant movement of vP into an internal FocP is assumed, as is illustrated in (32a,b). The CLRD constituent is inside TP, but preceded by vP, which hosts the sentence accent. (32c) is relevant for the analysis in Chapter 5. (32)
a.
TP
~
NegP
~
Neg
IntFocP
~
vP 1
IntTopP
~
CLRD
b. c. (
vP]
CLRD]
)p (CLRD)p
.ypt TP]
Syntactic Structure Prosodic Phrasing
The CLLD/CLRD asymmetries are highlighted in Villalba (1996, 1999a,b, 2000) and Cecchetto (1999), but are refuted by Samek-Lodovici (2006) 27 amongst others. I show that Catalan data still speak in favor of Villalba's and Cecchetto's assumption. Three tests for asymmetry are discussed. Two of them found in SL (2006): licensing ofN-words (such as negative polarity items, NPI) and binding properties ( Cecchetto's 1999 'antireconstruction effects'). These two tests are disc us sed because they appear to be controversial in the literature on Italian and Catalan. According to SL, the tests show that dislocated elements in Italian are not c-commanded by T0 or any other material within TP (such as a licenser for NPis) and thus support his view that right-dislocated constituents must be external to the clause main TP. I show that the Catalan counterparts behave contrariwise: Catalan CLRD is c-commanded by T0 and this can be modeled only by a clause-internal analysis.
27.
Henceforth SL (2006).
Chapter 1. Introduction
The third test is a completely new test. This test is based on obviation eftects. Left-dislocations lead to a disappearance of obviation effects in subjunctive complement clauses (Costantini 2005b). Right-dislocations, as is shown, keep obviation effects. The pattern is explained by assuming a clause-internal analysis ofCLRD. Chapter 5 deals with the prosodic phrasing of CLLD and CLRD in Catalan. It shows that embedded clitic left-dislocations are typically not preceded by a prosodic phrase boundary (80% of the data), while clitic left-dislocations are, in general, obligatorily followed by a prosodic boundary. Clitic right-dislocations are obligatorily separated from the preceding main clause by a boundary. The appearance of CLLD in embedded contexts is a topic that intonational research has, in general, not been very concerned with until now. I present experimental data that cannot be explained by Frascarelli (2000) and Prieto (2005). The relevant data concerns complex CLLD structures presented in Villalba (2000) and L6pez (2003, 2009a): left-dislocation out of clitic left-disloca.tions and embedded
left-dislocations. In order to account for the data, a new constraint is introduced: ALIGNToP(Ic),R. This constraint demands that the right edge of a CLLD and CLRD constituent be aligned with the right edge of a prosodic phrase. This accounts for the obligatory right boundary of dislocations (i.e. topics) and allows the constituent to phrase with preceding material. In order to account for the clause-internal position of CLRD constituents, a further constraint is introduced: ALIGN-vP,R. This constraint aligns the right edge of vP to the right edge of a prosodic phrase. Due to the movement of 1'P into the internal FocP, the right boundary of the prosodic phrase precedes the right-dislocated element, as in (32c) above. The two constraints are added to the OT-approach established in Chapter 3. Chapter 6 is dedicated to the prosodic difference between CLLD and preverbal subjects. A fourth experiment comparing left-dislocations and nonbranching, non-given preverbal subjects was conducted. The results show that non-given preverbal subjects are less often separated by a prosodic phrase from following material than left-dislocations. This finding supports the constraint ALIGN-ToP(Ic),R and thus supports the basic assumption addressed in Chapter 1 showing that preverbal subjects are not automatically left-dislocated. The data further prove that givenness overrides the effects of branchingness and constituent length (if the subject is non-branching): given non-branching subjects do not show the tendency for (SV)(O) when the object is long. The percentage of clear boundaries after the given (i.e. dislocated) subject comes to 88%. The percentage of clear boundaries after new non-branching subjects only comes to 67%. This means that the number of (SV)(O) phrasings of new subjects is
15
:16
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
much higher and thus in line with Prieto (2005). No new analysis is presented in this chapter because the analysis established in the preceding chapters already accounts for the data. This is demonstrated by three corresponding OT tables. Chapter 7 summarizes the contribution of this work to the area of prosody, syntax, and the prosody-syntax interface. It concludes the work by offering several directions for further research.
CHAPTER2
Fundamental aspects of Catalan intonation
1his chapter deals with the theoretical foundations assumed throughout the present study of Catalan prosody and intonation. The Tone and Break Index system for Catalan (Cat_ToBI; Prieto, Aguilar, Mascar6, Torres-Tamarit & Vanrell 2009, Prieto in press, Aguilar, de-la-Mota, Prieto 2009) is taken as the basic model for transcription and- as in Cat_ToBI- I assume the two prosodic levels intermediate phrase (ip) and intonational phrase (IntP, 1). The term prosodic phrase is used as a hypernym for ip and IntP. There are five different boundary cues used for detecting intonational boundaries: continuation rise, sustained pitch, preboundary lengthening, pauses, and complex boundary tones. Only the last two cues indicate IntPboundaries. Experimental data are not presented here, but there are several pitch tracks of recorded examples in order to illustrate the boundary cues. The chapter starts with a brief general introduction to the phonology of intonation (Section 2.1) and then quickly turns to the case of Catalan (Sections 2.2, 2.3, and 2.4). In Section 2.1 the Autosegmental-Metrical (AM) model and the Tone and Break Indices (ToBI) transcription model are presented. It includes an overview of the prosodic hierarchy and a description of the prosodic levels which are relevant to the present study. Readers familiar with the AM model and the ToBI system may skip Section 2.1 and continue reading Section 2.2. In Section 2.2 the specific descriptive conventions of the ToBI system for Catalan are described. The relevant pitch accents as well as the assumed edge tones (T- and T%) are presented (Section 2.2.1 and 2.2.2). The next section (2.3) is exclusively devoted to the five boundary cues assumed for intonational phrasing in Catalan. Each single cue is explained in detail. Section 2.4 summarizes in detail the main assumptions discussed in this chapter.
2.1
Foundations of the theoretical model
ToBI (Tone and Break Indices) is a system for transcribing intonation. It is based on the Autosegmental- Metrical (AM) model (Pierrehumbert 1980, Beckman & Pierrehumbert 1986, Pierrehumbert & Beckman 1988, Ladd 1996, 2008). The present section provides the reader, first, with an overview of the fundamental
:18
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
tenets of the AM theory! (Section 2.1.1) and, second, with a brief overview of the main conventions of the ToBI transcription system (Section 2.1.2). 2.1.1
The Autosegmental-Metrical (AM) model
The main goal of intonational models is to explain the complexity and the diversity of FO contours. The FO contour is the fundamental frequency of an utterance, which can be measured physically in Hertz (Hz). Pitch is the perceived fundamental frequency, while intonation is the variation of the fundamental frequency when speaking. To put it difierently: "By intonation we understand the overall melody of an utterance, as reflected primarily by its tonal or FO contour" (Hualde 2002: 102). In intonationa-l languages (such as English, Catalan, Spanish, or German) the melody of an utterance is used to convey semantic/discoursal meaning (cf. Ladd 1996: 7). In these languages pitch is not used to distinguish words as is the case in tonal languages (e.g. Chinese, Thai, or Hausa) where, in contrast the pitch within a word lexically distinguishes them (cf. Tun 2005). Intonational contours are composed of smaller units or primitives in order to account for the linguistic productivity of intonation. In the AM model it is assumed that in languages such as English, Catalan, or Spanish only particular points in the utterance are specified for tone. These points are either stressed syllables or phrasal boundaries at the phonological level. By phonetic interpolation between tonally specified points the rest of the contour is filled in (cf. Hualde 2002: 102). There are two types of tonal units: pitch accents and edge tones. They are briefly introduced here.2 A Catalan specific presentation of the tonal units follows in Section 2.2. Pitch accents associate with metrically strong syllables of a (prosodic) word. The tone which associates with the stressed syllable is marked by an asterisk'*' (cf for example 'L*' in Figure 2 in Section 2.2.2; for details on association cf. Pierrehumbert 1980: 11, Arvaniti, Ladd & Mennen 2000 and Prieto, D'Imperio & Gili Fivela 2005). Pitch accents are strictly locally determined, do not interact with each other (i.e. they are independent from each other), and are categorically distinct. It is assumed that only two tones, namely H(igh) and L(ow), suffice to describe a language (Bruce 1977, Pierrehumbert 1980, Gussenhoven 2004). The tones can either be monotonal, i.e. they consist of a single High tone (H) or a single Low tone (L), or they can be hi- or tritonal. Bitonal pitch accents are a combination of two low and high tones (e.g. L+H or H+L) and can either have a leading tone
1.
The overview of the AM model is based mainly on Gussenhoven (2004: ch.7).
1.
The presentation partly follows the one in Kligler (2007: 5).
Chapter 2. Fundamental aspects of Catalan intonation 29
before T* (e.g. H+L*) or a trailing tone after T* (e.g. L*+H). Tritonal pitch accents are a combination of three tones (e.g. L+H+L). Edge tones mark the edge of a prosodic constituent. In Pierrehumbert's (1980) original proposal edge tones are divided into two types: boundary tones (notated L% and H%) 3 and phrase accents (notated L-and H-). Boundary tones mark the edge of an intonational phrase (IntP or L; cf. Figure 1 in this section or Figure 2 in Section 2.2.2). They can appear at the beginning or end of the IntP. In contrast to pitch accents, they are independent of stressed syllables, since the end (or the beginning) of an IntP does not always coincide with a stressed syllable. Boundary tones serve as a demarcation; they are assigned for structural reasons (i.e. to signal the prosodic constituent IntP) and not for prominence reasons. Just as with pitch accents, boundary tones can be monotonal (as in English (Pierrehumbert 1980) or German (Fery 1993)) or they can consist of a sequence of tones (as in Seoul Korean (Jun 1993) or Bengali (Hayes & Lahiri 1991)). Phrase accents used to be free-standing unstarred tones occuring between the last pitch accent and the boundary tone in Pierrehumbert (1980). This proposal was revised in Beckman & Pierrehumbert (1986), who introduced the intermediate phrase (ip) as an additional constituent of the prosodic hierarchy. They reanalyzed the phrase accents as a boundary tone ofip. 4 As a result, non-final ips end in T- and IntPs in T-T%, since the right edge of every IntP coincides with a right edge of an ip. The present study also assumes the intermediate phrase and the 'phrase accent' is called ip-boundary tone (labeled T-) in the remainder of the work. 5 Pierrehumbert's (1980) work is based on both the models of metrical phonology (Liberman & Prince 1977) and of autosegmental phonology (Leben 1973, 1975, Goldsmith 1976). The term Autosegmental-Metrical (AM) model has been customary since the mid-1990s (a term coined by Ladd 1996), and the model is currently one of the most used phonological frameworks for representing intonation (Hualde 2003, Prieto 2003, Jun 2005, in press, Grice & Baumann 2007). It combines the two abovementioned phonological areas in the following way. Due to the fact that this model has separate tiers for tones and for segmental phonemes, it is autosegmental (cf. Gussenhoven 2004: ch.3.3, Hall2000: ch.5). Tones are not taken as inherent properties of a segment, but as entities which behave
Beckman et al. (2002: 23) and Prieto & Roseano (2010) argue for the presence of a mid tone level M% for Spanish.
3·
4· For details, ct: Ladd (1996: 273ft:, 2008: 10 l) and Gussenhoven (2004: 1301f.) or the original papers directly.
There is an ongoing discussion as to whether phrase accents really exist or not. For details cf. Grice, Ladd, and Arvaniti (2000) and Ladd (2008: 1421f.).
5·
30
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
phonologically independently of their segments. Tones are autonomous segments; in other words, they are autosegments. The element in the segmental structure to which tone (T) associates is called the Tone Bearing Unit (TBU). Languages differ in whether a vowel/consonant or the mora (fl), the syllable (a), or the foot (F) counts as the unit to which tone is assigned. For example, Catalan and Spanish assign tones to metrically strong syllables (a) and in Japanese the mora is the relevant unit. The model is metrical because the utterance is divided into phrases and relative prominence is assigned to elements within the phrase. The division is characterized by a set of phonological constituents which are hierarchically organized, cf. Figure 1. The hierarchy is called Prosodic Hierarchy (Selkirk 1984, Nespor & Vogel1986/2007) 6 and is described quite nicely by Truckenbrodt (1999): "In this theory, a hierarchical, layered representation structures a string of phonological segments, grouping segments into syllables, syllables into feet, and feet into prosodic words; the layers above the prosodic word are the phonological phrase, the intonational phrase, and the utterance" (Truck.enbrodt 1999: 220).
---------
Utterance
\}
l
l
I
~
T
~ w w
w
I
F
1\ I /?J. 6 6/lJ. I tu: me nil k.uks
I I I
\
(J
(J
~H*
I
F
F
I
(J
I I I
w
I
F
I
(J
; ----\
w
I
I
F
(J
i~
{ sp:nl I I
"-t*+H
\lf*
Intonational Phrase
I (J
6&
(J
/6
! br::l6
I
intermediate Phrase Prosodic Word Foot Syllable segmental structure
f
\ B*+L
Lt tonal structure
Figure 1. Prosodic Hierarchy (adopted from Gussenhoven 2004: 124: 1)
In Figure 1, one possible pronunciation of the English saying Too maey cooks spoil the broth is given and it illustrates the different levels of the pro so die hierarchy. 7
6.
Henceforth N&V (1986/2007).
7· Several phonologists (such as Gussenhoven 2004, Fery 2004, 2010, and It6 and Mester to appear (and references cited there)) assume that the Strict Layer Hypothesis (Selki.Ik 1984,
Chapter 2. Fundamental aspects of Catalan intonation
It is adopted from Gussenhoven ( 2004: 124) but differs from the original one in two aspects. First, the phonological phrase level is replaced by the intermediate phrase, because in the present work only the latter level is assumed. Second, two different lines (dashed and solid) are used in order to represent the difference between constituency lines and association lines (cf. Brentari & Bosch 1990: 2f.). Dashed lines represent association lines. Association refers to the relationship between an autosegment and the metrical position that licenses it (Beckman 2006: 1). Solid lines represent prosodic constituency. They connect the constituents of the prosodic hierarchy and thus represent category membership. The different constituents of the prosodic hierarchy are motivated by representing domains in which certain phonological processes apply (N&V 1986/2007). In what follows, the different levels starting from the syllable are basically introduced. The focus lies on the levels of the prosodic word, the intermediate phrase, and the intonational phrase, as these domains are of great importance for the present study. I concentrate on the main aspects of these prosodic constituents and do not present a detailed explanation of the arguments motivating them (for details, cf. N&V 1986/2007). A syllable (a) consists of a sequence of speech sounds. In intonational languages a certain syllable within a word is stressed, whereas the others are unstressed. Hence, the former is more prominent than the latter. This pattern is defined lexically. The prominence relations are clarified by indicating adjacent syllables according to their relative stress pattern as strong ('s) or weak ('w'). Consequently, the syllable 0 5 is more stressed than ow Only strong syllables are anchor points for pitch accents. The foot (F) is motivated as a phonological constituent due to word stress rules (cf. N&V 1986/2007: ch.3.2 and references cited there; Hall 2000: 277ff.). A foot consists of a stressed (i.e. strong) and an unstressed (i.e. weak) adjacent syllable, which builds the underlying rhythm (trochee: strong-weak; iamb: weak-strong). The level of prosodic word or phonological word (PW. w) dominates the foot level and is thus composed of one or more feet. Also the unit of w is motivated
N&V 1986/2007) can be violated under certain circumstances (e.g. Roca 1997). In the case of the definite article in Figure 1, the direct connection of the syllable with the level of the phonological phrase is such a violation.
Strict Layer Hypothe.sis (SLH, Nespor&Vogel1986: 7): A given nonterminal unit of the prosodic hierarchy, xP, is composed of one or more units of the immediately lower category xP- 1• ii. A unit of a given level of the hierarchy is exhaustively contained in the superordinate unit of which it is a part. iii. The hierarchical structures of prosodic phonology are n-ary branching. iv. The relative prominence relation defined for sister nodes is such that one node is assigned the value strong (s) and all other nodes are assigned the value (w). i.
31
32
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
on the grounds of being a domain where certain phonological processes apply (cf. N&V 1986/2007: ch.6 for details). According to Vigario (2003: 22) one of the mostintuitive diagnostics8 for the prosodic word domain in Portuguese (and many other languages) is primary word stress. It is generally accepted that the prosodic word must bear one and only one primary stress; consequently, elements which cannot bear primary word stress do not count as a prosodic word. These elements are called clitics and they are incorporated into the prosodic word, which hence is an agglutinating entity: "Any element that is not dominated by a prosodic word node must be adjoined to the following prosodic word" (Vigario 2003: 210&263). For Catalan, a language that has lexical stress, the basic idea is by and large clear; a stressed non-compound lexical word together with any adjacent clitic counts as a prosodic word. Elements in Catalan which cannot bear primary word stress are inter alia prepositions (which are often also asyllabic), determiners, and (weak) pronouns.9 Strong pronouns are stressed; hence they are not clitics. In general, itis easy to check if an element is unstressed in Central Catalan due to the property of vowel reduction: A reduced vowel is unstressed (on the other hand, full vowels are always stressed; cf. Tables 1 and 2 in Section 1.1.1 ). Clitics cannot be utterances because utterances need stress (e.g.: Whom did you see?- *La/Ella/La. viu 'Her/Shell saw her'). Definite articles, for example, are clitics since their vowel is reduced ([al 1nen] el nen 'the child') and the vowel is often epithetic (lamic 'the friend'; the IV cannot be a w, because there is no vowel). Prosodic words in Catalan consist of at least a moraic trochee (Cabre 1993) 10 and the primary word stress falls on the rightmost stressable element (Wheeler 2004: 1). The intermediate phrase (ip) is the level above the prosodic word. The ip groups (phonological) words into one phrase which have at least one accented syllable, i.e. each ip contains at least one pitch accent. 11 ip-boundary tones (labeled T-) signal the boundary of an ip. The term intermediate phrase stems
8.
For a comprehensive overview of diagnostics for the prosodic word cf. Vigl\rio (2003: 22).
9· There are two types of pronouns in Romance. In general, the first type takes a position adjacent to the verb and the second type occupies the canonical object position. The first type is called weak or dit:ic pronoun because they are not stressed and they phonologically depend on the verb. The second type is called strong pronoun, and they are stressed. (cf. FernAndez Soriano 1993: 13&22; cf. also introduction to clitic left- and right-dislocations in Chapter 1.)
to. But d Wheeler (2005: 277) who states that there is a discussion on whether the Catalan foot is an iamb or a trochee.
u. Sometimes there is another level assumed in-between the ip and the prosodic word: the accentual phrase. Beckman & Pierrehumbert (1986) find dear evidence for this constituent in Japanese, but less compelling evidence in English. Since this unit is not relevant in Catalan
(Aguilar et al. 2009, Prieto et aL 2009, Prieto in press), it is not considered here.
Chapter 2. Fundamental aspects of Catalan intonation
from Beckman & Pierrehumbert (1986) and is similar to the constituent N&V (1986/2007) referred to as phonological phrase (PhP, cp or <j>). 12 However, whereas the unit of PhP is rather based on postlexical phonological rules (such as Raddoppiamento Sintattico, cf. N&V 1986/2007: 165) and thus constitutes a domain where phonological processes apply, the ip is principally motivated by intonational aspects.B Due to the fact that until now there has been no evidence in Catalan for phonological processes applying in this domain, I use the term intermediate phrase in the remainder of the work. 14 There are several arguments supporting the assumption of an intermediate phrase level (cf. Prieto in press). First, prosodic transcribers of Catalan clearly distinguish between a weak and a strong disjuncture on a perceptual base. The two different levels of degree of disjuncture correspond to a level 3 break index and a level 4 break index respectively. Furthermore, the ip is tonally marked after its final pitch accent and often, the boundary tones at an ip-edge differ from IntP-boundary tones. While H- typically signals the end of a sentence-internal break. the low boundary tone L% signals the end of an intonational phrase-final edge (cf. Frota, D'hnperio, Elordieta, Prieto & Vigario 2007). The intonational phrase (IntP, 1) is formed by grouping together one or more ips. The IntP constitutes the domain of an intonational contour and its edges are positions where pauses are able to appear (N&V 1986/2007: 188, Hall2000: 310). The role of pauses led researchers to postulate a systematic relation between certain syntactic constructions and intonational phrases. Parenthetical expressions and nonrestrictive relative clauses, for example, are delimited by pauses and thus seem to form an intonational domain of their own (N&V 1986/2007: 188; cf. Dehe 2009 for a recent study on this matter). Much attention has also been paid to syntactic (root) clauses as an important factor that plays a role in the formation of IntPs (cf. Downing 1970, N&V 1986/2007, Truckenbrodt 2005; cf. also Selkirk's 2005 'Comma Phrase'). 15 On the other hand, there are also phonetic indices such as the so-called continuation rise (cf. below) and semantic conditions (c£ Selkirk's 2005: 43
12. Hayes & Lahiri (1991), for example, suggest that the intermediate phrase is equivalent to N&V's ( 1986/2007) phonological phrase (cf. also Ladd 1996: 93).
13.
Ct: Section 2.3.
14· Prieto (in press: ch.2.2) clearly states that the existence of the phonological phrase in Catalan is an unresolved issue. Up to now, there is no conclusive evidence for that level of phrasing. For example, it is not the domain of sandhi processes, because vowel merging can even apply across two intermediate phrases. In addition, it is not the domain of Stress Retraction, because the default way of avoiding stress clash in Catalan is the weakening or the deletion of the first stress which is involved in the dash (cf Prieto 2008). 15.
The role of root sentences is explained in the analysis of Chapter 3.
33
34
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
'sense unit') on intonational phrasing (Selkirk 1984: 287ft~, Selkirk 2005). Furthermore, IntPs can vary with factors such as the rate of speech or the length of constituents (N&V 1986/2007: 193). Exactly as with intermediate phrases, IntPs are delimited by (initial and final) boundary tones. The tonal unit is labeled by the symbol'%' (i.e. T%) (cf. Beckman & Pierrehumbert 1986, Selkirk 2000: 566). Initial boundary tones are optional in English as well as in Catalan and Spanish. The highest unit in the prosodic hierarchy is the Uttemnce (U, u). It is composed of at least one IntP if the sentence consists of only one IntP. However, the utterance can also consist of more than one sentence. The utterance is not of interest in the present study and for this reason I refer to N&V (1986/2007: ch.8) for details. It~ and Mester (to appear) refer to the prosodic units above the prosodic word as interface categories, because the parsing of these units is regulated by constraints on the correspondence between phonological and syntactic constituents. For this reason, the literature on prosodic grouping above the word level mainly concentrates on IntP and ip. Chomsky & Halle (1968) assume that the phonologicalinformation is contained within or at least derived from syntactic trees of the surface structure. The theoretical framework at present (that Selkirk 2005: 31 describes as the "theory of the syntactic grounding of prosodic categories"), though, assumes that the relation between syntax and phonology is indirect. It proceeds from the assumption that the hierarchy of prosodic constituents is separate from the S-structure trees, but that its prosodic constituents show systematic relations to syntactic constituent structure (for details cf. Section 3.4.1 and Truckenbrodt 2007). These systematic relations are characterized by Selkirk (1986 and subsequent work), 16 N&V (1986/2007), and Truck.enbrodt (1995, 1999, 2005). Selkirk (1986) and N&V (1986/2007) present approaches for constructing prosodic constituents: relation-based mapping (N&V 1986/2007), (1), and edge-based mapping (Selkirk 1986), (2). Truck.enbrodt (1995, 1999) presents an account that calls for a syntactic
t6. In Selkilk (2009a,b) a new theory of the syntax-prosody interface is proposed, which is labeled Match Theory. While in the Alignment theory of Selkirk (1995b), the framework adopted in this study, only the right or the left edge of a syntactic constituent corresponds to the right or the left edge of a prosodic constituent respectively, the Match Theory of syntactic-prosodic structure faithfulness requires both edges to correspond causing "a matching up of the constituents themselves" (Selkirk 2009a: ch.2). This is done, on the one hand, by S-P faithfulness constraints, which require "that syntactic constituency be faithfully reflected in prosodic constituency" and, on the other hand, by P-S faithfulness constraints, which require that "prosodic constituency be a faithful reflection of syntactic constituency" (Selkilk 2009a: ch.2).
Chapter 2. Fundamental aspects of Catalan intonation 35 constituent to be contained within a prosodic constituent (Wrap theory). In this study, the edge-based (or end-based) theory and the Wrap theory are assumedP (1)
Relation-based Mapping (Nespor & Vogel1986/2007) A phonological phrase contains a lexical head and elements on its non-recursive side that are not themselves lexical heads.
(2)
Edge-based Mapping (Selkirk 1986) The right/left boundary of a prosodic constituent of the category C corresponds to the right/left boundary of a morphosyntactic category X.
Whereas the relation -based theory concentrates on syntactic heads, the edge-based theory concentrates on (edges of) maximal projections. In Selkirk's approach, the right or the left edge of a certain syntactic constituent type matches up (i.e. aligns) with the right or left edge of a corresponding prosodic constituent type. The function of Truck.enbrodt's (1999) Wrap constraint is to suppress the effect of Selkirk's alignment constraints because it prevents syntactic XPs from being split up into multiple prosodic constituents. The exact application of these theories is explained in detail in Section 3.4. At that time, non-syntactic factors that influence the prosodic phrasing and that help to account for nonisomorphism between syntactic constituents and prosodic structure are also presented. To summarize, the AM model assumes that intonation has a phonological organization couched in a prosodic hierarchy. Intonation is described as a sequence of distinctive tonal units (High (H) and Low (L), and their combinations), and its contour is represented linearly by an auto segmental string of tones. These tones are associated either with a specific syllable (pitch accents) or with a specific location in a phrase (ip-boundary tones, IntP-boundary tones). This association marks the prominence relations among the words and the prosodic groupings of an utterance. Through phonetic realization rules (cf. Pierrehumbert 1980: 25ft~, Gussenhoven 2004: ch.7.2.4, Kugler 2007: 7), the phonological representation of tones is mapped onto an actual phonetic representation, i.e. a FO contour. Both the phonological representation and the phonetic realization are language specific. 18 2.1.2
The Tone and Break Indices transcription system (ToBI)
The AM models of the 1980s were instantiated in the 1990s by a new transcription system, called ToBI (Tone and Break Indices). In this section, the main tenets
17.
Cf. Section 3.4.1 for details on the Wrap theory.
18.
This passage is mainly based on Jun (2005: 2).
36
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
of the original ToBI transcription system for English are presented. Silverman, Beckman, Pitrelli, Ostendorf, Wightman, Prica, Pierrehumbert & Hirschberg (1992) replaced the by and large abstract tonal grammar of Beckman & Pierrehumbert (1986) with a practically oriented transcription system ToBI. The prosodic structure of a language is not only defined by its tonal patterns (intonational phonology), but also by the degree of juncture (i.e. prosodic separation) between any two adjacent words (Jun 2005: 2). ToBI annotates prosodic boundary strength (degree of juncture) at each word edge by using a five-point scale from '0' for the boundary between a word and a cliticized form up to '4' for signaling a boundary between intonational phrases (Ladd 1996: 96, Gussenhoven 2004: 132). The five possible boundary strengths on the ToBI break index tier are shown in Table 1 (A Catalan example transcribed for the different break indices is given in Figure 2 in Section 2.2.2).
Table 1. The ToBI break index system Break Index
Description
0
no word boundary (e.g. ditics +word) word boundary strong juncture with no tonal markings intermediate phrase boundary intonational phrase boundary
2 3 4
The five numerical break indices are in general used throughout the book in the figures presenting the waveform, spectrogram. and the FO trace of a given sentence. Nevertheless, the numerical break indices 3 and 4 represent those parts of the hierarchy of the prosodic groupings that are most important to the present study. BI 3 is used to signal an ip-boundary and it appears on the break index tier any time a phrase tone is indicated on the tonal tier (cf. Ladd 1996: 96f.). The same applies to BI 4 with respect to an IntP-boundary. The prosodic model in ToBI is a phonological model, not a phonetic model; ToBI is consequently language specific, and the system of one language is not appropriate for describing another language's intonational system. 19 Four layers of labeling ('tiers'), aligned with the appropriate speech signals were specified in the
Originally, ToBI was a transcription system for mainstream American English. Over the years, it has become very well known and many language specific versions have been developed since the early 1990s based on the principles and annotation conventions of the 1992 model (for German: G_ToBI, Reyelt et al. 1996, Grice et al. 2005; for Slovak: Sk_ToBI, Rusko et aL 2007; for Spanish: SP _ToBI, Mendma-Denton 1999, Beckman et al2002, Sosa 2003, Prieto & Roseano 201 0; for Korean: K_ToBI, Jun 2000, for Japanese: J_ToBI, Vendetti 2005, X-JToBI, Venditti, Maekawa & Beckman in press; for an overview cf. Jun 2005, in press). Due to this development, the original ToBI was renamed in (M)AE_ToBI ((Mainstream) American English
19.
Chapter 2. Fundamental aspects of Catalan intonation 37 original ToBI conventions: words, tones, break indices, and miscellaneous information. Since the information that can be labeled is not fixed, the quantity and types of tiers mirror the language specific prosodic system as well as the interests of the researchers (Jun 2005: 3).
2.2
The Tone and Break Indices transcription system for Catalan
A ToBI system of prosodic transcription for (all varieties of) Catalan, called Cat_ToBI, is relativelynew. 20 Pilar Prieto and colleagues established a first version for Catalan some years ago and published it online in 2007. Since then several modifications have been carried out and the most recent versions are the online training materials by Aguilar et al. (2009) and the detailed descriptions of Prieto et al. (2009) and Prieto (in press). The present study is a mixture of the different Cat_ToBI versions. On the one hand, I follow the latest versions in adopting the pitch accent inventory of Aguilar et al. (2009) for the tonal description of stressed syllables. On the other hand, I do not follow the latest versions in assuming that Catalan has bitonal and tritonal edge tones on both the ip and the IntP level (cf. Aguilar et al. 2009). I follow the standard ToBI assumptions (which constituted also the base for the Cat_ToBI version of 2007) in taking complex boundaries as the result of an ip-boundary tone followed by an IntP-boundarytone (cf Section 2.2.2 for details). Like ToBI systems in general, (every version of) Cat_ ToBI is also based on the autosegmental-metrical model and it gives information on the language specific tonal patterns and the degree of juncture between adjacent words. In what follows. I describe the Catalan pitch accent inventory (Section 2.2.1) and the prosodic levels marked by the numerical break indices 3 and 4 (Section 2.2.2). 2.2.1
Pitch accents in Catalan
Central Catalan has six pitch accents. Besides the two simple tones L* ('low') and H* ('high') there are four bitonal accents: L+H*, L+>H*, L*+H, and H+L*
ToBI) following the general practice of researchers of putting the initials of the language in front of the term 'ToBI~ 20. In earlier work (Prieto 1995, Estebas-V:daplana 2000, Astruc 2005) it was assumed that the English ToBI system developed by Silverman et al. (1992) generally also works for Catalan if some required modifications are considered
38
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
(Aguilar et al. 2009, Prieto in press, Prieto et al. 2009). 21 These pitch accents are also assumed in the present work. Table 2 presents a summary of the Catalan pitch accents and includes a description of their default phonetic realization patterns as well as a description of their core distribution. The shaded part of each schematic contour shape indicates the stressed syllable (o5). Tonic syllables are metrically strong syllables and weak syllables following tonic syllables are so-called posttonic syllables. Following Prieto, D'Imperio & Gili-Fivela (2005) I assume with Prieto (in press) that the main criteria for starredness is perception. If a syllable is perceived as high, the H symbol is marked by a star '*'. A syllable is perceived as high, when the pitch level stays high or rises in large parts of the accented syllable. Equally, if a syllable is perceived as low- i.e. if the pitch level stays low or falls for large parts of the accented syllable - the L tone is marked by a star '*'. The phonetic difference of the four bitonal accents in Table 2 is signaled by both the different association of the star'""' with 0'8 and by the different leading and trailing tones. The difference between the two rising tones L+ H* and L*+H lies on the position where the rise starts (cf. Table2). In L+H* the tonal movement starts at the beginning of the stressed syllable ('early rise'), while in L*+ H the tonal movement starts at the end of the stressed syllable and continues during the following syllable ('late rise'). Whereas L+H* and L*+ H can capture the two-way alignment contrast between early rising accent and late rising accent in Spanish (Face 2001, 2002, Hualde 2002, 2003), this transcription cannot capture existing Catalan contrasts. Prieto et al. (2005: 368ff.) show that there is a three-way alignment contrast in Catalan and thus include the pitch accent L+ >H* in their tonal description. They show that the three rising accents are contrastive and that they are used in a productive manner in different Catalan intonation contours. The difference between L+H* and L+>H* lies on the position where the rise ends (cf. Table 2). The rise of both tones starts at the onset of the accented syllable, but the rise of L+ H* ends at the end of the accented syllable, while the rise of L+ >H* is aligned with the postaccentual syllable ('delayed peak'). The falling tone H +L* is characterized by a fall which starts at the beginning of the stressed syllable (cf. Table 2). L*is realized as a low tone sustained throughout the production of the stressed syllable, whereas H* is realized as a high tone throughout the production of o8• In the AM model pitch accents are divided into nuclear and prenuclear accents. While the last accent of a phrase is taken as the nuclear accent, all non -final accents countasprenuclear accents (cf. Ladd 2008: 133). In Catalan, the nuclear accent lies on
The H tones of the pitch accents can acquire etiquettes for upstep (iT) and downstep (!T) and the following accents are attested so far: !H"", iH"". L+!H*, L+jH*, and !H +L* (Prieto in press). In the case of a downstep (!H), the high tone is realized lower than the preceding high tone, whereas in the case of an upstep (iH), the high tone is realized higher with respect to the preceding one. 21.
Chapter 2. Fundamental aspects of Catalan intonation
Table 2. Inventory of monotonal and bitonal pitch accents in Catalan and their schematic representations. (descriptions and schematic representations from Prieto in press)
Monotonal pitch accents
UJ]L'
This pitch accent is phonetically realized as a low plateau. It is generally realized as a local pitch minimum in the speaker's range. It is attested in nuclear position in broad focus statements and in yes- no questions (rising type). (low accent) This pitch accent is phonetically realized as a high plateau, and no initial dip is observed. It is attested as one of the possible choices for nuclear position in wh-questions. (high accent)
Bitonal pitch accents This pitch accent is phonetically realized as a rising pitch movement during the accented syllable. The rise starts at the onset of the accented syllable and ends at the end of that syllable. It is attested in nuclear position in broad and narrow focus, in anti-expectatlonal questions, and in combination with a variety of boundary tones in calls, insistent requests, obviousness statements, etc. (early rising accent) L+>H* Thispitchaccentisalsophoneticallyrealizedasarisingpitchmovement. Typically, the L tone is aligned with the onset of the accented syllable, and the H tone is aligned with the postaccentual syllable. This is the predominant choice for prenuclear accents in broad focus statements.
[]L'+H
(rising accent with delayed peak) This pitch accent is realized as a low tone on the accented syllable followed by a rise on the posttonic syllable. The peak is typically realized at the end of the posttonic syllable, and sometimes later. It is attested in prenuclear position in yes- no questions and requests. (late
rising accent) This pitch accent is phonetically realized as a fall within the accented syllable. The start of the fall is aligned with the beginning of the accented syllable and the end of the fall is aligned (roughly) with the end of the stressed syllable. It is attested in nuclear position in yes- no questions (falling type). (falling accent)
the last stressed syllable of the utterance in broad focus declarative sentences (Prieto et al. 2009: 299; cf. also Vallduvf 1993, Estebas-Vilaplana 2003b) -which is typical for Romance languages (e.g. Ordonez 1997 and Zubizarreta 1998 for Spanish, Costa 1998 for Portuguese). In Cat_ToBI, the low pitch accent L* represents the typical nuclear accent in broad focus statements.22 The predominant choice for prenuclear
22. There is still an ongoing discussion as to how to analyze the nuclear accent of declarative sentences in the literature (Bonet 1984, Prieto 2002b, Estebas-V!laplana 2000, 2003b),
39
40
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
accents in statements is, on the other hand, the rising accent L+>H*. This tone cannot be found in nuclear position (Aguilar et al. 2009). 2.2.2
Suprasegmental prosodic levels in Catalan
In accordance with standard assumptions, all Cat_ToBI versions claim two levels above the prosodic word (w) in the prosodic hierarchy: the intermediate phrase (ip) and the intonational phrase (IntP, 1). I adopt this view here. In addition, I follow standard ToBI assumptions by assuming that each intonational phrase contains at least one intermediate phrase and that an IP edge never occurs without a preceding ip edge (Grice, Baumann & Benzmiiller 2005: 67f., Beckman, Hirschberg & Shattuck-Hufnagel2005, Ladd 2008: 88). In consequence, all IntP tones are listed as combinations (such as L-H% or 1-L%). Prieto et al. (2009) depart from this standard assumption. They do not assume a phrase accent category and only assume one type of boundary tone, namely T%, at the right edge of intermediate and intonational phrase boundaries. As a consequence of this departure, boundary tones can be monotonal (such as L% or H%), bitonal (such as LH% or HL%) or tritonal (such as LHL%).23 The number of tones in the boundary configurations (i.e. one, two or three tones) corresponds to the number of targets that are produced in the posttonic stretch (cf. Prieto in press). Thus they seem to be independent of the prosodic constituents. Prieto (in press) and Aguilar et al. (2009) also dispense with the phrase accent category. but they still assume two different types of edge tones: one type of boundary tone (labeled T-) at the end of intermediate phrases and the other type (labeled T%) at the end of intonational phrases. Despite this step back into the standard direction, they still do not assume combinations of edge tones (T-T%). 24 For the present work, I adopt the three monotonal boundary tones L-, M -, and H-as well as L%, M%, and H% of Aguilar et al. (2009), but in contrast to Aguilar et al. (2009) I assume that the boundary tones can be combined - in accordance
cf Astruc (2005: 1591f.) for a detailed discussion. There are proposals to analyze the nuclear accent either as a low target L* (Bonet 1984, Prieto 1999, 2002a,b), as a high target, which is strongly downstepped, i.e. !H"" (Estebas-V!laplana 2000) or as a bitonal accent H +L* (Astruc 2005). 13. Cf. Aguilar et aL (2009), Prieto et aL (2009), and Prieto (in press) for the whole inventory of edge tones. 24. This conclusion is drawn from the fact that no IntP-boundary tone is preceded by an ip-boundary tone in the online training materials, i.e. every utterance ends with the nuclear pitch accent and the IntP-boundary tone. However, since each intonation phrase contains at least one intermediate phrase it sounds reasonable to assume that an IP edge never occurs without a preceding ip edge. If bitonal and tritonal edge tones exist on the ip as well as on the IntP level as assumed in Aguilar et aL (2009) and Prieto (in press), a combination of them, such as LH-LM% or LHL- LHL% for example, should be theoretically possible. For the time being, there is no empirical evidence for such complex boundaries and the exact interaction between T- and T% at IntP edges thus still has to be discussed in detail.
Chapter 2. Fundamental aspects of Catalan intonation
with standard ToBI assumptions. Table 3 summarizes the monotonal edge tones in Catalan according to Aguilar et al. (2009). The shaded part indicates the posttonic syllable(s) containing the edge tone. Bitonal edge tones that are attested in my data are presented during the presentation of the boundary cues in Section 2.3. Table 3. Inventory of Catalan edge tones and their schematic representations. (descriptions cited with slight modifications from Aguilar et al. 2009)
Boundary tones
0][0
L is manifested phonetically as a low sustained tone or a low descending tone that attains the baseline of the speaker
L-
This tone is attested in nuclear position before a rightdislocated element in broad and narrow focus statements, imperatives, falling yes-no questions, wh-questions, etc.
L%
This tone is found at the end of broad and narrow focus statements, imperatives, falling yes-no questions, whquestions, etc.
M is manifested phonetically either as a rising movement to a mid tone target when it occurs after a low tone or as a mid level plateau when it occurs after a high tone (the mid tone spreads to the left).
[IJ[B M-
This tone is found in pedagogic enumerations and at the end of inconclusive elements.
M%
This tone is found in pedagogic enumerations, in obviousness and disapproval statements and in stylized vocatives. In this last case, it is normally accompanied by a lengthening of the last syllable and is realized as a sustained mid tone.
H-
H%
H is manifested phonetically as a rising pitch movement, coming from either a high or a low pitch accent. This tone is found at the end of non-final constituents (including left-dislocations), inconclusive statements, etc. This tone is found at the end of neutral calling contours and after sentence-initial topic phrases.
In general, the edge tones are realized within the posttonic area. However, when the last syllable of the final word is stressed, both the pitch accent and the edge tone are compressed and are realized within the same syllable. No tonal truncation takes place because Catalan acts as a compressing language (Prieto in press, Prieto 2002b ). In the material used in the present study, the stressed syllable of the target words is located in the antepenultimate position so that the tones need not be compressed in the posttonic stretch (cf. Section 2.3). The descriptions in Table 3 indicate that there is a difference between sentenceinternal and sentence-final boundaries. For example, L-is attested in nuclear position before a right-dislocated element in broad and narrow focus statements, while L% is attested at the end of broad and narrow focus statements without following
41
42
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
material such as right-dislocations (Aguilar et a1 2009). The present study mainly concentrates on clause-internal intonational boundaries, namely on boundaries after S or V in the experiments on SVO phrasing (Chapter 3), boundaries after clitic left-dislocations and before right-dislocations (Chapter 5), and boundaries after preverbal dislocated and non-dislocated subjects (Chapter 6). The present study confirms Aguilar et al.'s (2009) results in great parts. Nevertheless, the results in the present study also show that L% can appear even if a right-dislocation follows. The speaker simply realized a stronger juncture between the final word and the right-dislocated element The same pattern holds for sentence-internal high boundaries. Aguilar et a1 (2009) say that H- is found at the end of non-final constituents. while H% is found at the end of a sentence (to be exact: at the end of neutral calling contours). The present data show that left-dislocations. which are obviously non-final (and not neutral calling contours), can also be marked by H%. These results are in accordance with previous work on ips and lntPs. which also show thatlntP-boundaries can appear clause internally(e.g. N&V 1986, Frascarelli 2000 and Astruc 2005 among others. d. also Figure 1). An example of a clause internal high ip-boundary (continuation rise) is given below in Figure 2 The figure is taken from Aguilar et a1 (2009) and presents the utterance Gelat de vainilla i gelat davellana Vanilla ice-cream and hazelnut icecream~ The declarative sentence consists of two intermediate phrases. The first one ends after the noun vainilla vanilla' and just before the coordination i •and'; the second ends at the end of the utterance and is aligned with the right edge of the intonational phrase.
~
~
2
450 370
i' 290 .tl .... 210
e 130
...,~ "' ~
so
3
I 0 !AH*
L+jH*
H-
0
4 I,H*
L*
L%
Figure 2. Waveform, spectrogram, and FO trace for the declarative sentence Gelat de vainilla i gelat davellana 'Vanilla Ice-cream and hazelnut Ice-cream' (taken from Aguilar et al. 2009) . The continuation rise (H-) can be seen after the first conjunct
Chapter 2. Fundamental aspects of Catalan intonation
The continuation rise represents the typical end of a sentence-internal prosodic boundary (cf. Section 2.3, Figure 5). In Figure 2, it is located after the first conjunct. The ip-boundary receives the numerical break index value 3. The rise of the preceding pitch accent L+iH* continues rising until the end of the noun, where H-is located. The pitch accent after H-is a downstepped high tone (!H*) which triggers the FO fall. The nuclear accent, located on the last stressed syllable of the utterance (lla of avellana), is the low tone L*. At the end of the utterance the combined low boundary tone L-L% signals the end of the sentence (Recall that Aguilar et al. (2009) do not mark IntP-boundaries as a combination ofT- and T%. For this reason, the nuclear configuration in Figure 2 consists of L* directly followed by L%). I finish this section by summarizing the relevant terms used throughout this work. The standard ToBI terms are 'phrasal accents' and 'boundary tones'. Due to the fact that both are associated with phrasal boundaries (the former signals an ip-boundary, the latter an IntP-boundary), I use the terms ip-boundary tone instead of'phrasal accents' and IntP-boundary tone (or t-boundary tone) instead of 'boundary tones'. In my nomenclature, the term (intonational) boundary tone or edge tone comprises both ip-boundary tone as well as IntP-boundary tone. If I use the terms edge tone or boundary tone (without the preceding specification), I either make no specific claim about the exact level of phrasing or I simply refer to both levels at the same time (intermediate phrase and intonational phrase). The rest of this chapter is devoted to the presentation of boundary cues for the two prosodic levels in Catalan.
2.3
Boundary cues in Catalan
In Section 2.3, I present those boundary cues of Catalan, which are considered in the present work and based on which I analyzed the recorded data. It is important to note that the boundary cues are phonetic/phonological and as such they are not part of the grammar that accounts for the prosodic phrasing. The grammarinternal construction of the prosodic boundaries is done by the syntactic constraints of the syntax-phonology interface and by certain non-syntactic constraints (cf. Chapter 3, Sections 3.4.1 and 3.4.2). In 2.3.1, I present the main boundary cues of Romance languages of Frota, D' Imperio, Elordieta, Prieto & Vigario (2007) and I start to concentrate on Catalan boundary cues by giving the frequency of the cues detected in the Catalan corpus of Frota et al. (2007). After that, I present the following cues in greater detail: continuation rise (2.3.2), sustained pitch (2.3.3), preboundary lengthening (2.3.4), pause (2.3.5), and complex boundary tones (2.3.6). Section 2.3.7 deals with
43
44
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
the organization of these boundary cues, concluding that the first three cues signal only an ip-boundary, whereas the last two cues signal an IntP-boundary. Boundary cues in Romance languages
2.3.1
Frota et al. (2007) is in all probability the most important work on the phonetics and phonology of intonational boundaries in Central Catalan, in European Portuguese, Italian, and Spanish. According to them, phrase boundaries in theses languages show one or more of the following boundary cues (cf. Frota et al. 2007: 134): a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h.
Continuation rise (the preboundary stretch is realized as a rise from/on the last stressed syllable into the boundary syllable) Sustained pitch (the preboundary stretch is realized as a rise on the last stressed syllable followed by a high plateau up to the boundary) The boundary is signaled by a High tone The boundary is signaled by a Low tone There is a 'pitch reset' after the boundary at the beginning of the following phrase The FO drops to the speaker's base le1'el at the boundary There is a preboundary lengthening, and A pa.use is present at the phrase boundary (a pause is defined as a stretch of silence)
Frota et al. (2007) use a corpus of 239 Catalan SVO sentences. These sentences are only a subset of the whole database. The authors decided to choose only uncontroversial cases of intonational phrasing, i.e. they did not included unclear or difficult cases, where boundaries were hard(er) to detect In their 239 sentences not all listed boundary cues were detected. For Catalan they give the frequency of the boundary cues as shown in Table 4 (cf Frota et al. 2007: 135). Table4. Frequency (in%) ofboundary cues of the Catalan corpus in Frota et al. (2007) Cont. Rise
Catalan
100.0
Sustained Pitch
0.0
Boundary Tone H
L
100.0
0.0
Pitch Reset
28.0
Drop PB Base Level Length.
0.0
100.0
Pause
10.5
In the Catalan corpus of Frota et al. (2007) 100% of the sentences are marked by a High tone which is realized as a continuation rise. For this reason there is neither a sustained pitch nor a Low boundary tone to be found in Frota et al. (2007). Both cues, though, are nevertheless possible in Catalan: Cat_ToBI states L-and L% as normal boundary tones (cf. Aguilar et al. 2009, Prieto in press) and a sustained pitch is found in my data (cf. Figure 9, Section 2.3.3) as well as in spontaneous
Chapter 2. Fundamental aspects of Catalan intonation
speech (Benet in prep., Benet, Lle6 & Cortes to appear). According to Frota et al. (2007) sentence internal prosodic breaks in Romance are predominantly marked by a High boundary tone and the preboundary stretch is predominantly realized as a continuation rise. This general statement can also be maintained for Catalan. In addition to these phonological and phonetic cues, preboundary lengthening and pauses are also relevant in Catalan. The former can be seen with a frequency rate of 100% in the corpus. The latter is shown below. I do not consider the remaining two cues: pitch reset25 and the drop of the speaker's base level. 2.3.2
The continuation rise
Estebas-Vilaplana (2000: 115) gives a clear example of a continuation rise ('abrupt rise' in her terms). In a subject with two anchor points for accents the second accent can be compared with the first one (cf. Figure 3).
1-A../~1
Les meves amJgues gren bones nenes. "My friends were good girls."
Figure 3. Intonation indication for prosodic boundary (taken from Estebas-Vilaplana 2000: 115; shaded grey and underlining signal stressed syllables)
25. Pitch reset is also called simply reset and interrupts the downstep effect. A downstep lowers the FO-realization of the material following a pitch accent. In (i) the downstep can be seen between pitch accent 1, 2, and 3 and also between accent 4 and 5. There is no downstep between accent 3 and 4, though. It is often assumed that a prosodic boundary causes such a cancellation of the downstep effect (Selkirk & Tateishi 1991 among others): If there is a downstep in the realization of adjacent pitch accents, there is no prosodic break in-between them. However, if the downstep is interrupted by a reset, a prosodic boundary is probable. Figure (i) demonstrates a total reset since accent 4 is as high as accent l.lf accent 4 is higher than accent 3 but lower than accent 1, one speaks of partial reset. According to Frota et al (2007), the number of pitch resets is only nearly one third of the 239 examined Catalan sentences. Only ratios of 0. 90 or higher between the peak of the first accent of the first phrase and the peak of the first accent of the second phrase (in my example accent 4) were considered cases of reset (Frota et al. 2007: 135).
f\Jif& 1
2
3
4
5
Figure (i): Downstep (.!-) and pitch reset (t) (taken from Ishihara 2007b: 5)
45
46 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
The continuation rise can be seen on the subject noun amigues 'friends' (fern., pl) in Figure 3. The FO contour of the first pitch accent, which is located on the possessive pronoun meves 'my: rises and reaches its peak on the accented syllable (L+H*). After the peak the FO contour descends due to the fact that the second accent is also L+ H*: The FO contour has to be low at the beginning of this accent. Even though the FO contour on mi of amigues 'friends' (fern., pl.) rises from low to high as on me of meves 'my: it does not descend after the accented syllable. The FO contour continues to rise on the posttonic syllable gues of amigues 'friends'. This rise into the preboundary syllable is called continuation rise and indicates an intonational boundary (cf. also Figure 8). It can, but need not, be obligatorily followed by a pause. Bolinger (1984: 404)- although not using the term continuation rise- describes its characteristic well by saying that "[t]here is something in the intonation itself that signals or can be used to signal incompleteness, and it is obviously the terminal rise': Hence, something is unfinished and there has to be a continuation. Previously, Delattre (1965: 25) spoke of continuation for describing such incompleteness effects.26 In my work, the High boundary tone (continuation rise) is one main cue to detecting prosodic breaks. For this reason, I shall discuss this criterion in more detail here. In Prieto (2006b ), the alignment of the H tonal target relative to the end of the word is examined. Rising accents (LH) are typical for Catalan (prenuclear) accents. According to Estebas-Vilaplana (2003a), such rises consist of a combination ofL*pitch accent plus a High word edge tone, i.e. that H aligns with the right edge of a word. Prieto (2006b) shows that the H location is sensitive to the position of the accented syllable within the given word though. She discovers a consistent trend: there is no strict word anchoring effect of H, but the peaks of word-final accented syllables (oxytonic words) are located after the end of the word (i.e. on the following word), whereas the peaks of word-medial accented syllables (in her case paroxytonic words) are located before the end of the word. (1)
a.
Compraven talls. buy.3PL.PAST pieces 'They bought pieces:
b.
Compra ventalls. buy.3sG.PAST fans 'Sihe bought fans:
26. Delattre (1965: 20) introduces the terms minor continuation and major continuation for describing the intonational signals which serve as a due to degrees of subordination within a given utterance (cf also Bolinger 1984: 410).
Chapter 2. Fundamental aspects of Catalan intonation w-medial
w-final
com/llflven talls
corr!JlN ventalls
96ms ~
< ace. syllable > endofword >
61ms
vr
< ace. syllable > endofword>
Hgure 4. Schematic diagram of the FO peak location with respect to the end of the syllable (and the end of the word) in paroxytontc and oxytonic words (taken from Prieto 2006b: 13)
Figure 4 is a schematic diagram of the differences in FO peak locations with respect to the end of the syllable (and the end of the word) in the paroxytonic (word medial condition) and oxytonic words (word final condition) of the sentences in Example (1). The thick vertical line in Figure4 signals the word boundary; the time value provides the mean distance between syllable boundary and peak (for compraven tails) and between word boundary and peak (for compra ventalls). Prieto (2006b) concludes that the "data [ ... ] does not support the idea that prenuclear pitch accents in Catalan contain an obligatory word-edge tone H that aligns with the right edge of a word. We entertain the possibility that the alignment effects found by EstebasVilaplana might have been conditioned by the presence of a phrase break H-" (Prieto 2006b: 13)
One can conclude from this discussion that a High tone at the end of a paroxytonic word is likely to signal an intonational boundary (i.e. ip or 1). The difference between the High tone of a bitonal rising accent and the high boundary tone is of great importance to the boundary criterion. If a high realization ofFO at the end of a paroxytonic word is very likely to be a boundary tone, the high FO contour at the end of a proparoxytonic word is a boundary tone in all probability. Let me recap the idea: if lexical stress in a word is on the last syllable it is hard to tell the difference between L+>H* and L+H* H-. The reason for this is that (a) the rising tone has a high contour after the stressed (and accented) syllable and (b) the high boundary tone H- also causes a high FO contour. If the accented syllable is the last syllable before a boundary, it is unclear whether the high FO contour stems from the rising contour tone or from a high boundary tone. Boundary tones, however, are independent from stressed syllables; they only mark the boundary. As a consequence, in order to tell if a high contour before a boundary stems from a continuation rise, one has to tear apart the two
47
48
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
tones. The only tone that can be moved away from the boundary is the pitch accent since it is directly connected with the stressed syllable and independent from the boundary. For this reason, I chose proparoxytonic words (paraules esdruixoles) in the target positions of my experiments. Their stress is located on the antepenultimate syllable so that the stress is followed by two unstressed syllables (ow), which separate the accent from the boundary. Based on proparoxytonic words, it is expected that the peak of a bitonal L+>H* accent differs from the high realization of the High boundary tone, so that a continuation rise or a sustained pitch can easily be detected. In Figure 5 an abstract proparoxytonic word is schematically modeled. The diagonal line represents the FO contour of this word. The L+>H* accent is realized on the stressed syllable (i.e. on the strong syllable oJ According to Prieto (2006b), the peak of the pitch accent is neither realized on os nor does it align with the word boundary (cf. the thick rightmost line after ow2 marked by w). It is located on the first posttonic syllable (owl, where ow= weak syllable), which is marked in Figure 5 by the end of the thick part of the diagonal line. The rise does not end on owl' though, but continues until the word boundary after aw2. The high contour on ow2 is caused by a High boundary tone. 2 7
H-
(J"w2
w
Figure 5. Schematic diagram of a continuation rise on a proparoxytonic word
If there is no High boundary tone, the FO contour has the pattern as schematized in Figure 6. Due to the fact that the following word (wor~) starts with a rising tone, FO has to descend in order to reach the Low target of the next pitch accent. Since weak syllables are not anchor points for pitch accents, ow2 cannot influence the contour and FO is not high at the word edge.
27. In Selkirk (1984: 288) the continuation rise is taken as a phonetic cue for an intonational phrase. I take this rise as simply signaling an intermediate phrase break. Only if the continuation rise is paired with a cue for IntPs (cf. below), is it located at an IntP boundary.
Chapter 2. Fundamental aspects of Catalan Intonation 49
L+H,.
as
awl
\.
word 1
aw
as
aw2
y
.I
word2
Figure 6. Schematic diagram of a proparoxytonlc word without High boundary tone
A real example for the schematic diagram in Figure 6 is given in Figure 7. The (left-dislocated) DP I.: alfobrega d' Algeria... The basil from Algeria' that is presented in Figure 7 is cut out from the sentence I.: alfobrega d' Algeria, la Barbara, la va posar a l'hivernacle fa un mes
Figure 7. Waveform, spectrogram, and FO trace for the utterance L' alfobrega d' Algeria... 'The basil from Algeria' of speaker AT (sentence 02a_OO_S_AT)
Both nouns in Figure 7 are proparoxytonic words. The prenudear rising accent L+ >H* is associated with the strong syllable fo of the first word L' al.fo.bre.ga ~e basil' and its peak is delayed (here marked by<>'). As assumed before (d. Figure 6) the delayed peak is not located at the end of the word, if there is no continuation rise. The peak in Figure 7 is on the first posttonic syllable and the pitch track starts falling due to the low leading tone of the second noun. Consequently. there is no ip-boundary between the two prosodic words I.: alfobrega The basil' and d' Algeria 'from Algeria However, there is a continuation rise on d' Algeria 'from Algeria:, marked by H- and the break index 3.
50
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
2.3.3
The sustained pitch
In Figure 8 a sustained pitch is compared to a continuation rise. The difference from the continuation rise is that a sustained pitch rises up to a certain level and then keeps the fundamental frequency until the end; in other words, a sustained pitch creates a plateau. Such a pitch track can be labeled by L+H*!H-. The ipboundary tone H-is downstepped in order to signal that FO remains high but does not continue rising as in the case of a continuation rise. Continuation rise
Ba
da
L
0
na
Sustained pitch
Ba
da
L
0
na
Figure 8. Schematic example of a continuation rise and a sustained pitch on the word 'Badalona' (taken from Frota et al 2007: 135)
A sustained pitch as well as a continuation rise signals a prosodic boundary because the posttonic syllables cannot influence the fundamental frequency. The height at the end of the word is caused by a boundary tone. According to Frota et al. (2007), the sustained pitch is frequent in Italian but is rare in the two Romance languages of European Portuguese and Spanish and never occurs in the Catalan corpus (Frota et al. 2007). But there are good reasons to assume that Catalan has sustained pitch accents. First, the non-existence of a sustained pitch in Frota et al. (2007) might well be a corpus effect because they only chose sentences with clear instances of boundaries and it might be the case that examples of a sustained pitch had been sorted out. Second, in my data there are some instances of a sustained pitch, cf. Figure 9. Third, Cat_ToBI gives several examples of such a tone (which is called 'to sostingut'). Fourth and finally, recent work on spontaneous speech (Benet in prep., Benet, Lle6 & Cortes to appear) gives clear evidence for this tone.
Chapter 2. Fundamental aspects of Catalan Intonation
g g3SO r-r+o+~--~4-~~~~~~
J:~300 t-~~:+~==c:~~~k======4~~~~~==~~
250200 5 1so
eo
+----+"""""+----+-+-::
~loo t=~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ c
&
0. 186
0. 11
0.2 12
Figure 9. Waveform. spectrogram. and FO trace for the utterance .. .que l' aguila robd el ratoli
'... that the eagle stole the mouse' of speaker GM (sentence 33_Emb_GM): Sustained pitch associated with the subject l' aguila 'the eagle'
Figure 9 shows a sustained pitch associated with the subject of the embedded clause ... que 1'aguila roba e1 ratoli <... that the eagle stole the mouse' of speaker GM The stressed syllable 1'a of 1'a.gui.la ~e eagle' is associated with a late rising tone L *+H.28 The contour rises on the first posttonic syllable gui and also reaches its peak there. The height of the pitch is sustained until the end of the second posttonic syllable, i.e. the end of the word 2..3.4
Pre boundary lengthening
Lengthening refers to the longer duration of syllables which precede a boundary. Their length can be opposed to either the duration of similar syllables, which are not followed by a boundary. in the same utterance or to the duration of the same syllables of the same word in a different sentence, where the word is not before a boundary. In both cases, the target word is uttered by the same speaker. The duration of the preboundary syllables is significantly longer and this signals a boundary(d Estebas-Vilaplana 2000: 120, Astruc 2005: 153 for Catalan; Medina Murillo 2005 for Spanish). Figure 10 and Figure 11 illustrate the different length of the three preboundary syllables of the word L'alfobrega ~e basil' of speaker AT.
28. Even though the rising tone L+>H* is the typical prenudear accent in Catalan dedaratives, there are also instances of the late rising tone L*+H to be found as prenudear accent in dedaratives.
SL
52
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
Figure 10 is the same as Figure 7 with the difference that the length of the relevant syllables is added Figure 11 shows the noun in a position right before an IntPboundary break (marked with H% and break index 4).
0. 186
0. 144
0.092
Figure 10. Waveform, spectrogram. and FO trace for the utterance L' al.fohrega d' Algeria .. . 'The basil from Algeria' of speaker AT (sentence 02a_OO_S_AT): Length ofnon-preboundary syllables
0.171
fa
bre
ga
0.183
0.169
0.168
Figure 11. Waveform, spectrogram, and FO trace for the utterance L 'alftlbrega ... 'The basil' of speaker AT (sentence Ola_O_S_AT): Length of pre boundary syllables
Whereas the last syllable ga has a duration of only 92 milliseconds in the nonpreboundaryposition in Figure 10. it has a duration of168msin Figure 11, where it directly precedes the boundary. This is a difference of 80 ms. The pattern is similar
Chapter 2. Fundamental aspects of Catalan intonation
for the first posttonic syllable bre: it is longer in the preboundary case. However, in these examples the accented syllable (fo) does not show any significant difference. The longer duration of the syllables in the preboundarycase (cf. Figure 11) has the consequence that the whole word has a longer duration. This is illustrated in Figure 12 and Figure 13. In the former figure, the verb(al complex) va comptar 'counted' is shown in a preboundary position and is uttered with a length of 568 ms by speaker MO. In the latter figure, it is in a non-preboundary position and is uttered with a length of only 406 ms (by the same speaker).29 The length of the whole verbal complex reflects the length of its syllables: va (123 ms in Figure 12 vs. 110 ms in Figure 13), comp- (287 ms vs. 180 ms) and -tar (157 ms vs. 114 ms).
0.123
0.287
0.157
va
comp-
-tar 0.5682
0
Time (s)
Figure 12. Length of syllables in seconds of the verb va comptar 'counted' of speaker MO in an utterance with a long object (sentence 22_SVOO _MO)
0.110
0.180
0.114
va
comp-
-tar 0.4061
0
Time (s)
Figure 13. Length of syllables in seconds of verb va comptar 'counted' of speaker MO in utterance with a short object (sentence 21_SVO_MO)
29.
Ct: Chapter 3. 3.2 for the results of each single speaker.
53
S4 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan 1.3.5
Pauses
Pauses are defined as a stretch of silence (Frota et aL 2007) or as a major FO break (Estebas-Vilaplana 2000: 118). Here, I distinguish between two kinds of pauses (Figure 14). The first kind of pause comprises stretches ofsilence which are visible in FO due to an interruption of the pitch track The data in the appendix are marked with \P)' for pause if the stretch is longer than 100 ms. The second kind of pause is a so-called audible pause. In general this type of pause comprises breaks which can be perceived audibly as a pause, but which are not visible in the pitch track In addition. stretches of silence that are shorter than 100 ms are also considered as audible pauses. The latter kind of pause also comprises the tonal extension mentioned in Astruc (2005: 153). Speakers often drawl the syllable before the boundary until it becomes a short silent pause. In order to dedde when an extreme lengthening becomes a pause proper. she sets the cut-off point at 100 ms. She considers such a duration enough for a period of silence to be perceived as a pause, i.e. as a major prosodic break in this type of "'read. pre- planned. non spontaneous data":
Figure 14. Waveform, spectrogram, and FO trace for the utterance L' alfahrega, Ia Barbara, Ia va posar (a l'hivernaclefa un mes) 'Barbara put the basil (In the green house one month ago)' of speaker AT (sentence Ola_O_S_AT)
Figure 14 illustrates both kinds of pauses. The two IntP breaks are both marked by H-H% and by the break index 4. The first IntP break (the one after the left-dislocated DP I.: alfobrega lhe basil') is an example of an audible pause. There is no visible stretch of silence, but a pause can clearly be perceived The second IntP break (the one after the preverbal subject Ia Barbara) is an example of a visible pause. The stretch of silence has a length of 115 ms and it is visible in the oscillogram (the encoding of the acoustic signal) as well as in the pitch track
Chapter 2. Fundamental aspects of Catalan intonation
The notion 'major break' which is used by Estebas-Vilaplana (2000) and Astruc (2005) signals that pauses are a very special boundary cue. I discuss this in more detail in Section 2.3.7 by concluding that they distinguish between ips and IntPs, exactly as a complex boundary tone. 2.3.6
Complex boundary tones
Based on Beckman & Pierrehumbert's (1986: 288) reanalysis of the phrase accent T- as an ip-boundary tone, the ToBI transcription system (Silverman et al. 1992) represents T-in IntP-final position together with the t-boundary tone T% as a complex symbol T-T% (cf. also Ladd 1996: 98 and Gussenhoven 2004: 132). As such, it is the standard assumption for English that a complex boundary tone signals a boundary of an intonational phrase (IntP, t). I consequently follow this assumption in the present work. 3 For example, the complex tone L-L% is the typical tone at the end of declarative sentences. A sustained pitch preceding an t-boundary is associated with (!)H-!H%. A continuation rise preceding an IntP-boundary is associated with H-H%. In the early Cat_ToBI version from 2007 the tone H-H% was described for questions (e.g. absolute questions (interrogatives absolutes de tipus ascendent) and for exhortative questions; in Prieto in press it is labeled HH% though). However, this tone is also typical for left-dislocations (cf. Chapter 5), which surely are not questions. For this reason, I assume that H-H%'s function is not only to signal questions, but that it can also appear clause-internally without an interrogative function. A very common complex boundary tone in my data is L-H%. This tone is described in the early Cat_ToBI version as one which expresses apparentness/ obviousness in a soft and smooth manner and the tone is typical in dedaratives expressing obviousness and in imperatives with a nuance of insistence.31 Although L-H% appears also every now and then in all-new sentences in my data (cf. Chapter 3), it is more common in the experiments including left-dislocations (Chapter 5 and 6) and I usually refer to L-H% when speaking of complex boundary tones in these chapters. This can be explained with the given status of these constituents
°
30. However, in the experiment data there are many cases where it is doubtful that a complex tone automatically signals an IntP-boundary. It is doubtful because the perception of these breaks is not as strong as in the case of clear instances of an IntP break. It might thus be the case that the ip-boundary tone is also complex, exactly as assumed in the most recent versions of Cat_ToBI (Aguilar et al. 2009, Prieto in press). Nevertheless. this work follows the assumption that complex boundary tones signal an IntP -boundary.
31· Aguilar et al. (2009) and Prieto (in press) say that LH- and LH% (the corresponding notations in the most recent Cat_ToBI versions) are attested in anti-expectational and incredulity questions.
55
S6
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
(d Chapter 1) and by repeating them a certain kind of obviousness is expressed Figure 15 is an example of L-H%. The left-dislocated DP r alfabrega lhe basil' has an early rising pitch accent on the stressed ~liable r al. The peak is reached between the stressed and the first posttonic syllable. After the peak. the pitch falls until the beginning of the preboundary syllable ga and then rises until the end of the word This fall-rise is expressed by L-H%.
L'al
fa
bre
ga
0.113
0.229
0.152
0.270
Figure 15. Waveform, spectrogram, and FO trace for the word L' alfabrega 'the basil' of speaker MO (sentence Ola_O_S_MO) : The IntP-boundary tone (BI 4) consists of a Low ip-boundary tone L-and a High tone H% 2.3.7
Organization of boundary cues
Only the last two criteria. pauses and complex boundary tones, indicate a boundary at the intonational phrase level. They are therefore very important for the dedsion on which level a prosodic break is located Complex boundary tones constitut~ for theory-internal reasons, an IntP break and pauses are mentioned throughout the literature on Catalan intonation as one dear cue for an IntP break. Estebas-Vilaplana (2000: 118) states that •the absence of a major FO breaiC shows that a prosodic break can be classified as an ip-boundary (.. PhP-boundarY' in her terminology). Astruc (2005: 154: Table 4.3) classifies pauses as signaling the ToBI break index 4 (i.e. IntP) and in Cat_ToBI it is mentioned that the IntP defines the position for pauses (Prieto et al. 2009: 293, Prieto in press: ch.2.2). In general, neither in Frota et al. (2007) nor in Cat_ToBI (Prieto et al. 2009) are the two prosodic levels intermediate phrase (ip) and intonational phrase (IntP. L) dearly distinguished by boundary cues (beside pauses). In addition, there are no detailed studies yet on Catalan, which try to characterize the different prosodic levels, either by phonetic properties or by (segmental) phonological rules that
Chapter 2. Fundamental aspects of Catalan intonation
apply in the specific domain.32 One important instance for distinguishing between the two levels mentioned is the transcriber, for it is the transcriber who assigns the boundaries to a certain level of intonational grouping. Prieto et al. (2009) note "'El criteri primordial per a decidir el grau de separaci6 prosodica es fonamenta en la impressi6 auditiva del transcriptor- encara que la presencia de determinats correlats ac1lstics tambe pot resultar util" (Prieto et al. 2009: 292; 'The essential criterion to decide the degree of the prosodic separation is based on the auditory impression of the transcriber - although the presence of concrete acoustic correlates can also be useful'; translation: I.F.).
As for this study, I take the first three mentioned boundary cues (continuation rise, sustained pitch, and preboundary lengthening) as cues for the ip-level. My assumption is based on the following reasoning: due to the facts that (a) according to the Strict Layer Hypothesis an IntP-boundary always coincides with an ip-boundary and (b) a continuation rise occurs at the level of ip (Prieto 2005, Prieto et al. 2009), each continuation rise preceding an IntP-boundary can be reduced to the lower ipboundary. This is similar to the sustained pitch and preboundary lengthening. The two remaining boundary cues, pauses and complex boundary tones, are used as cues for boundaries of the intonational phrase level. As described, pauses including visible and audible pauses and complex boundary tones are consequently taken as signaling IntP-boundaries. If one of the ip-boundary cues is combined with either a pause or with a complex boundary tone, they automatically precede an IntP-boundary. Table 5 gives a short summary of the relevant boundary cues. Table 5. List of assumed prosodic levels (between prosodic word and utterance) and the corresponding boundary cues Prosodic constituent
Boundary cues
intermediate phrase (ip) continuation rise sustained pitch preboundary lengthening
Intonational Phrase (IntP, t) pause (visible stretch of silence & audible pause) complex boundary tones
One final important note with respect to the organization of the boundary cues is necessary here. As mentioned, the boundary cues described in Frota et al. (2007) account for both prosodic levels. I clearly separate them in order to distinguish between ip and IntP. However, as my data show, it is impossible to say that a specific syntactic/pragmatic constituent is associated with a certain kind of prosodic constituent. This means that, for example, the right edge ofleft-dislocations does not
32· Prieto (2008: slide 9) dearly states that there are no arguments for prosodic constituency based on blocking or triggering of postlexical rules.
57
58
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
align always with either an IntP-boundary or an ip-boundary. Left-dislocations align with both kinds ofboundaries (cf. also Astruc 2005 for right-dislocations). This optionality might be a reason for why in studies such as Frota et al. (2007) no decision is made as to the correspondence between boundary cues and prosodic constituents. Furthermore, this optionality is the reason for Prieto et al. (2009) to assume only one type of boundary tones, while still assuming the two prosodic levels ip and IntP. In the present work. I follow older proposals (and hence not Prieto et al. 2009) and continue assuming two difierent boundary tones; but the described variation is the reason for introducing the term prosodic phrase as a hypernym for intermediate and intonational phrases (cf. Elordieta, Frota & Vigario 2005: 116, fn.2 for an analogous reasoning for Spanish). Prosodic phrase thus refers to both levels of intonational grouping, ip and IntP. The goal of this work is not to establish a detailed phonetic analysis in order to see how the Prosodic Hierarchy is implemented in Catalan. Rather, the aim is to decide whether a prosodic break is present or not. Moreover, it is shown that a break is in fact present at both levels of phrasing.
2.4
Assumptions on phonological inventory of Catalan
To conclude this chapter, I summarize the fundamentals and assumptions on which I have based my work. The foundation of my analysis is an early version 33 of the recent Cat_ToBI system proposed in Aguilar et al. (2009), Prieto et al. (2009), and Prieto (in press.), which is itself based on the Autosegmental-Metrical (AM) Model (Pierrehumbert 1980, Ladd 1996, 2008). Consequently, I assume that tones (High, Low) are located on a different tier than prosodic constituents, but they do associate with them (autosegmental part). The phonological constituents are organized hierarchically in the so-called Prosodic Hierarchy (metrical part). Just as in Aguilar et al. (2009), Prieto et al. (2009), and Prieto (in press), I assume two levels between the prosodic word (w) and the Utterance (U): Intermediate Phrase (ip) and Intonational Phrase (IntP, 1). However, I introduce the term prosodic phrase as a hypernym for ip and IntP, since there is often no need to distinguish between the two levels. As usual in ToBI systems, I assume three types of accents: pitch accents (which associate with metrical strong syllables), ip-boundary tones (which associate with the level of the intermediate Phrase), and IntP-boundary tones
33· As mentioned before, I base myself on a Cat_ToBI version which circulated in 2007 and which is much closer to the traditional transcription system proposed in Silverman et al. (1992) than the latest version(s).
Chapter 2. Fundamental aspects of Catalan intonation
(which associate with Intonational Phrases). I use the term edge tone or boundary tone as a hypernym for ip-boundary tone and IntP-boundary tone. With Aguilar et al. (2009) I assume six pitch accents: the two mono tonal accents L* ('low') and H* ('high') and four bitonal accents: L+H*, L+>H*, L*+H, and H+L*. The predominant choice for prenuclear accents in Catalan broad focus statements is L+>H*. The nuclear accent is L*. As for boundary tones, I assume the tones stated in Cat_ToBI for the intermediate phrase and the intonational phrase, namely L-, M-, and H-as well as L%, M%, and H%. In line with standard assumptions but in contrast to the latest Cat_ToBI versions, I assume that the combination of these tones (like H-H%, L-L%, L-H% etc.) signals a boundary on the IntP level. I take the three boundary cues continuation rise, sustained pitch, and preboundary lengthening as cues for the ip-level. Pauses and complex boundary tones are used as cues for boundaries of the intonational phrase level. Pauses include visible and audible pauses and complex boundary tones are consequently taken as signaling IntP-boundaries. If one of the ip-boundary cues is combined with either a pause or with a complex boundary tone, they automatically precede an IntP-boundary.
59
CHAPTER3
Phrasing patterns in Catalan SVO structures
1his chapter is devoted to objects and their influence on the prosodic grouping of the (matrix) subject and verb in Catalan. It is hypothesized that sentential objects - compared to DP objects increase the single group phrasing of (matrix) SV. Catalan is described as a language where eurhythmic constraints play a role and cause a short subject to phrase together with the verb when the object is long (i.e. (SV)(O), Prieto 2005, D'Imperio et al. 2005). In order to compare the different objects two experiments were conducted: the first for simple SVO structures and the second for complex SVO structures, in which the object is sentential. The research shows that the percentage of (SV) phrasing increases (by about 20%) when the object is sentential. It further shows that the (SV) grouping is only a root phenomenon. The (SV) grouping does not show up in embedded clauses. If the embedded object clause consists of a short subject and a long object, the embedded subject never phrases with the embedded verb. In addition, the embedded clause is in three quarters of the data prosodically separated from the matrix clause and the object clause itself is not phrased in a single constituent. The findings can be accounted for using an optimality theoretic (OT) framework based on Prieto's (2005) three main constraints. I depart from Prieto (2005), though, by assuming a new constraint which accounts for the boundary preceding the embedded clause (ALIGN-CP,L) and by assuming that there is a probabilistic constraint ranking where the constraints are situated on a continuous ranking scale (Stochastic OT, Boersma & Hayes 2001). In that way, I can account for the variation in the grouping of complex SVO structures. The research on object clauses is especially important due to the literature on Phrasing in Romance of the last decade not inquiring seriously into complex structures. These studies have mainly been concerned with simple SVO structures. Furthermore, the authors, who do examine complex structures, are mostly concerned with non-restrictive relatives, nominal appositives, parenthetical expressions or they are concerned with the comparison of right boundaries of root clauses (Downing 1970, Nespor & Vogel1986/2007, Selkirk 2005, Dehe 2009 among others). They are hardly concerned with clauses which are part of the verb's
62
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan argument structure. Truckenbrodt (2005), though. does inquire into subject and object clauses but his study is based on only one speaker. This chapter is structured as follows: In Section 3.1 background information on the research on Romance SVO during the last decade is given. This brief introduction quickly moves to a concentration on Catalan. Section 3.2 provides the reader with the general outline of the conducted experiments in the present study. Section 3.3 concentrates on the simple and complex SVO experiments. First, the specific experiment design is presented; then the results of the detected boundary cues are given. Finally. the results of the prosodic phrasing of these structures are presented. In Section 3.4 the theoretical approach to the phrasing of SVO and of embedded SVO is given.
3.1
Background and experiment hypothesis
In this section the general phrasing pattern of SVO in Romance is introduced followed by a detailed description of Catalan (Section 3.1.1 ). Finally; the two hypotheses underlying the experimental research are introduced (Section 3.1.2). Since the introduction of the Prosodic Hierarchy (Selkirk 1984, Nespor & Vogel1986/2007) the placement of intonational boundaries and their determining factors have been discussed. During the last decade several studies concerning the prosodic grouping in Romance sentences have been published (for Catalan: Prieto 1997, Prieto 2005; for European Portuguese (EP): Frota 2000; for Italian: D'Imperio 2001, 2002; for Spanish: Prieto 2006a, Elordieta et al. 2005 (also for EP), Feldhausen, Gabriel & Peskova 2010, Gabriel, Feldhausen & Peskova to appear; for all four languages: D'Imperio et al. 2005, Frota et al. 2007). The most recent works, especially, mainly concentrate on neutral declarative SVO utterances. 'Neutral' means that the SVO sentences are taken to be all-new sentences. The sentences count as answers to the question "What happened?" (cf Section 1.1.3 for more detailed information on informa.tion structure and the relation between focus and question/answer pairs). By speaking of 'neutral declarative SVO utterances' it is implicitly assumed that preverbal subjects are not taken as topics - otherwise they could not be 'neutral' (cf. Section 1.1.4 for arguments that preverbal subjects are not automatically left-dislocated). In D'Imperio et al. (2005), a crosslinguistic study of prosodic phrasing in Catalan, Spanish, Italian, and European Portuguese is presented. They mention three factors that can influence the phrasing pattern: syntactic branchingness, length of constituents, and speech rate (D'Imperio et al. 2005: 60f.). In their study they concentrate on only the first two factors and recorded two speakers of each language. D'Imperio et al. (2005) come to the conclusion that the Romance
Chapter 3. Phrasing patterns in Catalan SVO structures
varieties examined display different intonational phrasing patterns. The most common phrasing pattern in Catalan and Spanish is (S)(VO). Catalan has the tendency to phrase utterances in prosodic constituents of similar length. For this reason, an (SV)(O) phrasing is often produced with non-branching subjects and long objects. In Spanish, the (SV)(O) phrasing also appears only in cases with a long branching object (D'Imperio et al. 2005: 81, Prieto 2006a: 55): According to the study in D'Imperio et al. (SV)(O) in Spanish is much less common than in Catalan and statistically not significant. 1 In Italian and in Standard European Portuguese (SEP, the variety spoken in Lisbon) the (SVO) phrasing is the usual one (D'Imperio et al. 2005: 83). (S)(VO) phrasings are also possible, but they seem to be limited according to the nature ofS (long/branching). The nature of the object does not seem to play a role (cf. also Elordieta et al. 2005: 120). In contrast to SEP, the (S)(VO) phrasing is the pervasive pattern in Northern European Portuguese (NEP, D'Imperio et al. 2005: 83). Although in Italian the (SV)(O) phrasing might show up sometimes, this pattern nevertheless is rarely allowed or tends to be strongly avoided (D'Imperio et al. 2005: 76). In European Portuguese, (SV)(O) is unattested (D'Imperio et al. 2005:83, Elordieta et al. 2005: 130). Consequently, the (SV)( 0) pattern has the tendency to show up only in Catalan (and rarely Spanish), even though it does not constitute the pervasive phrasing pattern in the language. In (1) I present an overview of the phrasing patterns in the four Romance languages ('././': most common/typical phrasing; './': possible phrasing; '(./)': existing, but seldom phrasing; '0': unattested or strongly avoided phrasing). (1)
(S)(VO) (SV)(O) (SVO)
p.1
(according to D'Imperio et al. 2005)
Overview of the phrasing patterns Catalan ././ ./ (./)
Spanish ././ (./) ./
Italian ./
SEP ,f
NEP ././
0
0
0
././
././
./
Detailed background of Catalan phrasing patterns
In D'Imperio et al. (2005) two speakers from Central Catalan were examined. They read a corpus of 124 sentences three times. The factor oflength was controlled for
t. Elordieta et a1. (2005: 130) also report that (SV)(O) has no importance in Spanish. The same conclusion is drawn in Feldhausen et a1. (2010) and Gabriel et al. (to appear) for Buenos Aires Spanish: (SV)(O) is almost non-existent. In Prieto (2006: 55), the (SV)(O) phrasing in Spanish appears to be a more normal case though. This goes along with Nibert (2000), who concludes that (SV) (0) is the default type of phrasing in Spanish. According to Prieto (2006: 55) it appears that in Spanish (S)(VO) and (SV)(O) phrasing patterns are both possible (depending on weight conditions), and that there are individual differences among speakers.
63
64 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan in terms of number of syllables ( cf. Jun & Fougeron 2000), and not in terms of number of feet or prosodic words (as in e.g. Selkirk 2000 and Prieto 2005). In order to display the factor ofbranchingness, a PP or an AP was added to the argument noun (i.e. subject N/object N). In general. both speakers produced the sentences with two prosodic phrases. The sentence-internal boundary was signaled by a clear FO continuation rise. D'Imperio et al. (2005) is not the only study on Catalan SVO structures; Prieto (2005) also deals with these structures. Whereas in the former study Catalan is only one language among others, Prieto (2005) focuses on only Catalan. In addition, whereas the former study is presented without any theoretical analysis, Prieto (2005) offers a theoretical analysis for the phrasing pattern. Since the results are similar in both studies, I present only the broader study of Prieto (2005) in detail To be more concise: only the outline and the results of Prieto (2005) are presented here. The analysis of Prieto (2005) is presented in detail in Section 3.4.2, where it is embedded in the description of the analysis proposed in the present study. The data in Prieto (2005) has two different sources. On the one hand, four native speakers of Central Catalan (who were all linguists) were asked to judge the phrasing divisions of the utterances which appeared in her article. The consultants were asked to judge whether the phrasings would be grammatical at a normal rate of speech and also asked to interpret the sentences as out-of-the-blue conveying new information, i.e. to take them as broad focus sentences. On the other hand, the data from a production experiment (published in Elordieta, Frota, Prieto & Vigario 2003) were used. Two speakers of Central Catalan read the SVO target sentences three times. They were told to read the sentences at a normal speech rate as neutral declarative sentences (i.e. new information reading). Consequently, the sentences do not include topics or (narrow) focus constituents. The study of D'Imperio et al. (2005) is also based on this production experiment. The general phrasing pattern in Catalan is sensitive to constituent length, and verbal heads can be phrased together with preceding subjects when the DP objects are long (Prieto 2005: 214). If the DP object is short, or if the subject is long, the verb is phrased with the object. This leads to the following phrasing pattern in unmarked Catalan declarative sentences (where p =phonological phrase): (2)
2.
(S)p (VO)p (SV)p (O)p (S)p (VO)p
single word subjects, short verbal projection single word subjects, but long objects (2w) long subject (>2w), short objects2
Prieto (2005) does not include cases of a long subject together with a long object.
Chapter 3. Phrasing patterns in Catalan SVO structures
As the reader might have noticed, the terms 'prosodic phrasing' and 'phonological phrase' have been used to describe the relevant prosodic constituent These terms are the original notations used in D'Imperio etal. (2005) and Prieto (2005) respectively. I continue to use the term 'prosodic phrase' as a hypernym for ip and IntP. 3.1.2
The hypotheses
The main aspect for my study on SVO phrasing in Catalan originates in the interesting and atypical finding of D'Imperio et al. (2005) and Prieto (2005) that the subject can phrase together with the verb, if the DP object is long. It is common knowledge that objects can also be sentential. Hence, the question comes up as to how phrasing decisions are made (by Catalans) when the object is a complete clause. I set up the following hypothesis: Hypothesis 1: Compared to DP objects sentential objects ittcrease the single group phrasittg of (matrix) SV.
In order to be able to compare the influence of DP objects and sentential objects, two things are important First, the percentage value of the (SV) groupings in D'Imperio et al. (2005) is needed. In that study the (SV)(O) grouping adds up to 33.1% (D'Imperio et al. 2005: 68f. ).3 The hypothesis is validated, if sentential objects increase the value of (SV) phrasing, i.e. the value has to be significantly higher than 33.1 %. Second, it is also important to compare the utterances of the same group of speakers. For this reason, I repeated the SVO experiment with DP objects. In addition to this reason, there are two further arguments for repeating the SVO experiment: number of speakers and controlled material. The results of D'Imperio et al. (2005) and Prieto (2005) are based on only two native speakers of Central Catalan. In order to verify the findings, I conducted the experiment with ten speakers. Additionally, I carefully controlled for the all-new status of the SVO structure. Instead of asking the participants to read the sentences as all-new sentences, I introduced the target sentences in a context which caused the SVO structure to be entirely new (for more information structural background cf. Section 1.1.3). The same conditions were used in the experiment with sentential objects. The latter experiment has a further important research question: are embedded object clauses prosodically separated from the matrix clause? Downing (1970)
3· The average is calculated from Table 3, 4, and 5 in D'Imperio et al. (2005: 68t:).
65
66
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
argues that only the edges of root clauses (clauses that are not embedded) 4 are obligatorily aligned with larger prosodic boundaries - meaning that the left edge of an embedded clause does not have an obligatory boundary. This position is adopted in Nespor & Vogel (1986/2007: 189). Truckenbrodt (2005) picks up the question if an embedded clause triggers intonational boundaries ati ts left (or right) edges. He did not find any evidence of an intonational phrase boundary preceding an embedded object clause. Based on these works, I set up a second hypothesis: Hypothesis 2: Setttential objects are ttot obligatorily separated by prosodic means from the precedittg matrix clause.
3.2
General outline of the experiments
The present study is based on four different production experiments. The first one is concerned with simple SVO structures (DP objects), the second one with complex SVO structures (sentential objects), the third one with (embedded) clitic left- and right-dislocations, and the fourth one with preverbal subjects and left-dislocations. Experiment 1, 2, and 4 were conducted in one session in 2008, the experiment on clitic left- and right-dislocations was conducted in 2005 with a slightly different design. The latter experiment is described in detail in Chapter 5, whereas Section 3.2 provides the reader with the general outline of the 2008 experiments. Even though the specific experiment design of experiments 1, 2, and 4 differs, they all have the same general outline. Thus, Section 3.2 can be seen as a brief appended exposition giving detailed background information about the three experiments (i.e. location, subjects, basic aspects of the used material, and procedure). The specific experiment designs of the three parts are not presented in this section. The specific experiment design of the simple and complex SVO experiments is given in Section 3.3.1. The specific design of the CLLD vs. S experiment is given in Section 6.2.
4· Any CP contained in another CP is called an embedded clause. A root dause is any CP that is not contained in a higher CP (cf. also Downing 1970: 29ft:). A simple sentence such as [Peter sleeps] is a root clause; it is not contained in a higher CP. In a complex root clause such as [Mary supposes [that Peter sleeps]] the sentence [that Peter sleeps] is an embedded clause, since it is contained in a higher CP. Furthermore, the term matrix clause refers to the root clause 'minus' its embedded clause, i.e. [Mary supposes [... ]]. Throughout my work, I use the term root clause or root context in its narrow sense: I refer to simple sentences/CPs which do not dominate another CP (i.e. which do not have embedded clauses). The term embedded context refers to root clauses in its widest sense, i.e. CPs that dominate complement clauses.
Chapter 3. Phrasing patterns in Catalan SVO structures Table 1. Detailed information of recorded subjects Speaker
Sex
AT
f
Age 22
Profession
Orjgin and L1
student
Barcelona (Cat.) Barcelona (Cat. & Spanish) Barcelona (Cat.) Barcelona (Cat.) Barcelona (Cat.) Barcelona (Cat. & Spanish) Mamesa (Cat.) Terrassa (Cat.) Barcelona (Cat. & Spanish) Sabad ell (Cat. & Spanish)
CB
f
24
student
CP
f
23
student
DS
m
f
GM GV
m
f
IS
31 23 20 25
employee (retail trade) student student employee
MM
f
26
self-employed
MO
f
39
student
RS
m
26
student
Parents' L1 ~:Cat
cf: (Switzerland) ~:Spanish
d': Swedish ~:Cat
cf:Cat ~:Cat
d': Cat ~:Cat
cf:Cat ~:Cat
d': Cat ~:Cat
cf:Cat ~:Cat
d': Cat ~:Cat
d': Spanish ~:Cat.+ Spanish
d': Cat. + Spanish
The location of the 2008 experiments was Berlin and Hamburg (Germany). A hard disk recorder, Marantz CDR310, was used and the subjects were recorded in a quiet room. Ten subjects were recorded: seven female and three male speakers, ranging in age from 20 to 39 years old (0 ""26 years old), cf. Table 1. All speakers are native speakers of Central Catalan. None of the subjects are linguists. All subjects were totally naive as to the purpose of the experiment. The three different parts of the 2008 experiments are listed in (3). (3)
Parts of the experiments conducted in 2008: Experiment l: Simple SVO phrasing (12 target sentences (3 scenarios x 4 conditions)) Experiment 2: Complex SVO phrasing (12 target sentences (3 x 4)) Experiment 4: CLLD vs. S (i.e. preverbal subjects; 36 target sentences (3 x 12)) (24 target sentences) Fillers:
Altogether I used 84 different sentences in the experiment (cf. appendix). For each single part the sentences of the two other parts counted as filler clauses (as well as the pure filler clauses). In experiment 1 and 2, 12 sentences (14%) of the data presented were target sentences respectively, while the other 72 sentences (86%) counted as filler sentences. In experiment 4, 36 sentences (43%) of the data presented were target sentences and 48 sentences (57%) of the data were filler sen-
67
68
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
tences. The target sentences were presented with the filler sentences in a pseudorandomized order. The sentences of the different parts were mixed so that two sentences of one part never appeared in a row. As will be explained in the relevant sections. the three experiments consist of difterent contextual scenarios. The scenarios represent a "story" for the target sentences; they do not reflect the difterent conditions (such as length of constituents). It was also controlled that two sentences of the same scenario never appeared in a row (independently of the filler sentences in-between). Material: The material was controlled with respect to word stress (proparoxytonic words), with respect to the sounds in the target words, their syllables, the number of prosodic words, and the context. The target words were controlled in two further ways. First, I tried to use only sonorant sounds to guarantee the vocal fold vibration. Vowels are per definition sonorant. Sonorant consonants are nasals. vibrants, approximants, and glides (Hall 2000: 22). Target words such as numem 'number' and Agu.eda (Catalan female name) clearly show this. Both words are completely sonorant ({g) and {d) are approximants in Catalan, i.e. [y] and [a] respectively). The only exception among the target words is the sound [J] (i.e. {x)) in b1·uixola 'compass'. This sound is sufficiently away from the word's end though. The following sonorants (including the two nuclei of the post stress syllables) allow the vocal folds to vibrate and are able to show the desired fundamental frequency. Second, in most cases proparoxytonic words were used where the nucleus of the unstressed syllables is separated by (voiced) consonants. Open syllables with a voiced onset (i.e. CV-syllables) were also used. Target words such as nu.me.ro 'number' andA.gue.da (Catalan female name) are corresponding examples. In Catalan, diphthongs count as one syllable, but not all adjacent vowels are automatically a diphthong. There are vowel clusters which count as a hiatus (separate pronunciation of two adjacent vowels) and count as two syllables (e.g. ti.a. 'aunf, Nu.ri.a 'Nuria', Al.ge.ri.a 'Algeria', a.vi.a 'grandmother').5 Many proparoxytonic words in Catalan end in a hiatus. In general. I tried to avoid these words, since they bear the risk that some speakers pronounce the hiatus as a diphthong (cf. Cabre & Prieto 2004). If so, a proparoxytonic word such as vi.a would be uttered as a paroxytonic word tl.1'ia, with the stress on the penultimate syllable. Nevertheless, some target positions in my data are filled by proparoxytonic word with a hiatus which is possibly a diphthong (such as es.gle.si.a 'church' or Al.ge.ri.a 'Algeria'). These two aspects enable one to profit in the best way from the distance between the boundary and the stressed syllable. Not only the anchor position for
a.
5· Cabre & Prieto (2004) argue that the vowel dusters in these contexts are all diphthongs, in contrast to the 'norJii
Chapter 3. Phrasing patterns in Catalan SVO structures
the pitch accent (i.e. the stressed syllable) is far away from the boundary, 6 but the characteristics of the sounds and syllables in between allow the FO contour to be tracked in an optimal way. This is important for detecting boundary tones. Finally; the context was carefully controlled The context is the relevant environment which is responsible either for a certain element to be given (i.e. mentioned in the context) or to be non-given (i.e. not mentioned in the context), or for a certain sentence to be completely new (which is relevant for the study on SVO and embedded SVO structures). Different scenarios can represent the same context: If three different scenarios force the target sentence to be entirely new, they represent the same context (cf. Section 3.3.1). The way the context is controlled for each single part of the experiment as well as the types of structures studied are explained in the sections where the specific experiment design is introduced (or cf appendix). Procedure: The subjects were placed in a quiet room in front of a computer and the data were presented in a Power Point file. The context and the target sentence were presented together on a single slide; consequently, there were 84 slides. The subjects were told to read out the target sentences at a normal speech rate only after they understood the suitable context (question). The context (question) was presented in two different ways. First, it was visually presented on the computer screen. The subjects were told to read the sentences to themselves in order to understand them. Second, they listened to the sentences. The context was spoken out loud at a normal speech rate by a native speaker of Central Catalan? To summarize, after having read the context, the subjects pressed a button in order to hear the context. They were told to read the target sentence (i.e. the answer to the context question) directly after hearing the context (question). This procedure has several advantages: the subjects can read and hear the context; by reading the context, the subjects are able to understand it correctly; by hearing the context, the subjects were put in a more conversational-like situation, despite the unnatural, laboratory situation. In addition, speakers who did not read the context completely at least had to hear the context completely; and finally, by recording the context in advance, it was possible to control the way the context was uttered. Due to this, I could be sure that the context fits not only with respect to the content, but also with respect to the pronunciation.
Cf for example the schematic figures for explaining the continuation rise in Chapter 2, Section 2.3.2.
6.
7· I am very grateful to Ariadna Benet for lending me her voice and for recording all the contexts not only in an excellent manner, but also within a short time period
69
70
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
The subjects were told to read the sentences aloud in a conversational style without being given any specific instructions regarding the phrasing. The subjects were additionally told to think carefully about the sentences, since no commas were put in the data. Punctuation marks such as commas could cause the speaker to produce a pause. In order to avoid this influence commas were left out. Since left-dislocations in Catalan (cf. experiment 4 (CLLD vs. S)) are normally separated by a comma, the presented sentences could be difficult to understand. A short practice session at the beginning of the experiment was included because the procedure may have been slightly complex. During that period the subjects had to go through five context questions and their appropriate target sentences, so that subjects could become accustomed to the procedure. After that, the real experiment began. The sentences were recorded directly as.wav files (sample rate 22.050 Hz) and F0 tracks were analyzed using Praa.t version 5 .0.06 (developed by Boersma & Weenink 1992-2010, University of Amsterdam). Subsequently, a prosodic analysis of the spoken utterances was carried out. In order to determine the phrase boundaries the sentences were analyzed acoustically and instrumentally. By using Praa.t, I obtained the pitch tracks and the corresponding spectrograms and I aligned the suprasegmental events with the segmental string. The location of a phrase break, if any, was carried out by carefully listening to the sound files repeatedly and by observing the fundamental frequency and the spectrogram. 8
3·3
Experiments on simple and complex SVO phrasing
The goal of the simple and complex SVO experiment is to compare the influence of the different objects on the prosodic grouping of the (matrix) subject and verb. Additionally, the grouping of embedded clauses themselves is discussed. The experiments are conducted to test the two hypotheses described in Section 3.1.2. The study validates both hypotheses. It is shown that the percentage of (SV) phrasing increases (by about 20%) when the object is sentential. Further-
In order to ensure that my judgments of Catalan boundary tones were adequate, two different Catalan phonologists (Pilar Prieto and Uu'isa Astruc) were asked to determine the boundary tones of a set of sentences. After receiving their responses, my judgments were compared with those of the native speakers. The conclusion was reached that I was able to continue the work. 8.
Chapter 3. Phrasing patterns in Catalan SVO structures
more, even though Catalan shows a great tendency to separate the embedded object clause from the matrix clause, sentential objects are not obligatorily separated. 20% of the object clauses are phrased with preceding material. The simple SVO experiment shows that (S)(VO) is the predominant grouping in Catalan and that this grouping is less robust if the object is long and the subject short. The results clearly support the findings of D'Imperio et al. (2005) and Prieto (2005). In this section, the specific experiment design of experiments 1 (simple SVO) and 2 (complex SVO) is presented (Section 3.3.1). After that, the detected boundaries and their frequencies are described (Section 3.3.2). In Section 3.3.3 the results of the phrasing patterns are given. The results of simple SVO structures are presented first followed by the results of complex SVO structures. Section 3.3.4 concludes Section 3.3. 3.3.1
Specific experiment design
According to D'Imperio etal. (2005: 71) a clear effect oflength is found in Catalan phrasing decisions and the branching effect is dearly prosodic (i.e. the number of prosodic words; cf. Prieto 2005: ch.3.4). Based on these findings, three different scenarios (representing the same information structural context) for testing the phrasing ofbroad focus declarative clauses were constructed. There are two groups of clauses: root clauses (simple SVO) and embedded clauses (complex SVO). In (4), one complete scenario (which is called scenario A) is presented; including the context question and the different conditions for the target sentences. The three scenarios display all the same information structural context. They cause the target sentences to be entirely new (as described in Section 1.1.3): no constituent of the target sentence is given in the context question. The different conditions for the target sentence are explained below. The two further scenarios (called scenario B and C) are shown in (5). They are not presented as detailed as scenario A. The parentheses in (5) indicate which constituents do not always appear, but depend on length requirements (similar to the pattern in (4); cf. appendix A & B for a complete overview). (4)
Swtario A: Example for target sentences of (embedded) SVO sentences Cotttext (questiott): No et trobes be? Em sembla que estas de mal humor. No you feel.2sG good Me seem that be.2sG of bad mood
Que ha passat? What have happen.PTCP 'Do you feel bad? You seem to be in a bad mood What happened?'
71
72
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
Target sentences: a. Condition: short S/short 0 llguila roba el ratoli. the.eagle steal.PsT the mouse 'The eagle stole the mouse: b. Condition: short Sllong 0 r aguilaroba
elratoli
c. Condition: long S/short 0 La meva gran aguila roba
elratoli.
del meu germa.
d. Condition: long Sllong 0 La meva gran aguila roba el ratoH del meu germa. the my big eagle steal.PsT the mouse of.the my brother 'My big eagle stole my brother's mouse: e. Condition: short S/short 0 (in the embedded clause) La Barbara suposa que l'aguila roba el ratoH. f.
Condition: short Sllong 0 (in the embedded clause) La Barbara suposa que !'aguila roba el ratolf del meu germa.
g. Condition: long S/short 0 (in the embedded clause) La Barbara suposa que la meva aguila roba el ratolf. h. Condition: long Sllong 0 (in the embedded clause) La Barbara suposa que la meva aguila roba el ratoli del meu germa. the B. assume that ... 'Barbara assumes that...' (5)
Two further scenarios for (simple and complex) SVO 1.
Scenario B: Context (question):
E1 Pedro no es troba be? Em sembla que est a molt furi6s. the P. not RBFL feel good Me seem that be very angry Que ha passat? What have happen.PTCP 'Does Pedro feel bad? He seems to be very angry. What happened?'
Target sentences: (La Silvia no va mencionar que) l'(avia) Angela havia not PST mention that the.grandma A. have the S. comptat les errades (de les frases). count.PTCP the mistakes of the sentences '(Silvia did not say that) (grandma) Angela has counted the mistakes (ofthe clauses):
Chapter 3. Phrasing patterns in Catalan SVO structures
2.
Scenario C: Context (question):
No m.'agrada que tota la familia estigui sota arrest domiciliari. not me.like that all the family be.SBJ under arrest home Ames, em sembla que la mare esta especialment nerviosa. Moreover me seem that the mother be especially nervous
Que ha passat? What have happen.PTCP 'I don't like that the whole family is put under house arrest. Moreover, the mother seems to be very nervous. What happened?'
Target sentences: (El pare va dir que) 1a (teva tia) Amelia se n'ha anat RBFL CL.PST go.PTCP the father PST say that the your aunt A. a (la ciutat de) Malaga. to the city of M. '(Father said that) (your aunt) Amelia left for (the city of) Malaga:
(4a) consists of a short subject, a short verb, and a short object (condition short S/short 0). (4b) contains a short subject, the (short) verb, and a long branching object (condition short Silang 0). In (4c) the subject is long and branching, while the object is short (condition longS/short 0). (4d) presents the case where both the subject and the object are long and branching (condition longS/long 0). The exact patterns are repeated in (4e-h) with the only difference that the clauses are embedded in the matrix clause La Ba1·bara suposa. que ... 'Barbara assumes that .. :. A short constituent consists of three or four syllables (l'a.gui.la 'eagle: la.Bar.ba.ra 'Barbara'). A long constituent consists of at least six syllables. In (4) the long subject has seven syllables (la.me.va.gra.ruigui.la 'my big eagle') and the long object has eight syllables (el.ra.to.U.del.meu.ger.ma 'the mouse of my brother'). The branching condition is ambiguous. Each branching constituent is syntactically and prosodically branching but only the latter one plays a role in Catalan (D'Imperio et al. 2005: 71). Each branching constituent consists of at least two prosodic words. The branching subject and object in (4) include three prosodic words each. Short constituents are at the same time non-branching, and long constituents are at the same time branching.9 In addition, the matrix subject in the embedded contexts is always short and non-branching. The context (question) in (4) introduced the participants to a context. The context ends in a question for which the target sentences
9· Cf D1mperio et a1. (2005) for an experiment which sets the two factors apart.
73
74
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
function as answers. The context questions 'What happened?' causes the target sentence(s) to be understood as an all new/broad focus answer. The aguila-scenario described above contains four examples for the root SVO pattern (ct~ 4a-d) as well as four examples for the embedded SVO pattern (cf. 4e-h). There are three different scenarios, thus 24 different sentences (12 simple SVO sentences; 12 complex SVO sentences). Each single sentence was uttered by ten speakers, so that there are 240 sentences for experiment 1 (simple SVO phrasing; 120 sentences) and experiment 2 (complex SVO; 120 sentences). 3.3.2
Results -boundary cues
In Chapter 2, several boundary cues were introduced for detecting intonational boundaries. The following tables and figures quantify the different boundary types and discuss some difficulties in the boundary judgment. Table 2 shows the percentages (and the absolute number) of the total number of ip- and IntP-boundaries after the preverbal subject. Table 3 shows the number of the different realizations of the two intonational boundaries. Figure 1 illustrates the distribution of ip- and IntP-boundaries with respect to the length of the syntactic constituents. Figure 2 shows an example of an unclear boundary. Table 2 indicates the summarized numbers for ip- and IntP-boundaries. There are altogether 361 boundaries in the data (cf. row 4). 56.2% of them are realized as ip-boundaries and the remaining 43.8% are realized as IntP-boundaries. The percentage values are practically the same for the two individual experiments (cf. row 2 and 3).
Table 2. Percentages (and absolute number) of the total number of IntPand ip-boundaries after the preverbal subject
IntP
svo (106)
Emb.SVO (255)
Total (361)
ip
42.5% (45)
57.5% (61)
44.3% (113)
55.7% (142)
43.8% (158)
56.2% (203)
The total of IntP- and ip-boundaries of Table 2 (row 4) is split up in Table 3 below in order to show how the intonational boundaries are realized in detail. Due to this, row 1 of Table 3 gives the different possible realizations ofboundaries at the two levels. Additionally, the factor length is given (last column of Table 3). The factor length is not split up for the two experiments (cf. row 2 and 3); only the
Chapter 3. Phrasing patterns in Catalan SVO structures total value of 86% is given (row 4). In what follows, the values of the different IntPand ip-boundaries are presented in detail (row 2, 3, and 4). After that, a brief note on the factor length is given. Length, however, is discussed in detail later in this section (cf. Figure 3). Table 3. Percentages (and absolute number) of the type of the post-subject boundary realizations in the simple and complex SVO experiments ip
IntP
Pauses (P) visible
audible
Complex Boundary
Cont. Rise
Sust. Pitch
Length
H%
L%
H%
L%
(P)
no (P)
H-
!H-
L-
4.7% (5)
0%
13.2% (14)
0%
6.6%
(106)
(7)
17.9% (19)
46.2% (49)
4.7% (5)
6.6% (7)
svo
Emb.
6% (15)
0.4% (1)
9.4% (24)
0.4% (1)
5.1% (13)
23.1% (59)
40.8% (104)
7.5% (19)
7.5% (19)
Total (361)
5.5% (20)
0.3% (1)
10.5% (38)
0.3%
5.5% (20)
21.6% (78)
42.4% (153)
6.6%
7.2% (26)
svo
(255) (1)
(24)
86%
The second and third row present the number of the realizations of the different types (in percent and absolute numbers) for simple and complex SVO structures, respectively. The last row summarizes the number of both experiments. Due to the fact that the pattern of the experiments is similar, only the last row is explained. As for the IntP-level the most common marking of the boundary results from complex boundary tones. 10 Some of them are not followed by a pause (21.6% of all 361 boundaries). High boundary tones (H%) that are not followed by a pause also appear (10.5%). Low boundary tones (L%) are virtually never realized sentence-internally (0.3%). As for the ip-level, the continuation rise (H-) is the most common realization (42.4%). It is also the most common one with respect to both levels. In addition, the total number of continuation rises increases if the high IntP-boundary tones (H%) are also considered. They represent continuation rises at the IntP-level. Thus, at least 58.4% (5.5 + 10.5 + 42.4) of the boundaries are realized by a continuation rise. 11 This corresponds to the findings in Frota et al. (2007), who state that
Recall that only boundary tones that consist of dtiferent tones (such as the most common realized tone L-H%) are considered to constitute this class (cf. Chapter 2).
10.
n. If the High tone of the complex boundary tone L-H% is also considered as a continuation rise, the total number of continuation rises increases further.
75
76
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
"prosodic breaks in Romance are predominantly marked by a High boundary tone. The preboundary stretch tends to be realized as a continuation rise" (p. 135). The factor length (last column of Table 3) has to be considered separately from the different types of realizations. Whereas the latter are distributed complementarily (e.g. either the tone is realized as a sustained pitch or as a continuation rise), length overlaps all realizations (i.e. the sustained pitch as well as the continuation rise can additionally be marked by a long preboundary syllable). As Table 3 indicates, 86% of the boundaries are marked by longer syllables. I return to the results of the length measurement of preboundary and non-preboundary syllables (cf. Figure 3) later. Until now, nothing has been said concerning the distribution of the boundaries. For this reason, the relation between constituent length and the type of boundary (IntP vs. ip) is considered in the following paragraphs. I concentrate on the post-subject position of simple SVO structures (i.e. the position directly after the subject and before the verb). Experiment 1 (simple SVO) has four different conditions (shortS/short 0; short Silang 0; longS/short 0; and longS/long 0) with thirty sentences each. The conditions are given in the x-axis of Figure 1. They-axis shows the number ofboundary realizations (in absolute numbers). The four different lines in the diagram represent IntP-boundaries, ip-boundaries, unclear cases, and cases where no boundary appeared. Subject boundary
25 20 !il
.&.
E
~
15 10 5 0
• ...... ..
______. "11·--·--~ .......... ------~
........-___........../ __
. --
·--......~-
---~----..::--
shortS I short 0 shortS /long 0 longS I shortO longS Tlong 0 5 6 15 18 21 13 11 13 ---··ip 3 7 3 0 ·-*····unclear 1 4 1 0 ··•··no boundary
-+-lntP
Figure 1. Relation between length of constituents and intonational boundary at the post-subject position (the position between Sand V)
Figure 1 clearly shows the tendency for the increasing number ofintP-boundaries when the subject is long. In the short subject conditions the boundary after the subject is realized only 5 + 6 (11) times as an IntP-boundary (i.e. 18%). In the long subject conditions, though, the boundary is in 15 + 18 (33) cases of this
Chapter 3. Phrasing patterns in Catalan SVO structures
type (i.e. 55%). This is an increase of 300%. The number of ip-boundaries is very high in the shortS/short 0 condition (21 realizations; i.e. 70%), and decreases in the three further conditions, but still remains relatively high (13, 11, and 12 realizations, i.e. around 43% on average). As for the two remaining cases (unclear and no boundary), they reach an interesting number only in the short Silang 0 condition. In around 37% (4 + 7 (11)) of the cases there are either no or unclear boundary tones, whereas the highest percentage in the other conditions comes to only around 13% (1 + 3 (4)). By looking at this aspect from the reverse side, it can be said that the clear separation of the subject from the following verb comes to only 63% (i.e. 6 + 13 realizations) in that condition, whereas the average number of the three other conditions comes to 91%. Short S/long 0 is the condition where Catalan shows a tendency for the (SV)(O) grouping and the post-subject boundary realizations are reduced due to balance efiects of the length of prosodic constituents (D'Imperio et al. 2005, Prieto 2005, Frota et al. 2007). The interesting percent value of that condition in Figure 1 thus reflects the tendency of Catalan to not place a boundary after the subject if the object is long. Figure 1 (but also Table 2 and Table 3) shows a further important aspect: there is variation with respect to the nature of the boundaries. In some instances, the breaks dividing the subject from the predicate are straightforward intonational phrases, but in some cases they are clear instances of intermediate phrases. In the long subject conditions, there is a slight preference for IntPs (55%), while Table 2 indicates a slight preference for ips (56%). Nevertheless, the number ofintPs and ips seems to be distributed equally at a percent value of 50%. This result represents empirical evidence for the notion prosodic phrase as a hypernym for intonational phrase and intermediate phrase (cf. Chapter 2). Although most of the junctures could clearly be classified as being an intonational boundary or not, some instances were difficult to judge. Unclear cases arise due to the fact that an ambiguity between delayed peak and continuation rise is possible. Even though the schematic diagrams of a continuation rise and a delayed peak in Chapter 2 (cf. Figure 9 & Figure 10) are clear, the actual situation in uttered sentences is not always so clear. Prieto (2006b: 8) shows that the peak delay is larger in words with antepenultimate stress than in words with stress closer to the end of the word. In Figure 2 the ambiguity between a continuation rise and a delayed peak is illustrated by'?' in the tonal tier. The H peak is located 0.1569 seconds after the end of the accented syllable, whereas it is located only 0.0594 seconds before the end of the word. The proximity to the word edge can lead one to the conclusion that there is a phrase break H- present On the other hand, since the H peak is not totally located at the word edge, it is possible to conclude that it is the delayed peak of the rising tone and not a phrase break (i.e. L+>H*). Hence, an ambiguity arises. This ambiguity is marked by '?' in the data in the appendix. Unclear cases
77
78
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
are judged as presenting no boundary. This decision has an influence on the (SVO) phrasing in particular and is discussed in Section 3.3.3.2.
s
v
0
Figure 2. Ambiguity between delayed peak and continuation rise in the FO contour of
L' Angela va comptar les errades :Angela counted the mistakes' of speaker GM (sentence 2l_SVO_GM). The ambiguity is marked with '?' in the tonal tier
In addition, in a few cases it was difficult to judge if the detected break should have been categorized as an ip- or an lntP-boundary. This difficulty arose when it was unclear if a continuation rise was followed by an audible pause or not Due to the fact that there is an intonational boundary in either case, such cases were judged as being an ip-boundary. In the appendix. the corresponding instances of H- are marked by the preceding tag'( 4?)' (representing a possible break index 4). Finally, I return to syllable length. The bar diagrams (Figure 3 and Figure 4) illustrate the different length of preboundary and non-preboundary syllables of both experiments (1 and 2). The first diagram considers length in milliseconds (Figure 3), while the second diagram gives the corresponding percent values (Figure 4). The height of the bar represents the magnitude of the corresponding variable. For the measurement, only syllables consisting of two pronounced segments were considered- irrespective of being stressed or not, (6). 12
In the case of infiniives the word-final/r/ is not uttered sud:t that tar (of comptar'count') is pronounced as [ta], nar (of mencionar'mentioli) as [na] and d.ir'say' as [dt]. The infinitives as well as the past tense form robd 'stoteha~ word-final stress. Not considered were the dosed syllable nat of se nha anat'did go and the word-final materiallia of Amelia and via of Silvia.
12.
Chapter 3. Phrasing patterns in Catalan SVO structures Syllables considered for length measurement [consonant+ vowel (CV)]:
(6)
[1~1 (la) [ta] (tar) [ba] (ba) [na] (nar) [~] (ra) [s~] (sa) [~] (re)
(Angela, aguila 'eagle') (comptar 'count') (roM 'stole') (mencionar 'mention') (Barbara) (suposa 'supposes') (pare 'father')
[d1] (dir) (dir 'say')
The two diagrams (Figure 3 and Figure 4) show an important finding: there is a clear difference between preboundary and non-preboundary syllables. Pre boundary syllables have an average length of208 ms (100%), while non-preboundary syllables have a length of 119 ms (57%). Thus, they are 89 ms shorter than syllables that are followed by a break. This corresponds to a percent value of 43%. The average for all ten speakers is given in the last column, indicated by (0).
Syllable length (ms)
300 250 ~
200
8
..
150
~
100
c;
:..= "'
so
Figure 3. Length in milliseconds of preboundary and non-preboundary CV-syllables
The latter two have the described possibility of not uttering the hiat between the two vowels. If the hiat is not uttered - what is the typical case according to Cabre & Prieto (2004) - the word-final syllable consists of three segments or, if the hiat is uttered, the ultimate syllable has just one segment. No case fulfils the criteria of two phonetically realized segments.
79
So
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan Syllable Length (%) 120 , - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 100
80 60
f--------.----------.---.----------.------------.---~-------11---------l------f-------
40 20
Figure 4. Length in percentages of prebound.ary and non-preboundary CV-syllables
Additionally, the average length of preboundary and non-preboundary syllables for each speaker (black and grey bar respectively) is given in Figure 3 and Figure 4. By looking at single speakers, two extremes can be seen. On the one hand, for four speakers (CP, DS, GV, and MO) the difference comes to 50% or more. Their preboundary syllables are more than 100 ms longer than non-preboundary syllables. On the other hand, one speaker (MM) shows only a very small difference. The difference comes to 20% and non-preboundary syllables are 31 ms shorter. No other speaker has such a small difference between the syllable types. CB, for example, has a difference of 61 ms. As mentioned before (cf. last column of Table 3), the boundary cue length of the pre boundary syllable appears additionally to the boundary tones. The clear difference between preboundary and non-preboundary syllables can be seen by all ten speakers- irrespective of the actual realization (such asH-, H% or L-H%) of the produced boundary tones. 3·3·3
Results - phrasing patterns
In this section the results of the intonational grouping of simple and complex SVO structures are presented. First, the results of the simple SVO experiment are described and then the results of the complex SVO experiment. Both sections are followed by a discussion. 3·3·3·1
The simple SVO experiment
Figure 5 illustrates the total result of experiment 1 (3 scenarios x 4 sentences x 10 speakers= 120 sentences). The parentheses'( )'represent the prosodic grouping. In Catalan, there are four possible groupings (S)(VO), (SVO), (S)(V)(O), and (SV)(O) although speakers clearly prefer to place a phrase break after the subject. A mean
Chapter 3. Phrasing patterns in Catalan SVO structures
of around 80% of the cases in normal speech rate are instances of (S)(VO). The (SV0) 13 grouping comes to 15%, (S)(V)(O) to 3.33% and (SV)(O) to only 0.83%. SVO phrasing (0) (SV)(O) (S)(V)(O) (SVO)
•
(S)(VO)
I 0
I 10
20
30
50
40
60
70
80
(S)(VO)
(SVO)
(S)(V)(O)
(SV)(O)
80,33
15
3,33
0,83
90
Figwe 5. Prosodic grouping of simple SVO structures In Catalan
In the following figures, examples of the FO contour of each grouping are given. Figure 6 illustrates the (S)(VO) grouping. The post-subject boundary is marked by a continuation rise. It can clearly be seen on /aguila 'eagle. The rise starts in the proparoxytonic syllable Ia and rises steadily until the end of the subject, where the ip-boundary tone H- is located. V and 0 are not separated by a boundary.
g t;-
;
g. .1: ]
;
~ 3 ""'
250 210 170 130 90 50
s
v
0
Figwe 6. Catalan (S)(VO) phrasing- Waveform, spectrogram, and FO trace for the utterance
r: aguila roba el ratoli'The eagle stole the mouse' of speaker GV (sentence 29_SVO_GV)
13.
For comments on the relatively high percentage of (SVO) groupings, ct: discussion below.
81
82
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
Figure 7 illustrates the (SVO) phrasing. There is no break either after the subject or after the verb. The peak of the subjects pitch accent is delayed and located on the first posttonic syllable. At the word boundary. there is no special tonal movement
~
~ 3SO r-~~,_P-,_~~~~~~~~~r-~~~r-~
s= 300 r----+--r-~~+-,_--~H-~~--r-------r-~
J:~2SO r---o+~~~~~rl---~H--.r---r-~~~r-~ ~
200 r----¥~~~~+-1-~~~~~,-r-------~~
E 150 ~---+~~~rwJ-~---m~~~-=~~~--~~
1l~
100 F~==~~~~~~~~~~~~==~~
&! L'Angela
errades
s
v
0
Figure 7. Catalan (SVO) phrasing- Waveform, spectrogram, and FO trace for the utterance L'Angela va comptarles errades :Angela counted the mlsta kes' of speaker MO (sentence 2l_SVO_MO)
The (S)(V)( 0) phrasing is shown in Figure 8. The break after the long subject is indicated by sustained pitch (!H-). The peak of the preboundary pitch accent is delayed and reaches its highest point at the end of the first posttonic syUable. On the second posttonic syllable, the pitch does not rise any further but sustains at the
se- 200 =170
~it~!
~
s
140 110
I"!" 15
~
2.5
3
I
~
J:
..... .1'1"'1'
~
I•
1•· v rr ....
~ 80 1l
.
:
..;.
&! so
L
r,
/
....
s
.___
II"
v
* L H
I L: teva tia
.....
Amelia
T
-
L+H.'r -H %
se n'ha
anat
v
a
L-L%
Malaga 0
Figure 8. Catalan (S)(V)(O) phrasing- Waveform, spectrogram, and FO trace for the utterance La teva tia Amelia se n'ha anat a Malaga 'Your aunt Amelia went to Malaga' of speaker RS (sentence 39_SSVO_RS)
Chapter 3. Phrasing patterns in Catalan SVO structures 83
same level. The break after the verb, separating the verb and the object, is marked by an audible pause (H%). The last of the four groupings, (SV)(O ), is presented in Figure 9. The subject is not separated from the verb by any tonal movement or a pause. The only break in the structure is located after the verb and is marked by a continuation rise (H-). Furthermore, there is a pitch reset on the high part of the bitonal accent L+>H"'located on errades ('mistakes), which signals the boundary between the verb and the object
~
'6 350 5::s
300 g' 250
_ ...... ~ 1 lr -,. 'llf"i"
c.;; 200
s
~ -g &:
150 100
J l:
...JI
,._ ·;,
L*
L'Ange la 1va
s
~
comptar
-
['\
'-- f.-' .:•_
l~· , ~ ·
H
L
,
.. ,_,_
li · ftl
I
!
'\.
"
H*
les j erra des
v
2.5
I.
I
h
v .rv1-'""' """
J::
"'"""'
I""
I
L-
les
(0
frases (PP))
Figure 9. Catalan (SV)(O) phrasing- Waveform, spectrogram, and FO trace for the utterance L' Angela va comptar les errades de les frases ~ngela counted the mistakes of the sentences' of speaker MO (sentence 22_SVOO_MO)
Whereas Figure 5 gives the total results of all sentences irrespective of the different conditions, Figure 10 gives the percentages of the realizations of the different groupings for each condition (shortS/short 0; short S!longO; longS/short 0; and long S!long 0 ). SVO phrasing 120 100
~
c .,~
0..
80
•••
60 40
20 0
·+· (S)(VO) -(SVO) _.__ (S)(V)(O) -(SV)(O)
..-
.... __
... ...- .--·--·___ ..... ___
short S Tshort 0 short S /long 0 87 13 0 0
57 33 7 3
~--·--·~--·····
-~
long S Tshort 0
longsnongO
83 13 4 0
97 0 3 0
Figure 10. Percentages of simple SVO phrasing patterns in the four different conditions
84 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan As can be seen, (S)(VO) is the predominant phrasing across all conditions. with a value of mostly above 80%. The most robust (S)(VO) realizations arise in the long Silang 0 condition; nearly all examples are realized with a break after the subject (97%). Interestingly, only in the short Silang 0 condition is its value comparatively low. It comes to only 57%. In general, this condition deviates in many aspects from the other three conditions: besides the high number of non-(S)(VO) groupings, it is the only condition where the (SV)(O) grouping shows up and where all four groupings are realized. Besides the (S)(VO) grouping, all other groupings come to their highest number of realizations ((SVO): 33%; (S)(V)(O): 7%; and (SV)(O): 3%). Thus one can conclude that the condition where the subject is short and the object is long is the only condition that influences the phrasing decisions the most. It weakens the predominance of the (S)(VO) grouping. 3·3·3·2
Discussion
The goal of the simple SVO experiment was to set the basis for the complex SVO experiment and to repeat the study of D'Imperio et al. (2005) with more speakers and a clear information structural context. The two hypotheses in Section 3.1.2 concern only sentential objects and as such they are not discussed here. The phrasing pattern found in experiment 1 is in line with the findings of D'Imperio et al. (2005) and Prieto (2005): The most common phrasing in Catalan is (S)(VO), and (SV)(O) arises when the object is long. As for the first finding, D'Imperio et al. (2005: 71) ascribe the exclusive trigger of the (S)(VO) pattern to a long subject (i.e. branching S). This conclusion cannot be exclusively drawn here, but the data do not present counterevidence either. On the one hand, (S)(VO) comes to more than 80% in the longS conditions. However, in the shortS/short 0 condition the subject is also phrased separately in more than 80% of the cases. Thus, a long subject cannot have such an influence because a short subject is also mostly phrased separately. On the other hand, the object seems to play an important role; this is the case in both long 0 conditions. Across the longS conditions, a long object increases the number of (S)(VO) groupings. Whereas in longS/short 0 (S)(VO) comes to 83%, it comes to 97% in the long Silang 0 condition. If the subject is short, though, a long object decreases the number of (S)(VO) groupings (57%). As for the second finding, (SV)(O) shows up only in the shortS/long 0 condition. This is in line with D'Imperio et al. (2005: 70) and Prieto (2005: 214). D'Imperio et al. (2005: 71) say that the tendency for S to phrase with the following Vis a clear effect of length. In their data, the (SV)(O) phrasing comes to 33.1% (D'Imperio et al. 2005: 68f.). However, according to my data, (SV)(O) is realized only very rarely and does not come to such a high percentage although it also shows up only in the short Silang 0 condition. The difference might appear because the sentences were uttered only at a normal speech rate in the simple SVO experiment, while D'Imperio et al. (2005) examined different rates of speech.
Chapter 3. Phrasing patterns in Catalan SVO structures
They show that (SV) ( 0) appears more often at a fast speech rate. The aforementioned length effect, nevertheless, has an important influence in the present data. Although it does not significantly increase the SV grouping, it weakens the otherwise robust (S)(VO) phrasing and renders possible (higher numbers of) different phrasings. One interesting aspect concerns the high percentage of the (SVO) grouping in the shortS/long 0 condition. The (SVO) grouping is very atypical for Catalan (D'Imperio et al 2005, Prieto 2005). They found only some sporadic (SVO) groupings by one single speaker (D'Imperio et al. 2005: 68). The question arises as to why (SVO) can come to 33% in general and why it comes to that number in the short S/long 0 condition in particular. The cause can be explained easily; nearly all instances of (SVO) arise due to an unclear post-subject boundary. It was not possible to judge if there was a boundary after the subject or not. Unclear boundaries are judged as if there were no boundary. In my data, only two instances of (SVO) out of 18 are clear instances of (SVO). Nearly 90% of the cases are unclear. If the data are reinspected closely and detailed, it might turn out that some unclear boundaries are boundaries, while some unclear boundaries are not boundaries. Consequently, the percentage of 15% for (SVO) might be smaller. As for the second part of the question, (SVO) arises in the short S/long 0 condition in particular, because of the length effect. The long object causes the need for a post-subject boundary to be not as strong as normal. If the boundary is not as strong anymore, it can either disappear completely or it can simply become less clear. Due to the fact that unclear cases were dealt with as if there is no boundary, the phrasing (S- unclear- VO) turns out to be (SVO). Thus the number of unclear cases increases, especially in the short S/long 0 condition. 3·3·3·3
The complex SVO experiment
Figure 11 shows the results of experiment 2 (3 scenarios x 4 sentences x 10 speakers= 120 sentences). The bar diagram illustrates the percentages given in Complex-SVO phrasing (0)
(S)(VqS)(VO) ~~ (SVqS)(VO) ~~
~-..--. . .
(S)(V)(qS)(VO)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(SV)(qS)(VO)
0
10
20
I• misc.exduded
40
60
50
(SVqS)(VO)
(S)(VqS)(VO)
misc.
46,67
20
8,33
8,33
16,66
56
24
10
10
0
(SV)(qS)(VO) (S)(V)(qS)(VO)
I• misc.induded
30
Figure II. Prosodic grouping of complex SVO structures in Catalan (given in percentages)
85
86 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
the table below the diagram. The first line of the table indicates the four main groupings as well as the general number of miscellaneous groupings ('mise~). The general order is SVqSVO. S stands for subject, V for verb, and 0 for object, cf. (7a). The object, however, is sentential and also consists of a subject, verb, and object, cf. (7b,c). A new symbol has been added: 'q stands for que 'thaf, representing the complementizer. Consequently, SV preceding q represents the matrix subject and the matrix verb. SVO following q represents the embedded clause. This is illustrated in (7c). (7)
Notation of complex SVO structures a.
[S V O]
~ b.
[S V [O]]
~ c.
[S V [qSVO]]
The abbreviation SVqSVO simply reflects the word order, independently of the length and branchingness of their constituents. As before, the parentheses '( )' represent the prosodic grouping. Due to the fact that in these complex clauses at least one clear boundary has been found, there are no complete sentences judged as unclear (i.e. the matrix clause and the embedded clause are never grouped into one single prosodic phrase). However, there are examples where some boundaries remained unclear. Again, these cases have been treated as if the unclear boundaries were not boundaries at all. They are marked with '?' in the tables in the appendix, which show the phrasing decisions of each single speaker. The four different main phrasing possibilities are (SV)(qS)(VO), (S)(V) (qS)(VO), (S)(V)(qSVO), and (S)(VqS)(VO). They are not the only possibilities though. The last column in the table ('mise:) includes all other prosodic groupings which were uttered. They are briefly mentioned here. There are eight realized phrasings subsumed under the term 'miscellaneous': (S)(V)(qSVO) [five times], (SV)(qS)(V)(O) [five times], (SV)(qSVO) [four times], (SVqS)(V)(O) [two times], (S)(VqSVO) [one time], (SV)(qSV)(O) [one time], (S)(VqS)(V)(O) [one time], and (S)(V)(qSV)(O) [one time]. As the number of appearances in the square brackets indicates, these phrasings are not very common. For this reason, I have left them aside. However, the reader should note that the possible phrasings in contexts with embedded object clauses can be very large. Including the previously listed eight phrasings, there are 12 different prosodic groupings altogether. Thus, compared to the root context, the number of possible phrasings is considerably larger. The light grey bars indicate the number of the four main groupings and they include the
Chapter 3. Phrasing patterns in Catalan SVO structures
number of the miscellaneous groupings. As can be seen, the four main groupings come to more than 83% of the data, while the other eight groupings come to less than 17% together. For this reason, I concentrate on only the four main groupings from now on. The dark grey bars represent the corresponding percentage value without the miscellaneous groupings. The percentage values in Figure 11 reveal that the most common phrasing pattern is (SV)(qS)(VO), where the matrix subject and the matrix verb are phrased together, followed by the group complementizer + embedded subject, followed by the group embedded verb +embedded object. This group comes to 46.67% (i.e. 56% without misc.) of the 120 sentences. The corresponding FO contour is shown in Figure 12. The second favored phrasing is (S)(V)(qS)(VO), which comes to 20% (i.e. 24%). This phrasing pattern differs from the former in that the matrix subject and matrix verb are phrased separately (cf. Figure 13). These two groupings are followed by (SVqS)(VO), which comes to 8.33% (i.e. 10%). Here, the matrix clause is phrased together with the complementizer and the embedded subject. The embedded verb and the embedded object create another prosodic group (cf. Figure 14). 14 The next grouping is (S)(VqS)(VO), which also comes to 8.33% (i.e. 10%). It is characterized by phrasing the matrix verb, the complementizer and the embedded subject together (cf. Figure 15). Figure 12 shows the pitch track of the most common phrasing pattern (SV)( qS) (VO ). There is no boundary after the matrix subject The pitch does not rise after the peak of the pitch accent. In the following figures for the pitch tracks, the break index 1, which signals a word boundary, illustrates that there is no prosodic break in the ip- or IntP-level (break index 3 and 4 respectively). There is a break, though, after the verb. This break is signaled mainly by an audible pause and the high tone is downstepped (!H%). The next break is located after the long subject. There is a complex boundary tone (L-H%) followed by a visible pause. The embedded verb and object are not separated by a break. Figure 13 shows the pitch trackofthe second most common grouping, (S)(V) (qS)(VO). Here, thematrixsubjectandmatrixverb are separated bya break. This can be clearly seen by the complex boundary tone L-H% and its very high rise. There are two further breaks: one after the matrix verb (an audible pause, !H%) and one after the embedded subject (the complex boundary tone L-H%). Again, the embedded verb and the embedded object are not separated by an intonational boundary.
14· Most of the (SVqS)(VO) groupings evolve from the fact that some boundaries have been classified as unclear (cf appendix: corresponding examples in 25 (speaker MM), 26 (speaker RS), 36 (speaker MM),etc.)
87
88
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
~
~ fj- 350
c
~ 300
<:r
~ 250
~ 200 c ., 150
~
1!
100
If
............ ...
~ i
~.r
a."'\. \.
2jr'
1'~
I'
3. 5
k
I;
...
io-h
'
'"'
,..
r
1...
~
I"'"
"-J
....
I"~
.
*
%
H+
I r\. lrL%
4
s
·I
~!'
Lal Silvia nf1 m encio nar
C< ~p
v
errad es
1avifcomptat
Angel a
s
v
0
Figure 12. Catalan (SV)(qS)(VO) phrasing- Waveform, spectrogram, and FO trace for the sentence La Silvia no va mencionar que lavia Angela havia comptat les errades 'Silvia did not say that grandmother Angela has counted the mistakes' of speaker MO (sentence 27_Emb_MO)
g
.."
~ 350
~~~~& l's ,.....2. . .
c
I...
..~
250
If
100
a
..,c
I \.' JI
200
ISO ilo ...
L+H*
0
\~ V'
... ..
s
I
J
'\. I
I
v '-' .
~,
-
40
r#nencio nar
v
'1'3 5
r
H+L*'.H·H %L+H* L·H %
4 00 Silvia
.... ~
cc
4
e !'Angela
v!P
s
4.5
~
t
r
I .... h
L·H %
~~
I
~
300
............ 110
r---\.
H+L*
0
...,
t
H*
I 0
L* L·L%
I0 0
avi co mptat les errade
v
' '" .,
~
(0
le
4 fra ses
(PP ))
Figure 13. Catalan (S)M(qS)(VO) phrasing- Waveform, spectrogram, and FO trace for the sentence La Silvia no va mencionar que rAngela havia comptat les errades de les frases 'Silvia did not say that Angela has counted the mistakes of the sentences' of speaker MO (sentence 26_Emb_MO)
The next grouping is (SVqS)(VO) and its pitch track is given in Figure 14. There is just one break after the embedded subject It is marked by the complex boundary tone lrH%. There is no boundary after the matrix subject The delayed peak is located on the following word There is no break between the matrix
Chapter 3. Phrasing patterns In Catalan SVO structures 89
verb and the complementizer either. The interruption of the pitch track and its high starting point on the complementizer is caused by a consonantal effect on FO (d Gussenhoven 2004: 7). The raised FO is a result of a
g .,a~
350
g.
300
.1::1
...
250
e
200
If
100
.,a~
~
~JU.
~ IJ
,~ 1......
ISO
l.;l
.
J..,._
~
-
~
,' v v I• It
,.
1;,"I•·•·
~"'b
.. ... l.s
"\
'
s
L*
%
pare v+!ir [ce VCI
!'Amelia p
s
3
, \' I
-
I• H*
IEl
I
...J
.jl ..
se ln'ha a nat
v
*
ciutat
Malaga
(0
(PP))
Figure 14. Catalan (SVqS)(VO) phrasing- Waveform, spectrogram, and FO trace for the sentence El pare va dir que lil.melia se n'ha anat a la ciutat de Malaga The father said that Amelia went to the city of Malaga' of speaker CP (sentence 42_Emb_CP)
The fourth grouping, (S)(VqS)(VO), is illustrated in Figure 15. There are two sentence-internal main breaks marked by the complex boundary tone L-H%: one after the matrix subject; the other one after the embedded subject One phonetic characteristic should be noted here. Interestingly. if the end of the word is marked by a complex boundary tone, the peak of the pitch accent is not delayed but aligns with the right side of the strong syllable. By inspecting the three preceding pitch tracks, it can be seen that they show the same pattern. On the other hand, if the pitch accent is not followed by a complex boundary tone, a delayed peak is possible. 15 There is no break between the matrix verb and the complementizer. There is a transition between the verb's pitch accent and the low leading tone of the embedded subject There is no special tonal movement around the complementizer. There is also no break between the embedded verb and object
15- This is not a generalization: it is a description of the data Further research has to be done in order to generalize this statement.
90
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
Jlii.J ll!~
g 200 ~
... ~~~ . !!'-
ftl
1
110
i
If
80
so
......
all~
Ill..
.11..
1...... f! ~
111'1
-
.na;
~ I
.
L+H* L-H%L+> H* 4
0
La Barbara
s
;~
...,'-·
"V
~ ~ ~-~
..
r
L+H *
v c
rob a
s
v
el
~
•L+H *
1 0
!'aguila p
~
•• 4
u
~
L-H %L+> H*
10
sup osa
3.5
!~
,
~
~
"' ""
'llr 3
' '! 5
2
1.5
,
170
6- 140
Jl
...
I j~JI lr"T
1
ratoli (0
L*
L* L-L% 4
0 1
del lm+
germa
(PP))
Figure 15. Catalan (S)(VqS)(VO) phrasing- Wavefo rm, spectrogram, and FO trace for the sentence La Barbara suposa que l'dguila robd el ratol! del meu germd 'Barbara supposes that the eagle stole my brother's mouse' of speaker DS (34_Emb_DS)
After the description of the general results of the complex SVO experiment. the results for each condition are given. Figure 16 presents the four conditions with the corresponding percentage values in the table. The line diagram illustrates the values. If the values for each condition are added the total is not 100%. This is due to the fact that the difference represents the percentage of the miscellaneous groupings. Nevertheless, they are not listed in the figure. As shown in Figure 16, while the general order of the four groupings with respect to the frequency (d Figure 11) is by and large reflected in three conditions,
SVOphrulng 70 60
~
c
.. ~
0..
50
40 30 20 10 0
-+· _..,._ -
(SV)(qS)(VO) (S)(V)(qS)(VO) (SVqS)(VO) (S)(VqS)(VO)
·~ .
-
~~
~
..
;..--
,•
... ..·
........~~
.....
---....
.....
hort SI short 0 shortS /long 0 long SI short 0 long S/long 0 46,67
20
23,33 3,33 10
30 13,33 13,33
60 16,67 3,33 6,67
60 10 13,33 3,33
Figure 16. Percentages of complex SVO phrasing patterns in the fou r different conditions
Chapter 3. Phrasing patterns in Catalan SVO structures
it is perturbed in the short S/long 0 condition. The predominant grouping (SV) (qS)(VO) is the most common grouping in the three conditions shortS/short 0 (~47%), longS/short 0 (60%), and longS/long 0 (60%). However, it is not the most common in the condition short Silang 0 (only 20%). It is (S)(V)(qS)(VO) that is realized most often (30%). In addition, the two groupings (SVqS)(VO) and (S)(VqS)(VO) have both the same relatively high percentage, while they never have the same frequency in the other three conditions. Thus, as in the simple SVO pattern, the condition short S!long 0 changes the general phrasing pattern. One note with respect to the miscellaneous groupings should be mentioned here. While the main groupings never separate the embedded verb and object with a prosodic break (i.e. (VO)), there are some miscellaneous groupings that do (i.e. (V)(O)). Interestingly. they only do in the two conditions with a long object. There are five realizations in the shortS/long 0 condition and four realizations in the long S/long 0 condition. Still the number of these groupings is very low and is not considered anymore. In what follows, four important characteristics of the prosodic grouping of complex SVO structures are more closely described (leaving the miscellaneous phrasings aside and thus referring to the values of the dark grey bars of Figure 11 (unless mentioned otherwise)): (a) Separation of the object clause, (b) Phrasing of matrix subject and verb, (c) Phrasing of embedded subject, and (d) Phrasing of embedded verb and object. a.
Separation of object clause: The two most common groupings place a boundary between the matrix verb and the object clause. Thus, the total number of separated object clauses comes to 80% (56%+ 24%). Even in the short S!long 0 condition, the object clause is prosodically separated from matrix material at least 50% of the time (cf. Figure 16), although the number is smaller. Among these breaks 60% are realized as an ip-boundary and 40% as an IntPboundary. This is shown in Table 4. In both groupings ((SV)(qS)(VO) and (S)(V)(qS)(VO)), the boundary is most often realized on the ip-level. The number of IntP-boundaries in the (S)(V)(qS)(VO) grouping comes to only 30%, while it comes to 45% in the other grouping.
Table 4. Percentages of boundary types immediately preceding the embedded clause (all ten speakers, all three scenarios)
ip IntP
(SV)(q...
(S)(V)(q...
Total
31 (55%) 25 (45%)
17 (70%) 7 (30%)
48 (60%) 32 (40%)
91
92
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
The variation with respect to the realized boundary tone seems to be typical for Catalan. Experiment 1 (simple SVO) shows the same pattern. Furthermore, Astruc (2005) also shows that sentential adverbs are separated by (low) ip-boundary tones (32.7%) nearly as often as by (low) t-boundary tones (33.2%; cf. Astruc 2005: 154: Table 4.3). What do previous studies say about boundaries separating the embedded clause from the matrix clause? Downing (1970) exclusivelydevoteshisattention to obligatory boundary insertion (his OBI convention). He argues that obligatory boundaries are inserted at the leftmost and rightmost edge of root sentences (Downing 1970: 31) but not of embedded sentences since they are not root clauses. The difference between (Sa) and (Sb) is that in the former the complement is a direct quotation, whereas in the latter example the complement expresses reported speech. (8) (Examples taken from Downing 1970: 89) a. b.
Ann said,il1l make you some sandwiches." Ann said (that) she would make us some sandwiches.
Downing argues that complements of certain "quotative" verbs (such as say, remark, tell (someone), ... ) are identical to root clauses and thus are realized with obligatory boundaries, i.e. set off by pauses (Downing 1970: 89). The complement in (Sb) is simply an "ordinary complement" and is not obligatorily set off by a pause (Downing 1970: 90). However, it can be optionally set off by a pause (Downing 1970: 113ff.). Nespor & Vogel (1986/2007: 189) follow the idea by Downing (1970) that root sentences delimit an intonational phrase, "while those sentences that are not root sentences do not". By restructuring the intonational phrase, though, it is possible to place an intonational phrase boundary after the matrix verb. One factor for restructuring is length. N&V (1986/2007: 194f.) illustrate the tendency for intonational phrases to be grouped in constituents of "a more or less uniform, 'average' length" by giving examples (9), where (9a) can be grouped as (9b ). (9) (Examples 13a and 13d from N&V 1986/2007: 194f.) 16 a. b.
[1[Jennifer] rp [discovered] rp [that her attic] rp [had been invaded] rp [last winter](P [by a family](P [of squirrelsl9'lr [1[Jennifer]rp [discovered]rpJr lrlthat her attic]rp [had been invaded]rp [last winter]rpJr [1[by a family]rp [of squirrels]rpJr
In Example (9) of N&V (1986/2007), there is always a prosodic boundary between the matrix clause and the embedded clause. However, this prosodic break is a phonological phrase, constructed by a syntactic algorithm (N&V 1986/2007: 168).
16.
Chapter 3. Phrasing patterns in Catalan SVO structures
In his work on subject and object clauses (inter alia), Truckenbrodt (2005) achieves different results. Subject clauses (in the Vorfeld) are systematically separated from the matrix clause and object clauses (in the Nachfeld) are not separated from the matrix clause. Due to the fact that the subject clause is located in the Vorfeld, the relevant boundary is on its right. All three cited studies agree on the non-existence ofo bligatoryintP -boundaries preceding obj ectclauses. Myresults match insofar their findings, because only 80% ofthe clauses are separated and among them there are only40% IntP-boundaries. However, ip-boundaries have to be considered, too. Thus, even though 80% does not reflect obligatoriness, Catalan clearly tends to separate object clauses from preceding material. b.
c.
d.
Phrasing of matrix subject and verb: As Figure 11 and Figure 16 show; there are two groupings in which the matrix subject is phrased with the matrix verb: (SV)(qS)(VO) and (SVqS)(VO). Thus the total number ofS and V together in a group comes to 66% (56%+ 10%). In the other two groupings the matrix subject is phrased alone. The total number of separated matrix subjects comes to 34% (24% + 10%). Phrasing of embedded subject: The embedded subject is phrased separately from the matrix material and from the embedded verb and object in 80% of the groupings (i.e. only in the two main groupings; 56%+ 24%). The embedded subject is not phrased alone, though, because the complementizer is part of that prosodic group. The complementizer is unstressed and consequently counts as a clitic. In the remaining 20%, the embedded subject phrases with matrix material (cf (SVqS)(VO) and (S)(VqS)(VO)). It never groups with following material. Thus in all groupings (i.e. 100%), the embedded subject is followed by a boundary. Consequently, the tendency for (SV) does not exist in embedded clauses. Phrasing ofembedded verb and object: In all four main groupings, the embedded verb phrases together with the embedded object (i.e. 100%). There is never a boundary in-between them, nor does the verb phrase with the preceding subject.
Discussion In Section 3.1.2 two hypotheses were formulated. The first one said that sentential objects increase the number of the single group phrasing of matrix SV. The second one said that sentential objects are not obligatorily separated by prosodic means from the preceding clause. As for the first hypothesis, it has been dearly fulfilled. On the one hand, the number of (SV) phrasing in simple SVO structures (cf. experiment 1) is very low.
3·3·3·4
93
94
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
On the other hand, the matrix (SV) phrasing in complex structures comes to 56%. Hypothesis 1 is also validated when comparing the value of 56% to the percentage value of 33.1% in D'Imperio et al. (2005). The (SV) grouping increases by 20%. Consequently, the length of the object (i.e. its characteristic to be sentential) has a precise efiect on the phrasing of the (matrix) subject and verb. The tendency of these two constituents to phrase together increases considerably; this clearly supports the findings for Catalan in Prieto (2005) and D'Imperio et al. (2005). The length of the internal constituents of the object clause plays insofar a role that in the short Silang 0 condition the number of matrix (SV) decreases. Otherwise, the most common grouping persistently is the (SV)(qS)(VO) grouping. Nevertheless, the two most common groupings are further on (SV)(qS)(VO) and (S)(V)(qS)(VO). For this reason, the effect of the object clause internal object is not considered in the analysis (Section 3.4). The analysis of complex SVO phrasing deals only with the four main groupings. As for the second hypothesis, it can also be taken as fulfilled. The results concerning the separation of object clauses show that the boundary preceding the embedded clause is not obligatory, since 20% of the object clauses are not preceded by a boundary. Nevertheless, Catalan has a significant tendency to place a boundary before the embedded object clause. Thus any approach should consider that there rather is a boundary. The results further show that there is a great variability for prosodic constituents to have an ip- or t-boundary tone. By using the hypernym 'prosodic phrase' all boundary tones can be considered though. This variation of boundary tones, which seems to be normal in Catalan, might be the reason why the Catalan boundary cues described in Frota et al. (2007) - and presented in Chapter 2 - are not specific as to the exact level of the prosodic hierarchy.
3·3·4
Conclusion
I conducted two experiments on phrasing of SVO. In general, my findings support the view put forward in D'Imperio et al. (2005) and Prieto (2005) that the subject tends to be phrased with the verb if the object is long. In the first experiment (simpie SVO), the sentence is a root clause in its narrow sense; the object is a DP. The subject and the object were modified forlength (i.e. long/branching vs. short/nonbranching). In the second experiment (complexSVO), the object is sentential. The assumption was that a sentential object counts as a long object with respect to the phrasing behavior of (matrix) SV. In the first experiment, around 80% of the clauses were instances of (S)(VO). In addition, although (SV)(O) phrasing was detected under the long object condition, this pattern was realized rather seldomly by the ten speakers(~ 1%). This contrasts with the average percentage of33.1% in D'Imperio et al. (2005: 68). However,
Chapter 3. Phrasing patterns in Catalan SVO structures
experiment 2 showed that a sentential object leads to a (SV) phrasing in 56% of the cases, thus supporting hypothesis 1. I modified the length of the embedded subject and the embedded object This modification does not play a role in the phrasing of complex SVO- it is rather the fact that a sentential object itself is long. In 80% of the examples, the embedded clause is prosodically separated from the matrix clause. By that, hypothesis 2 can be taken as validated. Nevertheless, Catalan shows a great tendency to separate the embedded object clause from the matrix clause. The results of experiment 2 (complex SVO) show that there are some main characteristics concerning phrasing. They are listed here: i. ii. iii. iv. v.
the embedded object is phrased with the embedded verb the embedded subject is phrased separately from the embedded verb and object in most cases the embedded subject is phrased alone the embedded clause is normally separated from the matrix clause the matrix subject has the tendency to phrase with the matrix verb
Any approach on the phrasing of complex SVO structures in Catalan has to account for these characteristics. In Section 3.4, a corresponding approach is given.
3·4
An analysis for SVO and embedded SVO phrasing
This section offers an analysis of the prosodic phrasing of simple and complex Catalan SVO structures. The analysis is grounded in a variant of Optimality Theory (Prince & Smolensky 1993/2004) called Stochastic OT (Boersma & Hayes 2001). The approach is based on Prieto's (2005) account for simple SVO and includes her three constraints MAx-BIN-END>> MIN-N-PHRASES >> ALIGN-XP,R. A new constraint- ALIGN-CP, L-is assumed which is ranked below MAx-BIN-END but higher than MIN-N-PHRASES and ALIGN-XP,R, as shown in (10). The constraint ALIGN-CP,L aligns the left edge of a CP with the left edge of a prosodic phrase and thus accounts for the pattern that the embedded clause is in general prosodically separated from the matrix clause. (10)
MAx-BIN-END» AuoN-CP,L » MIN-N-PHRASBS » AuoNs-XP,R
By using the stochastic OT framework (Boersma & Hayes 2001), in which the constraints are ranked on a continuous ranking scale, the model can account for the variation expressed by the four most common groupings of the data (which grasp 80% of the data). I argue that ALIGN-CP,L, MIN-N-PHRASEs, and ALIGN-XP,R overlap and the actual ranking of the constraints will sometimes be the reverse of their 'normal' ranking. The different rankings derived from the underlying form in (10) account for the data.
95
96 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
Section 3.4 is structured in the following way. The theoretical background for boundary placement is presented in Section 3.4.1, in which the fundamental syntactic and phonological constraints (such as the alignment and wrapping constraints as well as two eurhythmic constraints reflecting constituent weight and speech rate) are introduced in detail. Readers familiar with the syntax-phonology interface may skip this section and continue reading Section 3.4.2. In Section 3.4.2 the theoretical approach for the phrasing of simple SVO structures is presented. Since I adopt in great part (with some modifications) the approach of Prieto (2005), it is introduced in detail. Her approach constitutes the basis for accounting for more complex structures. In Section 3.4.3, the analysis of complex SVO structures is offered. First, the necessary constraint rankings for the four groupings are given. Second, optionality in OT and the stochastic OT model are introduced. Finally, it is shown how the necessary rankings can be modeled in stochastic OT. 3.4.1
Optimality-theoretic constraints of the Syntax-Prosody interface
There has been evidence in the linguistic literature that syntactic and phonological factors determine the boundary placement. This section introduces in detail the theoretical background of the four constraints relevant for my approach and used in Prieto (2005): ALIGN-XP,R, WRAP-XP, MAx-BIN, and *P-PHRASE (i.e. MIN-N-PHRASEs). One main aspect of syntactic factors is the relation of certain XPs to prosodic structure (Selkirk's 1986, 1995b, 2000 End-Based Theory, Truckenbrodt's 1995, 1999, 2005 Wrap constraints; cf. below)P A further factor mentioned in the literature is syntactic heaviness (N&V 1986/2007, Kanerva 1990, Frascarelli 2000), in the sense that a constituent that is syntactically complex/syntactically branching has a greater tendency to be phrased independently. Another factor is certain syntactic constituents, i.e. certain type of constructions which form prosodic domains on their own, for example in the case of parenthetical expressions, nonrestrictive relative clauses, and vocatives (cf. Selkirk 2005, N&V 1986/2007, Astruc 2005 among others). Here I introduce the alignment constraints of the end-based (sometimes also edge-based) theory and the wrapping constraint. The influential proposal of the end-based theory by Selkirk (1986, 1995b, 2000) specifies a set of parameters for mapping between syntactic structure and prosodic structure. It predicts 'anchor points' where both structures coincide. The interface constraints require that the edge of a maximal projection in the surface
Selkilk (2009a,b) proposes a new theory, called Match Theory, for the relation between syntactic constituency and prosodic constituency. Recently, the relation of phases (CP, vP) to prosodic structure has also been highlighted (Ishihara 2004, 2007a, Kratzer & Selkirk 2007).
17.
Chapter 3. Phrasing patterns in Catalan SVO structures
syntactic structure (i.e. XP or Xmax) coincide with (i.e. aligns with) the edge of a prosodic constituent. The edges can either be on the right side or on the left side of both types of constituents. This is shown in (lla) and (llb) respectively. An example ofthe prosodic structure derived byrightalignmentis shown in (12). A right prosodic boundary is introduced at the right edge of XP 1 and of XP 2• (11)
(12)
Selkirk's (1986: 389) 'End parameter settings' for phonological phrases
a.
1xmax
b.
Xmax[
Derived prosodic structure by right alignment Prosodic structure: Syntactic structure:
Languages are characterized as having either right- or left-alignment (examples for right edges: Kisseberth & Abasheikh 1974 and Selkirk 1986 for Chi Mwi:ni; left edges: Selkirk & Shen 1990 for Chinese, Selkirk & Tateishi 1991 for Japanese). In general, it is assumed that it is the phonological phrase that coincides with XP. Gussenhoven (2004: 167) and Truckenbrodt (2005) broaden this idea and establish a relation between a sentence/CP and the intonational phrase. In the 1990s, Selkirk's (1986: 389) original approach was generalized to the format of Generalized Alignment (McCarthy & Prince 1993) in Optimality Theory (OT, Prince &Smolensky 1993/2004). 18 This is shown in (13). (13)
Alignment Constraints
a.
AuoN-XP.R: ALIGN (XP, R; q>, R) "Align the right edge of a syntactic XP to the right edge of rp'"
b.
AuoN-XP,L: AuoN (XP, L; q>, L) "Align the left edge of a syntactic XP to the left edge of rp.'"
The constraints in (13) are taken as ranked and violable constraints (Selkirk 1995b). In addition, they are universal in this theory. This becomes important for the new constraint ALIGN-CP,L (Section 3.4.3.1). De Lacy (2003) explores the notion of universality by concluding that in all grammars all constraints are present. He states that a grammar cannot chose between, for example, ALIGN (XP,Left; cp,Left) and ALIGN (XP,Right;
18. The reader should already have knowledge of how Optimality Theory (OT) wolks. Otherwise, I refer to the original work by Prince & Smolensky (1993/2004) or to introductory books such as Archangeli & Langendoen (1997), Kager (1999 ), or McCarthy (2002, 2008 ).
97
98
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
it is possible that a constraint in a given language is rendered inactive (de Lacy 2003: 70ff.) by higher ranked constraints, so that the language behaves as if there were only either left-alignment or right-alignment. In addition to the alignment constraints, there is a second class of constraints on the syntax-prosody interface: the Wrapping constraints (Truckenbrodt 1995, 1999, 2005). The function of such constraints is to suppress the effect of alignment constraints. Departing from a proposal by Hale & Selkirk (1987), Truckenbrodt (1999) argues that alignment constraints are not enough to describe the relation between syntax and phonology. He shows for the Native-American language Tohono O'odham (formerly known as Papago) that lexical XPs dominated from VP are not separated by phonological phrase boundaries, i.e. no p-boundaries are inserted internal to VP (Truckenbrodt 1999: 234): Tohono O'odham displays the phrasing shown in (15b) and not the phrasing (15a), which is derived by ALIGN-XP,R. He argues for a constraint WRAP-XP (14) that demands that for each lexical XP 19 there must be a p-phrase that contains the XP (Truckenbrodt 2007: 439). This constraint suppresses the right boundary after XP2 in (15a,b ). (14)
The Wrapping constraint
(Truck.enbrodt 1999: 228)
WRAP-XP ·Each XP is cotttained itt a phonological phrase." WRAP-XP is violated if a syntactic constituent XP is separated into distinct prosodic constituents. WRAP-XP and ALIGN-XP are thus inherently in conflict with each other. This is illustrated in (15). (15)
Reaction ofWRAP-XP to structures derived by AuGN-XP,R (Truck.enbrodt 1999: 229)
a.
* ( [XP2
c.
./ ( [Xl
)
b.
Xl]XPl )
XP 2lXP1
./
)
[XP2 Xl]XPl
d.
( )
Structures (15a,b) are left-branching. The former violates WRAP-XP because there is a prosodic boundary to the right ofXP 2 (favored by ALIGN-XP,R). XP 1 is thus not contained in a single phonological phrase. The latter structure does not violate WRAP-XP, but it violates ALIGN-XP,R because the favored right boundary is suppressed. The right-branching structure in (15c) does not lead to a conflict between
19. Truck.enbrodt (1999: 226) formulates the Lexical Category Condition (LCC): "Constraints relating syntactic and prosodic categories apply to lexical syntactic elements and their projections, but not to functional elements and their projections, or to empty syntactic elements and their projections."
Chapter 3. Phrasing patterns in Catalan SVO structures
WRAP-XP and ALIGN-XP,R because no constraint is violated: XP2 and XP 1 are right-aligned and both maximal projections are contained in a single phonological phrase. Right-branching structures only lead to a violation of WRAP-XP when the head has multiple complements, as is the case in (15d). ALIGN-XP,R demands a boundary after XP2 and for this reason XP 1 is no longer contained in a single phonological phrase. Today the most widely accepted theory of the syntax-phonology interface is based on the two concepts expressed by the constraints ALIGN-XP,R/ALIGN-XP,L and WRAP-XP. However, recent work has shown that phonological factors, such as constituent weight and speech rate, also play a major role in sentence phonology. This is also important in the present study. Constituent weight reflects the heaviness factor on the phonological side. A heavy prosodic constituent has a greater tendency to be phrased independently (N&V 1986/2007, Zec & Inkelas 1990, Ghini 1993 among others). Length can be measured in terms of number of syllables of a constituent along the level of syllable structure (Jun 2003, D'Imperio et al. 2005, Elordieta et al. 2005), or in terms of prosodic words of a constituent along the level of prosodic words (Prieto 2005, Prieto 2006a). Thus, constituent weight means prosodic branchingness and it concerns the question of whether a prosodic constituent of a certain level contains more than one prosodic constituent of the immediately lower level (Elordieta et al. 2005). As for IntPs, this would mean that it contains two or more intermediate phrases. Ghini (1993) was the first to establish constraints which consider balance and weight of constituents. He reanalyzed N&V's (1986) syntactic branching conditions in terms of average weight and balance of prosodic constituents. N&V (1986/2007: 172f.) argued for the phonological phrase that a syntactic head can restructure with (i.e. build a cp together with) an adjacent complement if this complement is non-branching (16a,b). If it is branching, the head and its first complement on the recursive side have to remain in separate phonological phrases. This is marked by'//' in (16c).20 (16)
Restructuring of phonological phrase (adapted from N&V 1986/2007: 172&173) a.
(Se prenden\)cp (qualcosa)cp (prendera)cp (tordi)cp
'If he catches something, he will catch thrushes:
10.
b.
(Se prendera qualcosa)cp (prendera tordi)cp
c.
(Portera)cp II (due tigri)cp (fuori dalla gabbia)cp 'He will take two tigers out of the cage:
Nespor & Vogel also give examples for restructuring of intonational phrases (N&V
1986/2007: 194).
99
100
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
Ghini (1993: 51) argues that there is an isomorphism between syntax and prosodic phrasing. It is not the first non -branching complement but the head of the complement which can phrase together with the preceding V head. N&V (1986) cannot account for the example in (17) because the complement is branching. Ghini (1993), though, is able to account for the phrasing in (17b) because he considers eurhythmic principles such as uniformity (a string is parsed into units of same length) and average weight (the ideal length of a p-phrase at a normal speech rate comprises two pro so die words). By referring to pro so die words, Ghini (1993: 52) moves away from syntactic branchingness and clearly concentrates on prosodic factors. (17)
Restructuring ofbranching objects
(adapted from Ghini 1993: 51)
a.
(Comprera)rp (mappe)rp (di dtta)rp (moho antiche)rp 'He will buy maps of very old towns:
b.
(Comprera mappe)rp (di citta molto antiche)rp 'He will buy maps of very old towns:
A version of Ghini's (1993) constraints was adopted in Selkirk (2000: 244) and Sandalo & Truckenbrodt (2002: 295), who introduced size constraints for prosodic constituents for English and Brazilian Portuguese (BP) respectively. In BP. for example, a verb is phrased together with a single-word object as in (18a), but it is phrased separately if the object contains two lexical words (i.e. two prosodic words; N =noun, A= adjective), as in (18b). The constraint ALIGN-XP,R does not help because it cannot derive the internal boundary in the latter example: V is not a maximal projection. (18)
Phrasing ofV and 0 in Brazilian Portuguese (Sandalo & Truckenbrodt 2002: 293)
a.
( V N ) Vendeu livros sold books 'He sold books:
b.
( V )( N A ) Vendeu livros novos sold books new 'He sold new books:
Based on Ghini's (1993) eurhythmic principles, Sandalo & Truckenbrodt (2002: 295) formulate the constraint MAx-BIN (19), which is a ranked and violable constraint in OT. MAx-BIN together with WRAP-XP accounts for the (V)(NA) phrasing in (18b). MAx-BIN inserts the boundary after V. Other groupings such as (VN)(A) and (V)(N)(A) are ruled out by WRAP-XP.
Chapter 3. Phrasing patterns in Catalan SVO structures (19)
Prosodic Binarity constraint of Sandalo & Truckenbrodt (2002: 295) MAx-BIN "P-Phmses consist of maximally two prosodic words."
The next non-syntactic factor influencing phrasing decisions concerns the rate of speech (N&V 1986/2007, Frascarelli 2000, Tun 2003, among others). The faster a sentence is uttered, the longer the IntPs of this utterance are, i.e. the utterance is less likely to be broken down into several IntPs (N&V 1986/2007: 195). Let us consider example (20). According to N&V (1986/2007), (20a) is uttered at a fairly rapid tempo. The sentence contains just one single IntP. However, if the speech rate is reduced it is more likely that (20b) or (20c) is uttered, where the sentence contains two or three IntPs respectively. (20)
Influence of rate of speech on phrasing a. b. c.
(adapted from N&V 1986/2007: 194)
(1 My friend's baby hamster always looks for food in the corners of its cage)1 (1 My friend's baby hamster)L (1 always looks for food in the comers of its cage)1 (1 My friend's baby hamster)L (1 always looks for food)1 (1 in the comers of its cage)1
The examples in (20) show that there is more structure (i.e. there are more IntPs) in the slower versions of the sentence, whereas there is less structure in (20a). Prince & Smolensky (1993: 25, fn.13) set up a family of constraints called *STRuc that ensures that structure is constructed minimally. The phenomenon in (20) can be caught by a constraint *P-PHRASE, (21a), which is part of the family of*STRuc and that seeks to avoid phonological phrases altogether (cf. Truckenbrodt 1999: 228, 2002: 274). Fery (2007) has a corresponding version for a ban on intonational phrases: *I-PHRASE (21b). (21)
Constraints punishing P-PHRASBS and IntPs a.
*P-PHRASE: "No phonological phrase."
b.
*I-PHRASE: "No intonational phrase.~
(taken from Fery 2007)
These constraints have in general the effect of punishing additional structure. Furthermore, as Truckenbrodt (1999: 228) notes, alignment constraints that are ranked below *P-PHRASE are rendered inactive because a boundary favored by ALIGN is punished by *P-PHRASE. Thus the universality argued for in de Lacy (2003) does not exclude languages where, for example, ALIGN-XP,L never shows up. In these languages ALIGN-XP,L is simply ranked below *P-PHRASE.
101
102
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
At this point, I end the introduction to the theoretical background. For more information, cf. Truck.enbrodt (2007) and references cited there. The next section is devoted to the relevant constraints for phrasing in Catalan.
3.4.2
Accounting for simple SVO structures in Catalan
This section presents the analysis of the phrasing pattern of simple SVO structures in Catalan. I argue that Prieto's (2005) constraint MIN-N-PHRASBS (a version of *P-PHRASE) can be violated cumulatively, that it is ranked below MAx-BIN-END (a version of MAx-BIN) and finally, that it is also active at normal speech rate. The results of the simple SVO experiment and of Prieto (2005) are similar. For this reason, the approach established in Prieto (2005) is adopted for my results. Furthermore, Prieto's (2005) approach underlies the approaches of the other three experiments (phrasing of embedded object clauses, phrasing of clitic left- and right-dislocation, and phrasing of preverbal subjects). Due to the important role that Prieto's (2005) analysis possesses in the present study, it is presented in detail here: first, the necessary constraints are introduced (Section 3.4.2.1) followed by a motivation for the constraint hierarchy (Section 3.4.2.2). After that, some OT tables of Prieto (2005) are presented to illustrate her account (Section 3.4.2.3). Finally, the modifications I propose for Prieto's (2005) account are introduced (Section 3.4.2.4).
3·4·2.1
The 1·elevant constmints
Prieto's (2005) OT account is based on the four previously introduced constraints: the two syntactic constraints ALIGN-XP,R and WRAP-XP and modified versions of the two non-syntactic constraints MAx-BIN and *P-PHRASB. 21 The syntactic constraints have the same function as described before. As for *P-PHRASB, Prieto's version of it is called MIN-N-PHRASBS and its goal is to minimize the number of phonological phrases (
11. Prieto (2005) hasfurtherconstraints. First,thereis MIN- UTTthat demands that an utterance consisting of only two prosodic words is parsed into one single phonological phrase (Prieto 2005: 213). Due to the fact that all the examples used in this study are longer than two prosodic words, MIN- UTT does not have any influence and is thus not considered here. Second, there is No-CLASH that prohibits two immediately adjacent stressed syllables (Prieto 2005: 219, 2008). I do not consider this constraint either because the target words of my data are proparoxytonic words. Consequently there is no dash with following material.
Chapter 3. Phrasing patterns in Catalan SVO structures 103 (22)
Prieto's (2005) constraint for avoiding p-phrases MIN-N-PHRASBS (RAPID SPBBCH)
"Minimize the number ofphrases (rapid speech)." As for MAx-BIN, it is explained in detail here. Prieto (2005: 205) argues that Catalan plays a stronger version of this constraint. The prosodic binarity is restricted to the end of sentences because in Catalan there are longer p-phrases in non-final positions than in final positions. For this reason, the single prosodic grouping of long subject constituents is possible, (23), and, in null subject clauses, the verb and following material of the complement that is not sentence final can form a long phonological phrase (24). In (23) the subject consists of three prosodic words (w) and is not split up. Even if the subject consisted of four or five prosodic words, it would constitute one single prosodic phrase (Prieto 2005: 216). The resulting prosodic structure is given in (23b). (23)
Phrasing of subjects with more than two prosodic words w
w
w
(Prieto 2005: 217) w
a.
(Els ve'ins catalans de l'Ebre)cp (s~nfaden)cp The neighbors catalan of the.Ebre (river) RBFL-get.angry.3PL 'The Catalan neighbors from the Ebre river get angrf.
b.
Resulting prosodic structure (S)cp (V)cp
Example (24) is a null subject clause. The verb comprava 'bought' is followed by the object mapes de Barcelona. 'maps of Barcelona, which consists of two prosodic words (w). The object is followed by the adjunct PP per a li\nna. 'for Anna The difference between (24a) and (24b) is that in the latter example the verb is phrased together with the object. In this case, the prosodic phrase consists of three prosodic words. However, this long phrase is not sentence final and thus is fully acceptable in Catalan. The syntactic structure and its prosodic grouping are given in (24c). (24)
Complement with 2 wand additional adjunct PP (adapted from Prieto 2005: 204) w
w
w
w
a.
(Comprava)cp (mapes de Barcelona)cp (per a rAnna)cp for to the.Anna buy.PsT.l/3so map.PL of B. 'I/{s)he used to buy Barcelona maps for Anna:
b.
(Comprava mapes de Barcelona)cp (per a l"Anna)cp
c.
Syntactic structure and resulting prosodic structure [[V [NP [PP]pp]NP [PP]pp]yp)rp1cp ~ (V NP)cp (PP)cp
w
w
w
w
104
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
In order to account for the pattern that non-final phonological phrases can contain more than two prosodic words, Prieto (2005) has invented the constraint MAx-BIN-END (25). (25)
Restricted prosodic binarity in Catalan
(Prieto 2005: 205)
MAX-BIN-END "P-Phmses containing the main stress of the utterance consist of maximally two prosodic 'WOrds."
Since the main stress of all- new utterances is on the last stressed syllable, MAx-BIN-END concentrates on the sentence final phonological phrase. The constraint sets up only a maximal limit of prosodic words. If the sentence final phrase consists of only one prosodic word (as is the case in (23) and (24)), it is not violated. In summary, the four constraints that are relevant to the phrasing of SVO in Prieto (2005) are ALIGN-XRR (as defined in (13)), WRAP-XP (as defined in (14)), MIN-N-PHRASES (as defined in (22)), and MAx-BIN-END (as defined in (25)). These four constraints are ranked in the following way (26): (26)
3·4·2.2
hierarchy of constraints (Prieto 2005): MIN-N-PHRASBS >>MAX-BIN-END>> AUGN-XP,R >> WRAP-XP
Motivation for the constraint hierarchy
In the next paragraphs the motivation given in Prieto (2005) for this ranking is presented. In Section 3.4.2.4, however, the order of the constraints in (26) is changed and MAx-BIN-END is argued to be the highest ranked constraint. ALIGN-XP,R is ranked higher than WRAP-XP because of data such as that given in (24). The adjunct PP is phrased separately in (24a) and (24c). According to the syntactic structure given in (24c), the VP (which contains the object and the adjunct PP) is split up. The right boundary after the object NP is introduced by ALIGN-XP,R and it is not suppressed by WRAP-XP. If WRAP-XP were ranked higher, there would be no boundary after the object. The same pattern also arises in double object constructions (27). (27)
Prosodic grouping of double object constructions in Catalan (Prieto 2005: 204) (Va donar el llibre)
The dative argument is prosodically separated from the accusative argument. The right boundary after the accusative argument is introduced by ALIGN-XP,R and
Chapter 3. Phrasing patterns in Catalan SVO structures
it is not suppressed by WRAP-XP. These examples are reminiscent of the abstract pattern given in (15d), where the effect of WRAP-XP on structures derived by AuoN-XP,R is shown. Due to the fact that the boundary after the accusative argument (i.e. after XP2 in (15d)) results in an acceptable structure, one can conclude that ALIGN-XP,R is more dominant than WRAP-XP, cf. Table 5. If the ranking were the reverse, there would be no boundary between the accusative and the dative argument- contrary to the facts (cf. Table 6).
Table 5. Catalan double object constructions - Right candidate is chosen when ALIGN-XP,R » WRAP-XP ALIGN-XP,R
[V [NP] [PP]]
WRAP-XP *
.,.... (Va donar elllibre)p (ala Maria)p (Va donar elllibre ala Maria)p
*!
Table 6. Ranking W RAP-XP >> AuoN-XP,R- wrong result for Catalan double object constructions ALIGN-XP,R
WRAP-XP
[V [NP] [PP]]
(Va donar elllibre)p (ala Maria)p
*! *
.,.... (Va donar elllibre ala Maria)p
A high ranked alignment constraint, though, prevents the wrapping constraint from having an effect, because boundaries can never be suppressed. Despite this, WRAP-XP is kept in the hierarchy, because there are cases where a low ranked wrapping constraint is able to select the optimal candidate. An example follows immediately, while presenting Prieto's (2005) data for motivating MAx-BIN-END to be ranked higher than AuoN-XP,R and WRAP-XP. Example (28) shows the phrasing pattern of a null subject clause with an object consisting of three prosodic words. The example is reminiscent of Ghini's (1993) findings (cf. (17)) because the head noun of the object phrases together with the preceding verb. (28)
Complement with 3 w
w a.
(Prieto 2005: 203)
w
w
w
(Comprava mapes)cp (de Ia Barcelona antiga)cp old buy.PsT.l/3so map.PL of the B. '1/(s)he used to buy maps of old Barcelona:
105
106
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
Due to the (VN) phrasing, the sentence final prosodic phrase consists of only two prosodic words- in accordance with MAx-BIN-END. The constraint ALIGN-XP,R is not able to account for this boundary since there is no edge of a maximal projection at the right of the head noun mapes 'maps'. Prieto (2005: 206) says that by considering MAx-BIN-END as higher ranked than WRAP-XP, the correct grouping can be derived. This is shown in Table 7.
Table 7. Dominant role of MAX-BIN-END (Prieto 2005: 207) [V [N [PP [AP]]]]
MAX-BIN-END
(Comprava mapes de Ia Ben antlga)p
*!
(Comprava)p (mapes de la Ben antlga)p
*!
(Comprava mapes de la Bcn)p (antlga)p .,.... (Comprava mapes )p (de la Ben antlga)p (Comprava)p (mapes de la Bcn)p (antlga)p
ALIGN-XP,R
WRAP-XP * ***! ** ***!
Table 7 shows several things. Firstly, the high ranked constraint MAx-BIN-END is violated by the first two candidates (wwww)
Chapter 3. Phrasing patterns in Catalan SVO structures
are interchangeable. The data of this table also stem from SVO constructions and I postpone presenting the table until later (cf. Table 12). 3·4·2·3
Prieto's (2005) OT tables for S VO phrasing
In (2) I presented the results of Prieto (2005) that have to be explained. For the sake of convenience, I repeat them here as (29). (29)
Catalan SVO phrasing pattern- Results of Prieto (2005) a. b. c.
(S)
2w), short objects
The ranking in (26) accounts for the groupings in (29). This is illustrated by the original tables from Prieto (2005: 19f.: ex.36, 38). The (S)(VO) -phrasing of (29a) is shown in Table 8 for sentence (30). The three lowest constraints of (26) explain the pattern. Candidate c. is the winner since it does not violate any constraint. MAx-BIN-END is respected because the VP consists of two prosodic words, ALIGN-XP,R is respected because there is a boundary after the subject and after the VP, and finally WRAP-XP is respected because no lexical XP is split. MIN-NPHRASES is not of relevance here, since all candidates have the same number of prosodic phrases. w
(30)
w
w
La nena demana els regals the girl want.3sG the presents 'The little girl wants the presents:
Table 8. Catalan (S)(VO) phrasing ofthe sentence La ttetm demana els regals 'The little girl wants the presents~ taken from Prieto (2005: 215)
[[Lanena]NP [demana [elsregals] NP]VPhPtCP MAX-BIN-END ALIGN-XP,R WRAP-XP
a.
(
b.
(
c.
(
)
)
*!
* *!
NP
)
~
Table 9 illustrates the (SV)(O)-phrasing of (29b) for sentence (31). The (SV) phrasing in Catalan shows up in normal and fast speech rate (Prieto 2005: 214) in the long branching object condition. Due to the speech rate, the constraint MIN-N -PHRASES is active and, according to Prieto (2005: 216), it penalizes output
107
108
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
forms with more than two prosodic words (cf. Section 3.4.2.4 for a comment on the minimal restriction to two prosodic words).
w (31)
w
w
w
La nena demana els regals de Reis the girl want.3sG the presents of (three) kings 'The little girl wants the Christmas presents:
Table 9. Catalan (SV)(O) phrasing of the sentence La nena dematJa els regals de Reis 'The little girl wants the Christmas presentS, taken from Prieto (2005: 216: 38).22 [[La nena]NP [demana [els regals] [de Reis] pp]NPlvPhPICP a.
(
b.
(
c.
(
d.~
(
)
e.
(
)
f.
(
)
)
).:p (
MJN-NMAXPHRASES BIN-END
)
~!
)
~!
ALIGN-
WRAP-
XP,R
XP
*
)
*
)
*
VPNP VP
)
*!
VPNP
)
*!
VP
The optimal candidate d wins because it does not violate MIN-N-PHRASES or MAx-BIN-END and it violates WRAP-XP less often than candidate c. All of the other candidates violate higher ranked constraints. Table 9 shows that MIN-N-PHRASES has to be ranked higher than ALIGN-XP,R in order to allow for the suppression of the boundary after the subject. If it were ranked below ALIGN-XRR, there would be no chance for the (SV) phrasing. WRAP-XP cannot be used for the suppression, because independent evidence has shown that it is to be ranked lower than ALIGN-XP,R. Furthermore, as in Table 7, the subordinate constraint WRAP-XP is responsible for the decision of the best candidate. Candidate c and d are only different with respect to the amount ofWRAP-XP violations. In addition, the data constitute evidence for MAx-BIN-END, because longer p-phrases appear in nonfinal position. It prevents the verb from being phrased together with the object (cf. candidate a and b). If MIN-N-PHRASES did not exist in Table 9, candidate f would win, which represents an (S)(V)(O)-phrasing. And in fact, candidate fwins, if the speaker speaks slowly (Prieto 2005: 214f.). In situations of slow speech rate, MIN-N-PHRASES is not active and the subject and the verb are phrased separately. Candidate f wins
21. In the original table, candidate f had two violations of WRAP-XP: VP and NP. However, the NP does not violate WRAP-XP; this is why I have changed it here.
Chapter 3. Phrasing patterns in Catalan SVO structures
over candidate d, because it does not violate ALIGN-XP,R. This is illustrated in Table 10 for sentence (31). Table 10. Catalan (S)(V)(O) phrasing ofthe sentence La tterui demana els regals de Reis 'The little girl wants the Christmas presents: taken from Prieto (2005: 216: 37) MAX-BIN-
ALIGN-
WRAP-
END
XP,R
XP
)
*!
~
)
*!
[[La nena]NP [demana [els regals] [de Reis]pp]NPJVPhP/CP a.
(
b.
(
c.
(
d.
(
e.
(
).:p (
f ......
(
)q> (
)q> (
)
(
)
(
)
*!
VP,NP
)
*!
VP
)
VPLNP
)
VP
The last of the three groupings in (29) can also be derived by Prieto's (2005) basic hierarchy of constraints. This is pictured in Table 11 for sentence (23a), repeated here for the sake of convenience. (23a)
w
w
w
w
(Els ve'ins catalans de l'Ebre)cp (senfaden)cp The neighbors catalan of the.Ebre (river) RBFL-get.angry.3PL 'The Catalan neighbors from the Ebre river get angry? Table 11. Catalan (S)(VO) phrasing of constructions with long subjects, shown for the sentence Els vei"tJS catalans de l'Ebre stmfadett 'The Catalan neighbors of the Ebre river get angrY, taken from Prieto (2005: 217) MAX-BIN-
ALIGN-
WRAP-
END
XP,R
XP
)q>
*!
NP
)q>
*!
[[Eisveins [catalans [de l'Ebrepp]AP]NP] [s'enfad.en]yp] 1p1cp a.
(
b.
(
c.
(
d....
(
e.
(
)q> (
)q>
)q> (
)q> (
)q> (
)q>
)q> (
)q>
NP
NP,VP
NP!
NP,VP
NP,VP
The winning candidate dis the only one that prevents the subject from being split up and satisfies all constraints. It is again WRAP-XP that makes the decision for the optimal candidate. Candidate e, which also satisfies MAx-BIN-END and ALIGN-XP,R violates WRAP-XP twice. To conclude, Prieto's (2005) approach for Catalan SVO-phrasing is able to explain the pattern in (29). Nevertheless, there are some aspects that are worth to be discussed. This happens in the next section.
109
uo Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan 3.4.2.4 Modifications ofPrieto's approach to SVO phrasing In this section, some modifications of Prieto's (2005) approach are presented due to a closer inspection of the constraint MIN-N-PHRASES. I propose that the constraint can be violated cumulatively, that it is ranked below MAX-BIN-END and finally, that it is also active at a normal speech rate. After that, the impossible (S)(VO) phrasing in Table 9 is discussed. First, there is no evidence for MIN-N-PHRASES to be ranked higher than MAxBIN-END. The reverse order is also possible, as shown in Table 12. The results of Table 9 are not changed; candidate d still wins. Moreover, Table 9 is the only table in Prieto ( 2005) where MIN-N-PHRASES is active. Thus nothing speaks against a re-ranking of the constraints like in (32). From now on, therefore, I assume the ranking in (32). Table 12. Catalan (SV)(O) phrasing according tore-ranked constraints (cf. (32)) La nena demana els regals de Reis (J)
a.
(
b.
(
c.
(
(J)
)cp (
(
e.
(
)
f.
(
)cp (
)
)cp (
MAX-BIN-
END
(J)
)cp (
(32)
(J)
)
*!
)cp
*!
MIN-NPHRASES
ALIGN-
WRAP-
XP,R
XP
*
)cp
*
)
*
VP,NP!
VP
)
*!
VP,NP
)cp
*!
VP
re-ranking of the constraints in Prieto (2005):
MAX-BIN-END>> MIN-N-PHRASBS >> AllGN-XP,R >> WRAP-XP Alternatively, one can conclude that MIN-N-PHRASES and MAX-BIN-END are not ordered because no data justify any of the two rankings. However, there are two arguments for ranking MAx-BIN-END higher than MIN-N-PHRASES. (a) The first argument stems from data of sentential objects and is presented in the analysis of embedded SVO (cf. Table 17). (b) There is some vagueness with respect to the application of the constraint MIN-N-PHRASES. The restriction of MIN-N-PHRASES to penalize only output forms with more than two phonological phrases shall be reconsidered here. It is unclear why only single violations are allowed and not multiple (cumulative) violations. In Table 9 candidates e and f violate the constraint because they consist of three phonological phrases. But the violation is marked by only one single star. Candidates that consist of one or two phrases do not violate the constraint (candidates a-e). It is unclear why the critical value is two (and not just one or even three or four), i.e. it is unclear why MIN-N-PHRASES should not be violated by output forms with one or two phonological phrases. If cumulative violations of this type of constraint were allowed in Prieto (2005) (as they are in Truckenbrodt 1999, Elordieta et al. 2005 or Fery 2007), though, candidate a would
Chapter 3. Phrasing patterns in Catalan SVO structures
wrongly win. It would evoke only a single violation because it consists of one phrase, whereas the other candidates would evoke a double or a triple violation. However, if MAx-BIN-END is ranked higher than MIN-N-PHRASEs, the latter constraint could be violated cumulatively. Table 13 is the same as Table 12 with the difference that MIN-N-PHRASES is cumulative. As can be seen, candidate a is not the winning candidate because it violates the higher ranked constraint MAx-BIN-END. Candidate b is sorted out for the same reason. Candidate d wins for the same reasons as before, with the difference that it violates MIN-N-PHRASES twice -but so does candidate c. Table 13. Catalan (SV)(O) phrasing with are-ranked cumulative constraint
MIN-N-PHRASBS MAX-BIN-
END
MIN-NPHRASES
)
*!
1
)
*!
2
La nena demana els regals de Reis (I)
a.
(
b.
(
c.
(
(
(I)
(I)
(I)
)
e.
(
)
f.
(
)
)
ALIGN-
XP,R
WRAPXP
..
)
2
.
)
2
*
VP,NP!
VP
)
J!
VP,NP
)
J!
VP
From now on, itis assumed that MIN-N-PHRASES is ranked below MAx-BIN-END and that it can be violated cumulatively. Before proceeding with the (S)(VO) phrasing oflong objects, one final note with respect to MIN-N-PHRASES is necessary. The definition in (22) says that the number of (phonological) phrases shall be Ininimized in rapid speech (cf. Prieto 2005: 216). However, the (SV)(O) phrasing is also possible at a normal speech rate (cf. Prieto 2005: 214). Hence, the limitation of (22) to fast speech rate would give an incorrect picture. For this reason, I take MIN-N-PHRASES to be active in normal and fast speech rate. Second, Prieto (2005) cannot account for the (S)(VO) phrasing with long objects. Due to the strict ranking of the constraints, candidate b can never win (cf. Table 9, Table 12 and Table 10). Either (SV)(O) or (S)(V)(O) wins. But my data and the data of D'Imperio et al. (2005) show that (S)(VO) phrasing is possible in the Catalan long object condition. In my data (S)(VO) comes to 57% and in D'lmperio et al. (2005: 68: Table 4) to approximately 38%. Prieto (2005) does not claim that this phrasing is not possible, but it is not considered in the approach. In which way can the rankings in (26) or (32) account for the most common grouping? In short, they cannot The strict ranking of the constraints impedes the corresponding candidate from winning (cf. Table 9 to Table 10) and the variation is left unaccounted for. For the (S)(VO) candidate to win, the order has to be ALIGN-XP,R >> MIN-N-PHRASES >>MAx-BIN-END >> WRAP-XP, as illustrated in Table 14. The importance of a high ranked alignment constraint is also shown in
111
112.
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
Elordieta etal. (2005: 137) for Spanish (S)(VO) phrasing in the long object condition. In Section 3.4.3.3, the framework of stochastic OT for modeling variation is introduced. At that time, I address the current problem. Table 14. Catalan (S)(VO) phrasing in the long object condition La nena d.emana els regals de Reis (J)
a.
(
b.
(
c.
(
(J)
(J)
ALIGNXP,R
(J)
)
d
(
e.
(
)
f.
(
)
*!
)
)
)
*!
)
*!
MIN-NPHRASES
MAX-BIN-
WRAP-
END
XP
1
*
2
*!
2
VP,NP
2
VP
)
3!
VP,NP
)
3!
VP
The results of the simple SVO experiment by and large reflect the findings of Prieto (2005) and D'Imperio et al. (2005). (S)(VO) is the most common phrasing pattern in Catalan. For this reason, I simply adopt Prieto's (2005) analysis for my data. The only change proposed is the re-ranking of her two highest constraints, MIN-N-PHRASBS and MAx-BIN-END, as presented in (32). Furthermore, the prosodic constituent of ALIGN-XP,R is taken to be the prosodic phrase and not the phonological phrase as originally done in Prieto (2005). 3·4·3
Accounting for complex SVO structures in Catalan
The results of the complex SVO experiment show that there is certain optionality. Often there are several variants possible for grouping complex sentences, but one of them is clearly preferred. The analysis of complex sentences concentrates on the four main groupings that represent 80% of the data. As a first step, the necessary constraints are introduced and it is shown that each grouping has a different constraint ranking (Section 3.4.3.1). Next, it is proposed that the four different rankings are generated from a single underlying form. This is modeled in the framework of stochastic OT (Boersma 1998, Boersma & Hayes 2001). The general topic of optionality in OTis approached in Section 3.4.3.2, while the specific model of stochastic OT is introduced in detail in Section 3.4.3.3. In the following Section (3.4.3.4) it is argued that the new constraint ALIGN-CP,L, as well as the two constraints MIN-N-PHRASBS and ALIGN-XRR overlap. Due to this, the actual ranking of the constraints will sometimes be the reverse of their 'normal' ranking and the different rankings can therefore be derived from the underlying ranking MAx-BIN-END>> ALIGN-CRL >> MIN-N-PHRASBS >> ALIGN-XP,R. It is shown that the frequencies of the four main groupings are adequately modeled in stochastic OT. Section 3.4.3.5 concludes Section 3.4.3.
Chapter 3. Phrasing patterns in Catalan SVO structures 113
3·4·3·1
1he relevant constraints and their rankings
The approach to the prosodic phrasing of SVO structures with a sentential object includes the three highest constraints of (32). 23 Thus the foundation of my approach is based on the proposal by Prieto (2005). However, I depart from Prieto (2005) in two respects. Firstly, I assume a new constraint, called ALIGN-CP,L. This constraint aligns the left edge of a CP with the left edge of a prosodic phrase. Secondly, I claim that the three constraints ALIGN-CP,L, MIN-N-PHRASES, and ALIGN-XP,R. are overlapping constraints (in stochastic OT terms) and consequently show free variation. Based on the proposal by Downing (1970), who argues that intonational phrases obligatorily align with root sentences (including object clauses but excluding adverbial and different preposed, postposed, and interposed constituents), Gussenhoven (2004: 167) introduces the OT constraint ALIGN(s,t), which aligns the right edge of every S(entence) with the right edge of IntP. This constraint reflects the influence of the morpho-syntactic structure on prosodic structure. It is shown in the preceding sections that there is often a prosodic break between the matrix clause and the embedded complement clause (80%). Hence, at least in Catalan, object clauses can be excluded from the root sentence (in the sense of Downing 1970), thus arguing that the cases without a prosodic break are caused by a higher ranked constraint. I propose the constraint ALIGN-CP,L (33), which accounts for the prosodic break preceding the embedded clause. (33)
ALIGN-CP,L: ALIGN( CP,Left;PrP,Left), or align the left edge of a CP to the left edge of a prosodic phrase (PrP).
The possibility of having both alignment of the right edge and alignment of the left edge of a prosodic constituent in one and the same language, argued for in de Lacy (2003), is also applied in Gussenhoven (2004). He introduces for French two constraints that are responsible for the pitch accent distribution either at the beginning or at the end of a phonological phrase (
Align the right edge of every 'f with a pitch accent. Left): Aligtt the left edge of every rp with a pitch accent.
In addition, he introduces for English the left-hand counterpart ALIGN(XP,Left;
Left): Align the left edge of e~·ery XP with the left edge of rp. Right): Align the right edge of every XP with the right edge of rp.
23. In contrast to its role in the approach to SVO phrasing, the constraint WRAP-XP does not have any effect in the phrasing of complex clauses and is thus ignored here.
114 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
Based on the empirical evidence in the Catalan data and due to the theoretic claims of de Lacy (2003) and the work by Gussenhoven (2004), it is plausible to have a constraint AuGN-CP,L and I conclude for the present work that it is active in Catalan. I propose the following four different rankings to account for the four different groupings (34). The small letters below the constraints shall help to identify the change in order. In addition, they signal the 'selection point' in the stochastic OT approach to be developed (cf. Section 3.4.3.3). (34)
Four different constraint orders for the main groupings a.
Ranking for (SV)(qSl
MAX-BIN-END>> ALIGN-CP,L >> MIN-N-PHRASBS >> ALIGN-XP,R a b c d b.
Ranking for (S)(V)(qSl
MAX-BIN-END>> ALIGN-CP,L >> ALIGN-XP,R >> MIN-N-PHRASBS a b d c c.
Ranking for CSVqSl
MAX-BIN-END>> MIN-N-PHRASBS >> ALIGN-XP,R >> ALIGN-CP,L a c d b d.
Ranking for (S)(VqS)(VO) ll0%1
MAX-BIN-END>> ALIGN-XP,R >> MIN-N-PHRASBS >> ALIGN-CP,L a d c b
Ranking (34a), illustrated in Table 15, accounts for the most common phrasing pattern of embedded SVO structures: (SV)(qS)(VO). The ranking is similar to the one for simple SVO structures in (32). Table 15. Actual ranking for the most common phrasing pattern (SV)(qS)(VO)
a
b
c
d
~
....:l
u
~!a tj ~ ~~
r:::l:i
I
Sm
~
iS r:Q
~
::?J
.,..a
56%
~
z
§ <
::?J
(SV)(qS)(VO)
3
b.
24% (S)(V)(qS)(VO)
4!
c.
10%
(SVqS)(VO)
d.
10%
(S)(VqS)(VO)
e. f
(SVqSVO) (SVqSV)(O)
*!
~
~ ~
~
*!
2
*!
3
*
1
Sm.Se
*!
2
Sm.Se
Sm
Chapter 3. Phrasing patterns in Catalan SVO structures 115
Table 15 shows the competition between the four main groupings (candidate a-d) and two hypothetical phrasings (e and f). As for the highest ranked constraint, MAx-BIN-END,24 it is violated only by candidate e and thus the evaluation is passed onto the next constraint ALIGN-CP,L. This constraint is violated by candidates c, d, e, and f, because these candidates do not have a boundary in -between matrix V and the complementizer 'q'. But there are still two possible winners, a and b. The next constraint, MIN-N-PHRASES, is able to decide between them. Candidate a wins, because it violates the constraint less severely than candidate b. The lowest constraint, ALIGN-XP,R, is not of importance here, since the decision has already been made ('Sm' stands for matrix subject; 'Se' stands for embedded subject). The ranking in (34b) accounts for the second most frequent phrasing pattern (S)(V)(qS)(VO) and is pictured in Table 16. Table 16. Actual ranking for the phrasing pattern (S)(V)(qS)(VO)
a Q
&l ~
=:1
~
<
~
a ... b.
c. d.
e. f
56%
b
d
c
,_.;j
~
u z
~
*~ ~ ;J
<
~
~
~ I
~
(SV)(qS)(VO)
z Sl
Sm!
24% (S)(V)(qS)(VO)
(SVqS)(VO)
*!
10%
(S)(VqS)(VO)
*!
(SVqSV)(O)
~
3 4
10%
(SVqSVO)
..~ =
*!
Sm
2
3
*
Sm,.Se
1
*!
Sm,.Se
2
The difference between Table 15 and Table 16 is the order ofMIN-N-PHRASES and ALIGN-XP,R. Since the latter is ranked higher in Table 16, it is the constraint which decides between candidates a and b. Candidate b wins, because it does not violate ALIGN-XP,R whereas candidate a violates this constraint because the matrix subject does not right-align with a prosodic boundary. The ranking in (34c) leads to the winning candidate c, representing the third most common prosodic grouping, Table 17. The difference between Table 15 and Table 17 is made up of the position of ALIGN -CP,L. It is ranked behind MIN-N-PHRASES
24· The careful reader might object that MAX-BIN-END is violated when the object is long. Please cf Section 3.4.3.1.1 below for a discussion.
116 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
and ALIGN-XP,R. After the evaluation process has passed onto MIN-N-PHRASES, two candidates remain: c and f. Thus ALIGN-XP,R has the possibility of selecting a candidate - and does so. Candidate c wins since candidate f violates ALIGNXP,R once more. Not only does the matrix subject not right-align with a prosodic phrase, but neither does the embedded subject. Table 17. Actual ranking for the phrasing pattern (SVqS)(VO) a
~
~
~
~ I
~
<
~
c
zdl
Kl
:lil
i:i
t:l"'
3!
b.
24% (S)(V)(qS)(VO)
4!
f
10%
(SVqS)(VO)
2
10%
(S)(VqS)(VO)
3!
(SVqSVO) (SVqSV)(O)
*!
I
Sm
~
(SV)(qS)(VO)
e.
~ z Sl ~
56%
d.
l=l:i
8~
a .,._c.
d
I
Sm
b ....:l
~
u
z
§ <
* *
1
Sm,.Se
*
2
Sm,Se!
*
Table 17 additionally shows the importance of MAx-BIN-END being ranked higher than MIN-N-PHRASES. If it were lower than MIN-N-PHRASES, candidate e would wrongly win. However, in complex sentences the single phrasing of the whole clause is never attested in my data. Thus such a phrasing is very unlikely, if not impossible. In order to account for this, MAx-BIN-END has to be ranked higher than MIN-N-PHRASES. Finally, the fourth most frequent grouping pattern is represented by the winning candidate of the ranking in (34d), Table 18. Due to the fact thatALIGN-CP,L is the lowest ranked constraint and MIN-N-PHRASES is ranked lower than ALIGN-XP,R, two candidates, b and d, survive the evaluation until MIN-N-PHRASES. Since candidate b violates the constraint once more than candidate d, the latter wins. The four tables show that a different order among the three constraints ALIGN-CP,L, MIN-N-PHRASES, and ALIGN-XP,R is responsible for the change of the winning candidate. However, it would be inappropriate to assume that there are four different grammars in Central Catalan for the different groupings. It is rather the case that the situation is one where one phonological input has several outputs. Such a situation is normally described by the terms 'variation' or 'optionality'. I take (34a), here repeated as (35), as the underlying form for the different groupings.
Chapter 3. Phrasing patterns in Catalan SVO structures 117 Table 18. Actual ranking for the phrasing pattern (S)(VqS)(VO)
a Cl
&l I
i!l
~
~
~
a
56%
b.
24% (S)(V)(qS)(VO)
c.
10%
(SVqS)(VO)
... d.
10%
(S)(VqS)(VO)
e. f
(SV)(qS)(VO)
(SVqSVO) (SVqSV)(O)
(35)
d
c
b
r:ll:i
~!a
u
~ ~ :::3
< Sm!
tj
~
~~
~
....:l
~
z s
~
3 4!
2
*
3
*
Sm.Se
1
*
Sm,Se!
2
*
Sm!
*!
Underlying constraint hierarchy for embedded SVO phrasing MAX-BIN-END>> AllGN-CP,L >> MIN-N-PHRASBS >> ALIGN-XP,R a b c d
Two aspects speak in favor of (35). First, this ranking has exactly the same order of constraints established for simple SVO structures in (32)- besides the enlargement by placing ALIGN -CRL after MAx-BIN-END. Thus the analysis is an extension of the approach by Prieto (2005) and, in addition, it reflects the close relationship between the two constructions. Second, the ranking accounts for the most common phrasing pattern and it is common practice to take that form as underlying which has the greater distribution (e.g. cf. Halfs 2000: 64 argumentation for k;f as the phoneme of the two allophones[~] and [x] in German). Before proceeding with presentating the stochastic OT approach, which accounts for the detected variation, a brief appended exposition of the long 0/ MAx-BIN-END topic is necessary. 3·4·3·1.1 Reconciling long objects and MAx-BIN-END - a tentative approach25 The careful reader might object that MAx-BIN-END is violated in the long 0 conditions of the complex SVO experiment in Table 15 (and in the following three tables): If the embedded object is long and phrases with the preceding verb, the sentence final prosodic phrase would consist of more than two prosodic words. In order to capture the sentences of the long 0 conditions, I propose the following modification
25.
I would like to thank H. Truckenbrodt for fundamental proposals leading to this section.
118 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
of the grammar. One further constraint, namely lDENT-vP (36), is added to the basic hierarchy, as shown in (37). Please note that the modification complicate the proposed theory and cannot be more than a tentative approach at this point in time. (36)
IDENT-VP Identify the right and the left edge of vP to the right and the left edge of a prosodic phrase.
(37)
Extended Constraint Hierarchy lDBNT-vP >>MAx-BIN-END>> ALIGN-CP,L >> MIN-N-PHRAsBs >> ALIGN-XP,R a b c d
The constraint lDENT-vP is a strongly restricted version of WRAP-XP. While WRAP-XP is satisfied when the maximal projection is contained in a prosodic phrase, lDENT-vP calls for a prosodic boundary precisely at both edges of the maximal projection vR as in (38). (38)
Phrasing derived by lDBNT-vP ( ) Prosodic Structure [ 1,p ] Syntactic Structure
lDENT-vP directly accounts for the (VO) grouping in the embedded clauses: there is a boundary preceding V, and a boundary following 0, and no boundary separates the verb and the object. Most importantly, the constraint is not sensitive to the number of prosodic words in the sentence final prosodic phrase, in contrast to MAx-BIN-END. lDENT-vR however, demands the minimally and exhaustive phrasing of any vR i.e. the embedded as well as the matrix vP. The structure shown in (39a) would therefore be a result of this constraint. (39)
Recursive phrasing of vP (incorrect) a. b.
)) [1•Pl
(vP2
] ]
Prosodic Structure Syntactic Structure
Grouping (39a) indicates a recursive prosodic structure. Recursivity, however, violates the Strict Layer Hypothesis (SLH, N&V 1986/2007: 7). The structure shown in (39a) can easily be circumvented by assuming it is important to keep the derived prosodic structure. The application ofiDENT-vP is cyclic. Each vP (i.e. phase) constitutes a cycle. The embedded 1'P (i.e. 1'P2) is merged before the matrix vP (i.e. vP J Only the first phase (i.e. the embedded vP) shows an effect, due to the fact that previously derived structure cannot be deleted. The matrix v P would demand
Chapter 3. Phrasing patterns in Catalan SVO structures 119 the deletion of the embedded v P boundaries in order to respect the SLH. But this is not an option because structure cannot be deleted. The effect of the newly added constraint is illustrated in Table 19 for the most common grouping, i.e. (SV)(qS)(VO).It is assumed that the object of the embedded clause consists of two prosodic words. For this reason MAx-BIN-END is violated by all four main groupings.
Table 19. Actual ranking for (SV)(qS)(VO) when the object consists oftwo prosodic words. The basic hierarchy is modified by the higher ranked constraint IDBNT-vP SVqSVO
IDBNT-VP
MAXBIN-END
ALIGN-
CP,L
MIN-NPHRASES
ALIGN-
*
XP,R
..- (SV)(qS)(VO)
*
***
(S)(V)(qS)(VO)
*
****!
(SVqS)(VO)
*
*!
**
*
*!
***
*
*!
*
**
*!
**
**
****
*
(S)(VqS)(VO) (SVqSVO)
*!
(SVqSV)(O)
*!
(SV)(qS)(V)(O)
*!
*
Table 19 clearly shows the effect ofiDENT-vP. The constraint eliminates all the candidates that do not phrase the embedded verb and object in one single group. The last three candidates fatally violate IDENT-vP. The four main groupings do not violate IDENT-vP. Similarly to Table 15 above, the decision for the best candidate is made among the four main groupings. There is only one difference to Table 15: all four groupings violate MAx-BIN-END, while none of them violates MAx-BIN-END in Table 15. Due to the collective violation the evaluation is passed onto the lower ranked constraints. The evaluation process now equals the process in Table 15 and the most common grouping is the winning candidate in Table 19, cf. candidate a. The last candidate in Table 19 is similar to the first candidate. It differs, though, from the winning candidate in having a boundary that separates embedded V and 0. This in turn causes a fatal violation of IDENT-vP, even though MAx-BIN-END is not violated. In conclusion, the introduction of a further constraint helps to resolve the problem of the long object pattern. Nevertheless, this constraint might cause problems when analyzing simple SVO structures. In these structures, verb and object are, in fact, sometimes phrased separately (cf. Section 3.3.3.1 and D'Imperio et al. 2005). I leave this question open for further research.
110
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
3·4·3·2
Optionality in Optimality Theory
In this section, several proposals to capture variation are introduced. The stochastic OT model (Boersma & Hayes 2001), which underlies my approach, is presented in Section 3.4.3.3. The question arises as to how to capture such gradient but robust facts in a generative model. This situation is exactly the one that forced Anttila (1997) to reconcile variation with Generative Phonology and to propose a model for deriving variation from principles of Universal Grammar. 26 The need for reconciliation is clearly described in Pierrehumbert (2001). Whereas work on sound structure outside of generative linguistics has used probabilistic models for capturing gradient optionality for many decades, classical generative models are non-probabilistic and for this reason any given sequence is either grammatical or completely impossible (Pierrehumbert 2001: 195). The non-generative work has shown that the cognitive representation of sound structure is probabilistic and that frequencies play a crucial role in several areas: in the acquisition of phonological and phonetic competence, in speech production and in speech perception, and also in long-term mental representations (Pierrehumbert 2001: 195). At the present time, there are several models for capturing variation in Generative Phonology. In what follows, several further models are briefly introducedP A first attempt to model variation comes from Reynolds & Nagy (1994). They assume a variable ranking with a floating constraint. A floating constraint can intervene between ranked constraints in a given domain. A second model comes from Anttila (1997). He proposes a pa.rtial orderedgmmmar (or stratifiedgmmma.r Anttila 2002: 230), where two tied constraints, A and B, are freely ranked.28 Then, in some productions A outranks B, whereas in other productions B outranks A. If the tied constraints are ranked high enough in the constraint hierarchy; variation is observed. The different rankings of the tied constraints translate the partial ordered grammar into several totally ranked grammars (Anttila 2007: 527). The relative frequency is derived by a quantitative interpretation of these grammars: "If a candidate wins by n [totally ranked, I.E] grammars and tis the total number of grammars, then the candidate's probability of occurrence is nit" (Anttila 2007: 524). The underlying cause of variation, as Pierrehumbert (2001: 201) points out, is attributed to the mind of the individual speaker and is an intrinsic part of
16. Anttila (1997) is concerned with variation in Finnish genitive plurals (Le. the variable inflectional behavior of polysyllabic Finnish nouns) and not with the prosodic phrasing of Catalan clauses, though.
27.
Cf Anttila (2002, 2007) and Gabriel (2007: 247) for a detailed overview.
18.
The term 'free ranking' was introduced by It6 & Mester (1997).
Chapter 3. Phrasing patterns in Catalan SVO structures
linguistic competence. A further approach has been developed by Truckenbrodt (2002) for accounting for variation in p-phrasing in Bengali. He argues that variation in complex forms of p-phrasing may be inherited from simpler forms via a process called output-to-output faithfulness (DO-faithfulness). An additional approach is presented by the stochastic OT model proposed in Boersma (1998) and Boersma & Hayes (2001), and this is the one I assume in the present study. They refine and extend Anttila's (1997) approach by providing each constraint with a probability distribution on a continuous ranking scale. In what follows, the main features of this approach are sketched. 3·4·3·3
Stochastic Optimality Theory
Boersma's (1998) Functional Phonology and Boersma & Hayes' (2001) Gradual Learning Algorithm (GLA) can easily capture frequency-dependent variation. Their approaches are variants of OT and are subsumed under the term stochastic OT. Due to the fact that experiment 2 (complex SVO) provided data quantified for the number of realizations of each pattern, the stochastic OT approach is the appropriate framework. Two notions are important for this model: the continuous ranking scale and the stochastic candidate evaluation. In classic OT, a ranking C 1 >> C2 >> C3 is interpreted non-probabilistic, meaning that a constraint cl dominates a constraint c2 that dominates a constraint c3. It is not intended that constraint c2 and c3 have a shorter distance between each other than cl and c2. This idea, though, plays a central role in stochastic OT. Instead of assuming a strict ranking scale, a continuous ranking scale is assumed. Constraints have a certain ranking value and higher values correspond to higher-ranked constraints and lower values to lower-ranked constraints (40). The example numbers added for the ranking values reflect the relation between the constraints. Here it is merely important that a shorter distance between two constraints implies that the relative ranking of the constraints is less fixed. The less fixed order is the crucial aspect in accounting for variation. Boersma (1998) and Boersma & Hayes (2001: 47) suggest that constraints are not single points, but that they act as if they are associated with ra.nges of va.lues (42). This happens due to a temporarily perturbation of the position of each constraint by a random positive or negative value at evaluation time (i.e. the time when the candidates in an OT table have to be evaluated in order to determine a winner). This is illustrated in (41). The concrete value that is used for a single constraint is called the selection point. This point is given by the black line in (42); the line is marked with 'b' at the end, meaning that this is the selection point for constraint b. The selection point can differ from the ranking value (dotted line). The latter is the center of the range, i.e. the value more permanently associated with the constraint (e.g. example value '100' in (41) and (42)).
121
1:12
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan (40)
Constraints with a given ranking value on a continuous ranking scale a MBE b AL-CP,L c M-N-P d AL-XP,R 120
100
85
80
(high ranked) (41)
(low ranked)
Perturbation of constraint by a random positive or negative value bAL-CP,L
fl~
.
100
(42)
Range of value and selection point bAL-CP,L
[I I I
I
100 (Ranking value) b selection point
A selection point near the center (i.e. the ranking value) is more probable than a selection point far away from the center. This is so because constraint ranges are interpreted as probability distributions. By that they can account for noisy events that are described with a normal(= Gaussian) distribution (cf. Boersma & Hayes 2001: 48). A normal distribution has a single peak in the center and declines towards zero on each side. For this reason values become less probable the farther away they are from the center. The grey box around the center in (42) describes the standard deviation, in which most of the values drawn from a normal distribution are located. In stochastic OT, every constraint has the same standard deviation. The less fixed order of given constraints becomes important when their distance is relatively short If the distance is short enough, two (or more) constraints overlap, i.e. their ranges covered by the selection points overlap. This is pictured in (43) for MIN-N-PHRASES (M-N-P) and ALIGN-XP,R (AL-XP,R). Due to the fact that at evaluation time it is possible to choose the selection points from anywhere within the two given constraints, the ranking of the constraints most often results in the 'normal' ranking order (43a), but sometimes it will be the reverse of the 'normal' order (43b ). In the former case, the selection point is taken from the upper partofMIN-N-PHRASES and from the lower part of ALIGN-XP,R. In the latter case,
Chapter 3. Phrasing patterns in Catalan SVO structures 123
the selection point is taken from the lowest part of MIN-N-PHRASES and from the upper part of ALIGN-XP,R. (43)
Overlapping constraints a.
'Normal' ranking
b. Reverse of'norrnal' ranking
aMBE
I a
bAL-CP,L
l I
c M-N-P dAL-XP R
I I LJII' b
I'
de
Free variation arises due to overlapping constraints because they can generate multiple output forms from a single underlying form. The more the constraints overlap, the more probable a reverse ranking is. This means that in a certain percentage of the evaluations (depending on the amount of overlap) ALIGN-XP,R will outrankMIN-N-PHRASES in (43), although the latter constraint has a higher ranking value. When this happens, the second best candidate wins. Constraint ranges are hence interpreted as probability distributions. (44)
Strict ranking of constraints
The strictness of classical OT rankings is a special case included in continuous ranking scales. It is illustrated in (44). As can be seen, it appears when the constraints do not overlap (i.e. when the distance between the constraints is very large so that the probability of deviant ranking becomes very low; cf. Boersma & Hayes 2001: 50). In order to know what ranking value the necessary constraints have, Boersma & Hayes (2001) developed the Gradual Learning Algorithm (GLA), an algorithm for learning optimality-theoretic constraint ranking. The GLA requires two kinds of inputs: OT constraints and the frequencies of distribution. The second input
1:2.4 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
enables the model to include the results stemming from empirical data. Now the process of learning an appropriate constraint ranking consists merely of finding a workable set of ranking values on a continuous scale. The GLA calculates the location of the constraints relative to each other.29•30 3·4·3·4
Applying stochastic Optimality Theory to the phrasing of complex sentences
The data examined in the complex SVO experiment can be accounted for by a stochastic model. This is shown here. As a first step, the constraints that overlap are illustrated. Second, the application of the Gradual Learning Algorithm gives the ranking values for deriving the frequency effects. The underlying constraint hierarchy has been given in (35). The four different orders of these constraints have been given in (34). As can be seen, whereas MAx-BIN-END is always the highest ranked constraint, the remaining three constraints vary their positions. I claim now that the relative order of the lower three constraints never changes (thus giving (35)), but that the distance between them is so short that their ranges overlap. The corresponding Catalan grammar is pictured in (45). (45)
Constraint Hierarchy for Catalan clauses with sentential objects b.AI.-CP,L
aMBE
~-'---"-'=--::..::....c=----.,'l '
M-N-P 1
dAL-XP,R
The differences of the height and the length of the constraint ranges in (45) have no meaning, but are used only for the sake of clarity. The constraints have still the same standard deviation. The area of overlap of the three constraints induces that any order between the ALIGN-CP,L, MIN-N-PHRASES, and ALIGN-XP,R can be generated. This is exactly what is needed for deriving the four different rankings of (34). 31 As an example, the order of the selection for the fourth most grouping
For a complete description of the GLA process of learning cf. Boersma & Hayes (2001: 51ff.).
29.
In Boersma & Hayes (2001), the empirical application of the GLA is illustrated with examples of free variation of glottal stop and glides in Ilokano (an Austronesian language of the northern Philippines), of output frequency in the Finnish genitive plural, and of gradient well-formedness judgments of English light and dark /11.
30.
31· There are six possible permutations, although only four are needed to account for the variation. As the reader might easily control, the two remaining permutations (a» c » b » d and a » d » b » c) generate existing groupings and they therefore do not pose a problem for my approach.
Chapter 3. Phrasing patterns in Catalan SVO structures (S)(VqS)(VO) is illustrated in (46). For the sake of convenience, the corresponding constraint ranking (34d) is repeated below. (46)
Order of selection points for the phrasing (S)(VqS)(VO)
[
aMBE
II r , d~-XP
b AL-CP,L c M-N-P
I
l
••
a
(34d)
MAX-BIN-END>> ALIGN-XP,R >> MIN-N-PHRASES >> ALIGN-CP,L a d c b
Now, the application of the GLA endows the hierarchy with concrete ranking values for the constraints (cf. Boersma 1999: ch.S for a detailed explanation of the GLA application). Possible values are given in (47), and the frequency prediction (compared to the empirical data) is given in (48). Due to the fact that the ranking values and the frequency predictions differ with each run, they cannot be more than possible values. (47)
Ranking values proposed by GLA a. b. c. d.
(48)
MAX-BIN-END ALIGN-CP,L MIN-N-PHRASES ALIGN-XP,R
117.843 ll3.223 ll0.853 109.601
G LA frequency prediction
(SV)(qS)(VO) (S)(V)(qS)(VO) (SVqS)(VO) (S)(VqS)(VO)
frequency prediction 55.98% (559876.0) 24.02% (240211.0) 10.03% (100319.0) 09.95% (099594.0)
empirical results 56% 24% 10% 10%
a>> b >> c » d a>> b >> d » c a>> c >> d >> b a >>d>> c>> b
The application of the learning algorithm shows that the proposed approach is realizable and that the clear tendencies of the empirical frequency values can be captured. However, the shorter distance between the three lowest constraints is rather more important than the exact ranking values proposed by the GLA. Finally, I return to the (S)(VO) phrasing in the long branching object condition of simple SVO structures. Prieto's (2005) approach as well as the suggested reranking in (32) cannot account for this grouping. As the data of the simple SVO experiment and the results of D'Imperio et al. (2005) show, there is variation with respect to the groupings. The data practically call for a stochastic account of simple SVO structures. Table 14 shows that the ranking of the constraints should be ALIGN-XP,R » MIN-N-PHRASES » MAx-BIN-END » WRAP-XP. In the
125
12.6
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
approach to complexSVO structures, it was suggested that all constraints except for MAx-BIN-END overlap. In order to account for (S)(VO), the constraint MAx-BINEND must have a closer distance to the other constraints so that it overlaps with them. Then its selection point can appear in certain cases below the selection points of ALIGN-XP,R and MIN-N-PHRASES and the (S)(VO) candidate wins. 32 A closer distance of MAx-BIN-END is also proposed for the analysis of left-dislocations in Catalan (Chapter 5). 3·4·3·5 Conclusion With respect to the analysis of the prosodic phrasing pattern of simple SVO structures in Catalan, I adopt by and large the proposal of Prieto (2005) -even though I hardly found (SV)(O) realizations. I deviate from Prieto (2005) by re-ranking her two highest constraints MIN-N-PHRASES and MAx-BIN-END in the reverse order (cf. (32)). Her two further constraints, ALIGN-XP,R and WRAP-XP. have been left unchanged. There-ranking enables the welcoming possibility of maintaining the same constraint order for the most common phrasing pattern of complex SVO structures with a sentential object: (SV)(qS)(VO). However, a further constraint has to be added after MAx-BIN-END: ALIGN-CP,L. This constraint accounts for the pattern that the embedded clause is in general prosodically separated from the matrix clause (in 80% of the data in the complex SVO experiment). The results of the complex SVO experiment have further shown that there is variation in terms of the prosodic groupings of structures with embedded complement clauses. Although the variation is broadly diversified (12 different groupings), the four most common groupings already represent more than 80% of the data. The variation is modeled in the stochastic OT framework (Boersma & Hayes 2001) and ALIGN-CP,L, MIN-N-PHRASES, and ALIGN-XP,R are taken to overlap on the continuous ranking scale. The general constraint hierarchy I propose is as follows:
MAx-BIN-END>> ALIGN-CP,L >> MIN-N-PHRASBS >> ALIGN-XP,R Exactly as in the account of Prieto (2005), the (SV) phrasing of the matrix clause is not derived from a specific constraint reflecting the length of the object. It is derived from the interaction of several constraints. In Prieto (2005), it is the interaction of MAx-BIN-END and MIN-N-PHRASES, which outrank ALIGN-XP,R. In my approach, it depends on the actual position of ALIGN-XP,R and on the higher ranked constraints.
32.
However, I will not deepen this suggestion here, but leave it for further research.
CHAPTER4
Syntactic aspects of Catalan clitic left- and ditic right-dislocation In the present chapter, a clause-internal analysis of Catalan clitic right-dislocations (CLRD) (i.e. a position below TP and above vP) is argued. These arguments support Villalba's (2000) syntactic approach, which underlies my optimality theoretic approach to prosodic phrasing of clitic left-dislocations (CLLD) and CLRD (Chapter 5). The approach by Villalba (2000) is shortly introduced (as well as two further approaches to the syntax of dislocations): CLLD is taken to host TopPin the C-domain, while CLRD is taken to host an internal TopP projection below TP. Subjects are taken to host the specifier of TP. While this chapter concentrates only on syntactic aspects of CLLD and CLRD, their prosodic characteristics are presented in Chapter 5. The introduced difference between preverbal subjects and CLLD (cf. Chapter 1) is revisited from an intonational side in Chapter 6.
4-1
Syntactic aspects of clitic left-dislocations (CLLD) and clitic right-dislocations (CLRD)
In 4.1.1, the most common syntactic approaches to CLLD and CLRD are briefly introduced. In 4.1.2, I argue for a clause-internal analysis of Catalan CLRD based on CLLD/CLRD asymmetries. These asymmetries were highlighted in Villalba (1996, 1999a,b, 2000) and Cecchetto (1999), but refuted by Samek-Lodovici (2006) amongst others. I show that Catalan data still speak in favor of Villalba's and Cecchetto's assumption. Section 4.1.3 concludes this chapter. 4-1.1
Three syntactic approaches to CLLD and CLRD
For clitic left-dislocation, it is common to assume that the dislocated constituent is placed in the C-domain, i.e. the (complex of) functional projection(s) above TP. 1
I use TP (tense phrase) as a cover term for inflectional phrase (IP), Le. TP is a syntactical functional projection accommodating tense and agreement features of the sentence
1.
12.8 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
The functional category C is part of the core functional complex ( CFC), made up ofC-T-v-V (cf. Chomsky 1986: 169, Giorgi 1987). Chomsky (2008: 143) says that "C is shorthand for the region that Rizzi (1997) calls the 'left periphery"'. Rizzi (1997) splits the CP up into four functional projections: ForceP-Foc(us)P-Top(ic) P-Fin(ite)P. The C-domain is labeled in Rizzi (1997) as the complementizer layer, where clause-type properties (i.e. Force) and information structural aspects (topic-focus) are expressed.2 In earlier days, CLRD was assumed to mirror CLLD: whereas a CLLD XP is left-adjoined to a certain node, a CLRD XP is simply right-adjoined to the same node ((1); cf. Vallduvi 1993: 104). The 'mirror hypothesis' (Cecchetto's 1999 term) assumes that the characteristics and properties of CLLD structures can be simply transferred to CLRD structures. ( 1)
Mirror hypothesis by Vallduvi (1993: 104; structure slightly modified by I.F.): 3
left-detachments
right-detachments
b.
a. TP
TP
~
CLLD
~
TP
TP
~
~
-cl-t-
CLLD
-cl-t-
As (1) shows, Vallduvi (1993) assumes an adjunction-to-TP(IIP) analysis, which was quite common to assume for topicalization around the 1980's (cf. Baltin 1982: 18, Lasnik & Saito 1992: 77f., and Rochemont 1978, 1989). Nevertheless, there had already been approaches assuming a position in the CP (Authier 1992: 330, Watanabe 1993: 529). The two latter accounts propose a CP-iteration for topic structures, which can be seen as predecessors for Rizzi's (1997) Split-CP analysis. Villalba (1996, 1999b, 2000), Cecchetto (1999), and L6pez (2003, 2009a), however, show that there are asymmetries between CLLD and CLRD which cannot be
(cf. Chomsky 1995: 377). One important reason for doing so is the fact that the abbreviation 'IP' is used in both syntactic work (as just mentioned) and phono-prosodical work. where it stands for Intonational Phrase. In order to avoid confusion, I use TP for the former and IIrtP for the latter. When quoting other authors who use the functional projection IP, I also use TP and explain in a footnote their original notation.
::r.. In addition, Rizzi (1997) assumes two further layers: the inflectional layer (i.e. IP), which is mainly concerned with the licensing of morphological features; and the lexical layer (i.e. vP I VP), which is mainly concerned with theta-assignment.
3· Vallduvf (1993) originally uses the notion 'IP~
Chapter 4. Syntactic aspects of Catalan clitic left- and clitic right -dislocation 129
explained by the 'mirror hypothesis'. As a consequence, they assume the CLRD constituent to be below T 0 : Spec of a "VP peripheral Topic Phrase" in Cecchetto (1999: 59), Spec of the "Internal Topic Phrase" in Villalba (2000), and Spec of vP in L6pez (2003, 2009a).4 In addition, these authors assume that dislocations are derived by movement (in line with Cinque 1977, Rizzi 1997, Grohmann 2003, and Belletti 2005). The constituent moves from its base position (e.g. from the argument position of the verb if the dislocation is an object or the subject) to the topic position below TP. All three authors take this topic position as an intermediate position for CLLD (cf. also Postal1991: 15). Consequently, if the topic constituent constitutes a right-dislocation, it remains in the internal topic position. If the topic constituent constitutes a left-dislocation, it moves further up from the internal topic position to a position in the C-domain. I demonstrate the medial topic position with Villalba (1996, 1999a, 2000), as in (2). The internal Topic Phrase (lntTopP) is located above vP and below TR 5 NegR and an internal Focus Phrase. The latter functional projection hosts the constituent which bears main prominence (for suggesting an internal FocP cf. Belletti & Shlonsky 1995, Ambar 1999). CLLD, in contrast, occupies the specifier position of an external Topic Phrase (ExtTopP), which is located in the C-domain. (2)
C-domain ofVillalba (2000: 218) CP
TP-domain ofVillalba (2000: 221&233) (slightly modified by I.F.) TP
~
~
ExtTopP
NegP
~
CLLD
~
ExtTop
Neg
~
ExtTop
TP
IntFocP
~
Focus
IntTopP
~
CLRD
vP
The correct word order of the CLRD elementis derived in both Villalba (1996, 1999a, 2000: 232f.) and Cecchetto (1999: 57f.) by movement of the material following the CLRD into the internal Focus Phrase.6
4· Cf. Cardinaletti (2002) and Samek-Lodovici (2005, 2006) for a critique of such a medial position for CLRD; and ct: Section 4.1.2 below. 5· Villalba (1996, 1999a, 2000) originally uses the notion 'IP~ 6. Ct: L6pez (2009a: ch.3.2.4, 2009b) for a PF-analysis of how the CLRD constituent moves to the right.
130
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
However, not all authors assuming movement also assume an internal position for CLRD. Kayne (1994), Zubizarreta (1998: 121), and more recently Samek-Lodovici (2004, 2006), for example, assume a clause-external position for right -dislocations. They are derived from left-dislocations via remnant movement of the following TP (i.e. IP): in the Italian sentence Eho vista, Gianni 'I saw John' in (3), the dislocated element (Gianni) has been moved leftward to [Spec,Top]. After thatin order to derive a right-dislocation (from the momentary left-dislocation)- the IP (i.e. the remnant) moves into the specifier of a higher maximal projection (XP). (3)
Clause-external CLRD and remnant movement (Samek-Lodovici 2006: 840) XP
[pro l'ho visto tJk
0x
TopP
In addition, not all authors assuming remnant movement assume movement of the dislocated element. Frascarelli (2000, 2004), for example, assumes that right-dislocations are base-generated in a Topic projection of the C-domain (cf. Frascarelli 2000: 139,159ff.; hence 'right-dislocations' in her analysis are right-hand topics). Her base-generation account for dislocations is in line with Cinque 1990, Anagnostopoulou 1997, Sufier 2006, Alexiadou 2006, and De Cat 2002, 2007. 7 As can be seen in the different syntactic approaches to CLLD and CLRD, these constituents host almost always a functional projection TopP. This projection is inevitably connected to the information structural notion topic (as presented in Chapter 1).
7. The question as to whether topics are base-generated in their surface position or if they are dislocations, Le. moved from an TP-internal position, has become an important topic (cf. De Cat 2002: 991f.,Frascarelli 2000: 137,1591f., L6pez 2009a: ch.6, Villalba 2000: 2331f.) and researchers have to take a stand. Interestingly, early accounts, such as Lasnik & Saito (1992) assume both base-generation and movement of topics. Lasnik & Saito (1992: 771f.) analyze (English) embedded and matrix topicalization as movement into an adjoined IP, whereas English left -dislocation is only possible in matrix clauses and base-generated in a Topic Phrase. As for the comparison with Romance CLLD, Rochemont (1989: 1541f.) notes that CLLD behaves exactly like topicalization in English in its syntactic effects. However, English topicalization does not allow for resumptive pronouns. Cecchetto (1999: 57: fn.22), for example, assumes movement for dislocated arguments, whereas base-generation for dislocated PPs.
Chapter 4. Syntactic aspects of Catalan clitic left- and clitic right -dislocation
In what follows, I provide evidence for an asymmetry between CLLD and CLRD. As previously shown, there is an ongoing discussion of the right analysis for CLRD. The presented evidence supports the clause-internal analysis for Catalan CLRD. This result is important for the analysis of the prosodic patterns of dislocation structures in Chapter 5. 41.2
CLLD and CLRD asymmetries
As for asymmetry. several tests can be found in Cecchetto (1999) and Villalba (2000).8 Some of these tests can also be found in Samek-Lodovici (2006), 9 but he argues against asymmetry. In what follows, I discuss only three tests. Two of them are found in SL (2006): licensing ofN-words (such as nega.tive pola.rity items, NPI) and binding properties (Cecchetto's 1999 'antireconstruction effects'). These two tests are discussed, because they seem to be controversial in the literature on Italian and Catalan: According to SL, the tests show that dislocated elements in Italian are not c-commanded by T 0 or any other material within TP 10 (such as a licenser for NPis) and thus support his view that right-dislocated constituents have to be external to the clause main TP. I show that the Catalan counterparts behave
8. Cecchetto (1999) provides four tests showing asymmetries between CLLD and CLRD and thus argues for a clause-internal analysis and against the mirror hypothesis (and partly against Kayne's double topicalization analysis presented in Cecchetto 1999). The tests rely on antireconstruction effects (Cecchetto 1999: 42), exploiting an argument-adjunct asymmetry of constituents following a noun; on ECP effects (Cecchetto 1999: 44), exploiting a subject-object asymmetry arising when a CLLD constituent appears between a wh-word and the following clause; on the Right Roof Constraint (Cecchetto 1999: 46), exploiting the idea of dause-boundedness of CLRD constituents; and finally on Aux-to-COMP constructions (C ecchetto 1999: 47), exploiting the idea of intervening dislocations after gerundival adverbials inCOMP. V!llalba (2000) provides several tests, also arguing against the mirror hypothesis and Kayne's (1994) analysis. Among the tests are the criteria of boundedness (Villalba 2000: 186; Cecchetto's Right Roof Constraint test bases on VIllalba's idea); island effects (V!llalba 2000: 188), exploiting the idea that CLRD does not show island effects; licensing of NPis (Villalba 2000: 189; equals the test of SL 2006); Principle C effects/antireconstruction effect (Villalba 2000: 190), exploiting the idea that a principle C violation can be compensated by left-dislocating the constituent with the R-expression; Quantifier binding of pronouns (Villalba 2000: 191 ), exploiting the idea null pronouns receive a bound variable interpretation; dislocation out of dislocations (Villalba 2000: 192 ), exploiting the idea that a constituent from within a right -dislocate can be left -dislocated whereas the reverse is not true (ct: Chapter 5 for examples of this construction). 9· 10.
Henceforth SL (2006). SL (2006) originally uses the notion 'IP:
131
132 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
contrariwise: Catalan CLRD is c-commanded by T 0 and this can only be modeled by a clause-internal analysis. The third test is a completely new test. This test is based on obviation effects. Left-dislocations lead to a disappearance of obviation effects in subjunctive complement clauses (Costantini 2005b). Right-dislocations, as is shown, keep obviation effects. The pattern is explained by assuming a clause-internal analysis of CLRD. 4.1.2.1
Licensing of negative words
Negative words (n-words) such as ningU. 'nobody/anybody' or negative polarity items (NPI) such as mai 'ever' and res 'anything' are only licensed when they are in the scope of negation. For this reason they have to be overtly licensed by an element which c-commands the negative element The licenser (mostly the sentential neg-marker no 'no') can be within or higher than T 0 • The examples presented in this section rely strongly on the examples used by Samek-Lodovici (SL). I present his original Italian examples immediately followed by their corresponding Catalan translations. Due to the fact that the Italian and the Catalan examples are so similar, only one translation is given, which is valid for both languages. Concerning the basic pattern of n-words, there are no differences between Italian and Catalan. As (4) shows, the negative marker (the licenser) is obligatory and cannot be left out. In addition, n-words cannot be right-dislocated alone, as in (5), but they may easily appear in longer dislocations, where the neg-marker is also present, as in (6) and (7). (4)
Neg-marker cannot be left out a. Gianni *(non) ha mai visto nessuno. [ITAL] Jolm not has ever seen anybody (taken from SL 2006:844: 15) 'John has never seen anybody: b.
(5)
[CAT]
Right-dislocated n-word a. "Non l'ha invitato GIANNI, nessuno [ITAL] not him/it has invited John anybody (taken from SL 2006:844: 16) 'John didn't invite anybodY. b.
(6)
El Joan *(no) ha vist mai ningu. the Jolm not has see.PTCP2 ever anybody
*No l'ha convidat el Joan, aningU. not cL.have invite.PTCP2 the John to anybody
[CAT]
Right-dislocated neg-marker and n-word a. Lo sappiamo GIA. che noo. avete incontrato nessuno. [ITAL] (we) it know already, that (you) not have met anybody We already knew that you haven't met anybodY. (taken from SL 2006: 844: 18a) b.
Ja ho sabfem, que no havies trobat ni.ogU. [CAT] already cl know.lPL.PST that not have.2SG.PST fi.nd.PTCP anybody
Chapter 4. Syntactic aspects of Catalan ditic left- and clitic right -dislocation 133 (7)
Right-dislocated neg-marker and n-word a. Lo e sembrato CARLO, non lavorare mai. [ITAL] it is seemed Carl, not to-work ever (taken from SL 2006:844: 18b) 'It was Carl who seemed to never work: b.
??Ho sembla en Carlo, de no treballar mai. It seem.3so the C. of not work.INP ever 'Carl seems to never work:
[CAT]
The Catalan example in (7) is odd. This judgement, however, has nothing to do with the NPI but stems from dislocating the infinitive. As shown in (4), if there is no neg-marker licensing then-word (or NPI), the sentence is ungrammatical. As SL (2006: 844) states, this is also the case if the n-word is right-dislocated (5), where the n-word is outside the c-commanding domain of its licenser (as proposed by the clause-external analysis).n Based on the argumentation for (4) to (6), examples (8) and (9) are ungrammatical due to the lack of a neg-marker. In (8) and (9) then-word is part of a sentential right-dislocation, but the only available licenser has been omitted. Thus, the ungrammaticality can only be caused by the failure oflicensing (SL 2006: 845). (8)
Right-dislocated n-word without licenser a. *Lo sappiamo GlA, che avete incontrato nessuno. [ITAL] (we) it know already, that (you) have met anybody 'We already know that you haven't met anybody: (taken from SL 2004 (cf. SL 2006: 845)) b.
(9)
..Ja ho sabiem, que havies trobat ningU. [CAT] already it know.lPL.PST that have.2so.Psr findPTCP anybody 'We already know that you haven't met anybody:
Right-dislocated n-word without licenser a. ..Lo e sembrato CARLO, lavorare mai. [ITAL] it is seemed CarL to-work ever 'It was Carl who seemed to never work: (taken from SL 2006:845: 19b) b.
*Ho sembla en Carlo, de treballar mai. d seem.3so the C. of work.INP ever 'It was Carl who seemed to never work:
[CAT]
n. However, it is objected that the ungrammaticality of a right-dislocated n-word can be simply due to the fact that n-words cannot act as topics. If this is the case, (5) says nothing about the relation between licenser and n-word.
134 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
Furthermore, if the neg-marker is located in the matrix clause, and no dislocation occurs, the neg-marker can easily license into the embedded clause as shown in (10) and (11). ( 10)
Neg-marker licenses into an embedded clause a. Non ho voglia di vedere NESSUNO. [ITAL] (I) not have wish to see anybody 'I have no wish to see ANYBODY (taken from SL 2006: 846: 23) b.
(11)
No volia veure NINGU. not want.l sG.PST see.INF anybody 'I have no wish to see ANYBODY:
Neg-marker licenses into an embedded clause a. Non desidero mangiare NULLA. (I) not wish to-eat anything 'I do not wish to eat ANYTHING: b.
[CAT]
[ITAL] (taken from SL 2006: 846: 24)
No vull menjar RES. not wish.1 sG eat.INF anything 'I do not wish to eat ANYTHING:
[CAT]
Up until now, there are no differences in the pattern of the licensing of n-words between Italian and Catalan. Examples (4) to (11) demonstrate the basic properties of n-words and the conclusion is that they are the same for both languages. SL ( 2006: 845) now intra duces the crucial test. It has been seen that the n-word must be c-commanded by its licenser, be it (the licenser) in the same clause or in a matrix clause. Examples (12) and (13) present the Italian examples from SL (2006: 845). The (a) sentences in both examples involve ann-word licensed by a neg-marker within the dislocated clause. These sentences are grammatical (cf. also (6) and (7)). The (b) sentences are identical to the (a) sentence but difter in one respect: the neg-marker is located in the non-dislocated part of the sentences. As for the crucial test, if the RD constituent is low in the hierarchy (i.e. clause-internal analysis) the neg-marker should be able to c-command then-word, and the (b) sentences should be grammatical. If, on the other hand, the RD constituent is high (i.e. clause-external analysis) the licensing should fail, because the RD constituent is higher than Negtr0 • ( 12)
Italian data for the test: Different position of the neg-marker (taken from SL 2006: 845: 20) a. Ne ho davvero VOGLIA, di non vedere nessuno (I) of-it have definitely wish of not to-see anybody per qualche giomo. for.a.few days 'I definitely DO wish not to see anybody for a few days:
Chapter 4. Syntactic aspects of Catalan ditic left- and clitic right -dislocation 135
b.
(13)
"Non ne ho VOGLIA, di vedere nessuno per qualche (I) not of-it have wish of to-see anybody for a-few 'I definitely do NOT wish to see anybody fora few days:
giorno. days
Italian data for the test: Different position of the neg-marker (taken from SL 2006: 846: 21) a. (Non lo desidero,) lo PRETENDO, di non mangiare nulla (I) not it wish, (I) it demand, of not to-eat anything per qualche giorno. for a-few days 'I do not wish, I DEMAND not to eat anything for a few days:
b.
*Non lo DESIDERO, di mangiare nulla per qualche giorno (I) not it wish, of to-eat anything for a-few days Oo
PRETENDO).
((I) it demand)
'I do not WISH to eat anything for a few days, (I DEMAND it):
As can be seen, the (b) examples of (12) and (13) are ungrammatical: The licensing of then-words fails. Thus, the RD constituent should be higher than Neg/T 0, supporting the clause-external analysis. In (14) and (15), the corresponding Catalan examples are given. The Catalan sentences show that the pattern which holds in Italian does not hold in Catalan thus showing a clear contrast between these two languages. In (14) and (15) the b.-examples might be somehow marked, but they are certainly not ungrammatical. (14)
Catalan data for the test: Different position of the neg-marker a. Certament ho VULL, de no veure ningU. /res certainly cL want.l so of not see.INF nobody /nothing (durant uns dies). during a day.PL 'I definitely WISH not to see anybody/anything (for a few days): b.
(15)
Certament no ho VO LIA, de veure ningU. /res certainly not cL want.l so.PsT of see.INF nobody /nothing (durant uns dies). day.PL during a 'I definitely did not WISH to see anybody for a few days:
Catalan data for the test: Different position of the neg-marker a. (No ho desitjo,) ho PRETENC, de no menjar res not cL wish .I so cL want.l so of not eat.INF nothing (durant uns dies). day.PL during a '(I do not wish it,) I WANT not to eat anything (for a few days):
136 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan b.
de menjar res No ho VULL, durant uns dies not cL want.lso of eat.INF nothing during a. day.PL (ho PRETENC). CL want.lsG 'I do not WISH to eat anything for a few days (I demand it):
(16)
(17)
Further Catalan data: Neg-marker licenses into RD No ho necessito, de tenir cap cotxe, pero but not cL need1 sG of have.INF no car 'I don't NEED to have a car, but I would like it:
m'agradaria. me1ike.3sG.COND
Further Catalan data: Neg-rn.alker licenses into RD (taken from Villalba 2000: 189) a. La Maria no es responsable de res. the M. not be responsible of anything 'Maria is not responsible for anything: b.
La Maria no ho es, responsable de res. the M. not cL be responsible of anything
c.
*Responsable de res, la Maria no ho es. of anything the M. not cL be responsible
Example (16) is a further Catalan example showing that having the neg-marker in the non-dislocated part is completely fine. These data lead to the conclusion that the neg-marker can license an RD constituent. Villalba (2000: 189) also noticed this asymmetry between CLLD and CLRD in Catalan, cf. (17) and uses it as one argument against the 'mirror hypothesis'. Hence, the assumption of SL (2006) that CLLD and CLRD are in the same structural position above TP cannot be maintained - at least for Catalan - since NPis in the CLRD constituent are licensed. The pattern of Catalan NPI-licensing is problematic for any analysis which assumes the RD constituent to be hierarchically higher than TP. 4.1.2.2
Binding
With respect to LF-reconstruction, Freidin (1986) points out that the following two examples behave quite differently. Whereas in (18a) reconstruction takes place and the pronoun he cannot take John as an antecedent, reconstruction in (18b) is not obligatory. John can act as the antecedent for the pronoun. (18)
Complement/adjunct- asymmetry a. Which claim [that John1was asleep] was he.111 willing to discuss b. Which claim [that John1 made] washe111 willing to discuss
Lebeaux (1988) traces the different behavior to a difference between complement and adjunct. In (18a) the constituent that John ·was asleep is a complement of claim
Chapter 4. Syntactic aspects of Catalan clitic left- and clitic right -dislocation 137
and must appear at the level of D-structure. At this level a principle C violation arises since the r-expression John is c-commanded by the pronoun he. In (18b) the CP that John made is a relative clause and has adjunct status. Due to the fact that it is an adjunct, it does not appear at D-structure and can be adjoined after reconstruction occurs. He never c-commands John and can thus be coreferent with the r-expression. Chomsky (1995: 204f.) carries Lebeaux's analysis over to a minimalist framework. keeping the difference between complement and adjunct. Cecchetto (1999: 42) develops a test for the position ofRD in Italian based on the asymmetry between complements and adjuncts. He comes to the conclusion that whereas CLLD displays an argument-adjunct asymmetry, CLRD does not. He explains this by the clause-internal analysis of CLRD. Samek-Lodovici (2006) repeats this test and comes to a contrary result: both complement and adjunct clauses in CLLD and CLRD display the argument-adjunct asymmetry. For this reason, he assumes a clause-external analysis of CLRD, as shown in (3). SL (2006) constructs sentences in which the matrix clause involves the null subject pro and in which the dislocated object noun is followed by a CP containing a definite subject, as in (21) and (22) below. Before presenting the data, though, the idea of the test is introduced here. The CP following the dislocated object is either a complement or an adjunct (i.e. a relative clause). The clause-external analysis predicts that in the case of the complement CP, coreference between pro and the definite subject is not possible. The complement CP reconstructs and the null subject pro thus c-commands the subject's copy left behind, as shown in (19a; adopted from SL 2006: 841: 9). The arrow illustrates c-commanding. (19)
Reconstruction of complement CP vs.late insertion of adjunct a. Complement: [TP pro clitic aux V (det N 6 that Subj ...H) b.
Adjunct:
[TP pro clitic aux V {det-N-}]
In the case of the relative clause, the CP is an adjunct and can be inserted late in the derivation, i.e. after the dislocation of the object (Chomsky 1995: 204f.). Since the late inserted relative clause does not reconstruct, pro never c-commands the subject of that CP. The corresponding configuration is (19b ), where no copy of the CP is found after object N. The pattern with CLLD is comparable with the asymmetry shown in (19) because only the complement CP reconstructs into a position below the matrix subject, whereas the adjunct CP remains high (cf. Villalba 2000: 190 for further antireconstruction effects with respect to CLLD). The clause -internal analysis predicts that there is no asymmetry between complement CPs and adjunct CPs. The right-dislocation is below TP and the matrix
138 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
subject always c-commands the r-expression, independent of being reconstructed or not (20). (20)
Predictions ofthe clause-internal analysis a. Complement: [TP p~ clitic aux [det N [cp that Subf ...]] V ~] b. Adjunct: [TP pro clitic aux [det N [cp that Subj ...]] V -(det-N-f]
For Italian, Samek-Lodovici (2006) shows that asymmetry exists and a clause-external analysis is to be preferred. Right-dislocated nominal complements are not possible (21), whereas right-dislocated nominal adjuncts are possible (22). (21)
Italian data: Nominal complements (taken from SL 2006:841: lOb & llb) a. *pro1 non le mantiene quasi MAl, le promesse che (he) not them keeps almost ever, the promises that onesto. Berlusconi1 sara B. will-be honest 'Berlusconi almost NEVER keeps the promises that he will be honest: b.
*pro1 non le rivela certo ai GIORNALI, le prove (he) not them reveals certainly to-the newspapers, the evidence di Palermo1 viola la legge. che il procuratore-capo that the chief public prosecutor of Palermo breaks the law 'Palermo's chief public prosecutor does not reveal the evidence that he breaks the law to the NEWSPAPERS:
(22)
Italian data: Nominal adjuncts (taken from SL 2006: 841: 1Oa & 11 a) a. pro1 non le mantiene quasi MAl, le promesse che (he) not them keeps almost ever, the promises that Berlusco~ fa in campagna elettorale. Berlusconi makes in campaign electoral
'Berlusconi almost NEVER keeps the promises that he makes during the electoral campaign: b.
pro1 non le
rivela certo ai GIORNALI, le prove (he) not them reveals certainly to-the newspapers, the evidence
che il procuratore-capo di Palermo1 trova durante un'inchiesta. that the chief public prosecutor of Palermo finds during an.investigation 'Palermo's chief public prosecutor does not reveal to the NEWSPAPERS the evidence that he collects during an investigation:
•
Chapter 4. Syntactic aspects of Catalan clitic left- and clitic right -dislocation 139
This findings contrast with Cecchetto (1999). SL (2006: 843: fn.2) states that the odd status of Cecchetto's original example does not come from binding effects but might be caused by the quantificational nature of the indefinite subject, i.e. Cecchetto used an incorrect example. I now turn to the Catalan pattern. The following examples show that Catalan contrasts with Italian: both right-dislocated nominal complements and adjuncts are ungrammatical, (23) and (24) respectively. The judgments were based on oneon -one interviews with six native speakers. All speakers reported having very dear intuitions about the ungrammaticality of the sentences. (23)
Catalan data: Nominal complements a. *proJ no les mante gairebe MAl, les promeses que (he) not cL keep almost ever, the promise.PL that el president! sera honest. the president be.FUT honest 'The president almost never keeps the promises that he will be honest: b.
(24)
*proJ no les revela pas als DIARlS, les proves (he) not cL reveal certainly to.the newspaper.PL the evidence.PL que el president1 viola la llei. that the president break the law 'The president does not reveal the evidence that he breaks the law to the newspapers:
Catalan data: Nominal adjuncts a. ""prol no les mante gairebe MAl, les promeses que el (he) not cL keep almost ever, the promise.PL that the
b.
electoral president 1 fa en campanya president make in campaign electoral 'The president almost never keeps the promises that he makes during the electoral campaign: ?*proJ no les revela pas als DIARlS, les proves (he) not cL reveal certainly to.the newspaper.PL the evidence.PL que el president1 troba durant una instrucci6. that the president find during an investigation 'The president does not reveal the evidence that he collects during an investigation to the newspapers:
The data sharply contrasts with the Italian examples presented in SL (2006). The ungrammaticality of the Catalan data in (23) and (24) speaks in favor of a clauseinternal analysis of CLRD, along the lines presented in (20). Villalba (1999b: 244) has already shown that there is no complement-adjunct asymmetry in CLRD constituents. One conclusion can be drawn at once: Catalan CLRD is clause-internal.
140
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
The second conclusion concerns the Italian results and can be stated for my purposes as follows: Italian and Catalan have to be distinguished with respect to the position of CLRD. However, Villalba (1999b) argues that LF-reconstruction is neither necessary nor adequate and that the Split-Topic Hypothesis (Villalba 2000) is able to account for the (Catalan) data. He argues that counterexamples derive from independent factors as discourse context and modality and that by assuming an independently motivated level, such as Zubizarreta's (1998) Assertion Structure, binding facts receive a proper treatment. If the Italian binding facts in examples (21) and (22) can be accounted for in terms of an independently motivated level, it might be possible to maintain the clause-internal analysis for Italian as Cecchetto (1999) proposed. I am not able to deal with this topic in the current study and will leave it open for further research. 4.1.2.3
Obviation effects
A completely new test for the structural position of CLLD and CLRD is based on obviation effects in subjunctive complement clauses. This test also argues for a clause-internal analysis of CLRD. Complement subjunctive clauses in Romance languages such as the example in (25) are subject to an obligatorydisjointreference holding between the subjunctive subject and the matrix subject. (25)
Subjunctive disjoint reference a. Jo 1 vull que proJ vagi a veure aquesta pel.Hcula. [CAT] I want.lso that pro go.3sG.SBJ to see.INF this movie 'I want him to go and see this movie: b.
c.
"Jo1 vu1l que jo/pro1 vagi a want.lso that Ilpro go.lso.SBJ to 'I want to go and see this movie: Jo 1 vull PR0 1 anar a veure I want.lso PRO go.INF to see.INF 'I want to go and see this movie:
veure aquesta pellicula.[CAT] see.INF this movie aquesta pellicula. this movie
[CAT]
(25a) shows that the sentence is grammatical when the embedded subject (here: pro,) is not coreferent with the matrix subjectjo1 'f. (25b), in contrast, is ungrammatical. The embedded subject jo/pro1 cannot be coreferent with the matrix clause subject jo1 'I: The infinitive's subject in (25c), however, must pick its reference from the matrix argument. The effect in (25a) is called "Subjunctive Disjoint Reference" (Kempchinsky 1987, 2009) or "Obviation" (Farkas 1992, Lujan 1999, Costantini 2005a, 2009). Now, it is possible for a left-dislocation to appear between the matrix clause and the embedded clause, i.e. embedded left-dislocation (cf Baltin 1982: 19, Authier 1992:329, Lasnik & Saito 1992:76, L6pez 2009a). Costantini detects an interaction
Chapter 4. Syntactic aspects of Catalan ditic left- and clitic right -dislocation 141
between obviation and CLLD, which has not been considered so far in linguistic research. He mentions, in his thorough overview of approaches to obviation, that embedded left-dislocations may affect obviation in some cases (Costantini 2005b: 129; cf. also Costantini 2009: 58). His examples are presented in (26) and (27).12 (26)
Obviation and CLLD in Italian (taken from Costantini 2005b: 129: 64) a. Gianni1 spera che pro?l/J abbia fatto pochi errori G. hopes that has(subj) made few mistakes allesame di linguistica. at-the exam of linguistics 'Gianni hopes that he has made few mistakes on the linguistics exam: b.
di linguistica], pro 111 abbia Gianni1 spera che, [allesame Gianni hopes that at-the exam of linguistics has(subj) fatto pochi errori. mistakes made few 'Gianni hopes that he has made few mistakes on the linguistics exam:
(27)
Obviation and CLLD in Catalan (taken from Costantini 2005b: 130: fn.l9) a. En Joan no es pensa que pro.111 hagi fet molts the Joan not it(cl) thinks that has(subj) made many errors a l'examen. mistakes at the.exam 'John doesn't think he has made many mistakes on the exam: b.
pensa que [a l'examen de lingilistica En Joan no es The J. not it(cl) thinks that at the.exam of linguistics computacional] pro 111 hi hagi computational CL has (subj)
fet made
molts many
errors. mistakes
'John doesn't think he has made many mistakes on the computational linguistics exam:
The normal word order of verbs taking a subjunctive complement clause is shown in the (a) examples of(26) for Italian and of(27) for Catalan. The typical obviation effect is visible: the embedded (null) subject is disjoint in reference from the matrix subject (or it tends to be disjoint as marked by'?' in the Italian example). In examples (b) the adjunct all'esame/a l'examen (... )'on the exam' is locally left-dislocated (i.e. preceding the embedded clause). Since clitics in Italian are obligatory only for left-dislocated direct objects (SL 2006: 847), there is no elitic of the left-dislocation
u. Ct: Costantini (2005a: ch. 3. 2.1, 2009: 60) for examples where the clause with the embedded subject is itself dislocated
141
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
in the embedded clause in (26b). Now; if embedded CLLD applies, the coreferential properties change. Obviation is affected by CLLD and disappears: coreference between the embedded null subject and the matrix subject is acceptable. In order to combine obviation and embedded CLLD, one has to pay attention to two restrictions on the matrix verb: (a) for obviation to appear the matrix verb has to be a volitional/desiderative verb (Kempchinsk:y 1987, Farkas 1992); (b) the matrix verb has to be a bridge verb in order to allow for extraction (Erteschick-Shir 1973, Authier 1992, Miiller 1995). The following examples are constructed along these lines.B
13. (a) Semantic Class of the Matrix Verb: KempchinfKy (1987) and Farkas (1992) observe that obviation is restricted to a subclass of predicates taking subjunctive complements. namely desiderative/manipulative or volitional verbs. Verbs of doubt and denial (i) and factive -emotive verbs (ii), for e:aunple, do not trigger obviation.
(i)
que proili sea la persona mas apta para el puesto doubt.3sg that be.3sg.subj the person best suited for the job
Ana; duda
A. ~a
doubts that s/he is the best suited person for the job' (Kempchinsky 1987: 126)
(li) Anai lamenta que proilj tenga tanto trabajo A. regret.3sg that have.3sg.subj so- much work ~a regrets that s/he has so much work' (Kempchinsky 1987: 126f.) (b) Bridge Contexts and embedded CLID: Embedded topicalization is possible if it is confined to bridge contexts (Mill.ler 1995: 351, Authier 1992: 333£). This means that the matrix verb has to be a bridge verb, since only these verbs easily allow for extraction from their sentential complements into the left periphery of the embedded complement or the matrb: clause. Verbs such as think, believe, say, condude, ask, tell, report, announce, know, hope fall under the class of bridge verbs, whereas verbs such as doubt, shout, worry, want, understand are non-bridge verbs. Since Erteschlk-Shir's (1973) introduction of the term 11rldge verb, the discussion about this class of verbs is by and large concerned with the question of whether a verb will join it or not. For Erteschick-Shir it is the notion of semantic dominance on which the condition on extraction is based (Erteschick-Shir 1973: 8). "A clause or a phrase is semantically dominant if it is not presupposed and does not have contextual reference." (Erteschik-Shir 1977: 9), i.e. the speaker wants to draw attention to the semantic content of this constituent. "Extraction can occur only out of clauses or phrases which can be considered dominant [ ... ].A matrix which is subordinate (i.e. where the embedded clause is dominant and allows extraction) will be called a bridge. Extraction out of an island is therefore possible only across a bridge." (Erteschik-Shir 1977: 50). Hence, the semantic weight (Featherston 2004) is of relevance and bridge verbs are then assumed to be semantically light. The relevance of semantic weight is also detectable in Kiparsky & Kiparsky (1970), Cattell (1978), and Erteschick-Shir & Lappin (1979) (d Featherston 2004: 183). In his work on the relation between bridge verbs and (Germanic) V2-verbs, Featherston (2004: 205) comes to the conclusion that the "'[b]ridge feature is a continuum and not a categorical distinction: there is no absolute group of bridge verbs, only better and worse ones':
Chapter 4. Syntactic aspects of Catalan ditic left- and clitic right -dislocation 143
I present a new set of data including CLRD now. The reason for taldng CLRD into account is the question as to whether CLRD has the same consequences for obviation as CLLD. The idea is that if CLRD constituents are structurally in the same position as CLLD constituents, as assumed by the clause-external hypothesis, obviation should likewise disappear. If CLRD does not affect obviation, it is possible to conclude that they are not in the same position (an analysis for the data is presented below). In (28) and (29) the corresponding CLRD structures to (26) and (27) are represented, respectively. (28)
Obviation and CLRD in Italian Gianni1 spera che pro?IIJ abbia fatto pochi errori, mistake.PL Gianni hope that have.SBJ make.PTCP few [all~same
di lingui.stica].
at.the.exam of linguistics 'Gianni hopes that he has made few mistakes on the linguistics exam: (29)
Obviation and CLRD in Catalan En Joan1 no es pensa que pro*?IIJ hi1 hagi fet molts the J. not cL think that cL have.SBJ make.PTCP many errors, [a lhamen de lingii.istica computacional]l. mistake.PL at the.exam of linguistics computational 'John doesn't think he has made many mistakes on the computational linguistics , exam.
The configurations in (28) and (29) show obviation as CLLD does. The obviation is dislocations, (26a) and (27b). Two further one for Catalan, (31)) are given. They also obviation. 14
that right-dislocations do not affect as clear as in the examples without examples (one for Italian, (30), and show that CLRD does not influence
14· I would like to thank Francesco Costantini and Gemma Rigau for helping me with the data. Both mentioned independently that the data and the binding relations are rather subtle and that it is sometimes hard to make a decision. This assessment was confirmed by the grammaticality judgments of six Catalan native speakers. While for three of them the disjoint reference in (31a,b) was obvious, the remaining three were able to establish coreference between the embedded pro and the matrix subject Joan. The judgments on the Catalan data, in addition. seem to be dependent on social factors such as age and regional factors such as dialect Nevertheless, I conclude that - generally speaking - it seems that the coreference is easier to get if there is a constituent in the left periphery.
144 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan (30)
Obviation and CLLD/CLRD 15 a. Gianni1 pensa che pro%?1/J sia andato nel 1991 ad Amburgo G. think that have go.PTCP in 1991 to Hamburg
[ITAL]
(ma non si ricorda l'anno esatto). (but not REFLremember the.year precise) 'John thinks that he went to Hamburg in 1991 (but he doesn't remember the precise year): b.
CLLD: Gian~
G.
pensa che [ad Amburgo],pro 111 ci sia andato nel 1991 think that to Hamburg, CL have go.PTCP in 1991
esatto). (rna non si ricorda l'anno (but not REFL remember the.year precise c.
CLRD: Gianni1 pensa che pro%WJ ci sia andato nel 1991, G. think that CL have go.PTCP in 1991 [ad Amburgo], to Hamburg, (ma non si ricorda esatto). l'anno (but not RBFL remember the.year precise
(31)
Obviation and CLLD/CLRD a. En Joan1 esperava que pro 1•111 no digues res mal dit [CAT] hope.Psr that not say.sBJ nothing bad say.PrcP the J. al congres de la societat sociologica. at.the congress of the society sociologic 'John hoped that he has said nothing bad at the congress of the society of sociology: b.
CLLD: En Joan1 esperava que [al congres dela societat the J. hope.Psr that at.the congress of the society sociological 1 proi!J no hi1 digues res sociologic not CL say.sBJ nothing
c.
mal bad
dit. say.PTCP
CLRD: En Joa~ esperava que pro?.ll) no hi1 digues res mal dit, hope.PST that not CL say.SBJ nothing bad say.PTCP the J. [al congres de la societat sociologica] 1• at.the congress of the society sociologic
15. I owe the examples to F. Costantini (p.c.); they are published in Costantini (2009: 59); "%?" stands for "odd readillj(.
Chapter 4. Syntactic aspects of Catalan clitic left- and clitic right -dislocation 145
As before, the data in (30) and (31) show that there is no obviation eftect in the (b) examples, the one with an embedded CLLD, while coreference is marginally accepted or even not possible in the examples without any dislocation and with right-dislocation. I thus conclude that it seems that coreterence is easier to achieve if there is a constituent in the left periphery. Since CLRD does not affect obviation, it is likely that CLRD constituents are not located in the left periphery. As the examples additionally show, the pattern is similar in Catalan and Italian. Thus, the data do not support a clause-external analysis for Italian. Now it is time to implement the findings into a theoretical approach. By doing this, I show that a clause-internal analysis can easily account for the obviation data. Up until now, there is neither an approach for the CLLD pattern of Costantini (2005b) nor one which accounts for the CLRD data. For this reason, I present an analysis below. The analysis is based on Lujan's (1999) approach on obviation in general. A theoretical approach to the influence of CLLD on ob11iation Lujan (1999) proposes a binding-theoretical approach to obviation. Binding-theoretical approaches assume that the binding domain of the null subject in the embedded subjunctive clause is extended to the whole sentence. Then, according to Principle B, pro cannot be bound by the matrix subject since the latter is part of the binding domain of pm. Binding-theoretical approaches differ in the claim of which properties are responsible for the extension of the binding domain (cf. Costantini 2005b: 99). Lujan (1999) assumes that (a) pronouns universally undergo LF-movement in order to define their reference, and (b) clausal complements are marked with Case and the Spanish complementizer que 'that' bears that abstract Case feature (Lujan 1999: 106). Obviative clausal complements are assumed to be included in a simple CP structure, cf. (32), whereas non-obviative clausal complements have a double CP structure. 16 The complementizer que 'that' saturates the matrix verb's Case feature (accusative in (32)). At LF the null pronoun has to head-move to that complementizer due to interpretational properties (cf. Hestvik 1992). By LF-adjoining to que the pronoun absorbs the Case feature. The consequence of adopting the Case feature of the matrix verb is that the 41.2.3-1
Luj~n's (1999) approach is founded on the observation that ECM structures and Obviation of the subject pronoun in a subjunctive complement have the same range of restrictions. Therefore, she assumes the same syntactic structure for obviative subjunctives such as ECM structures, namely a "'double-strata CP": lcp lcp···· whereas non-ECM structures are only provided with a simple CP structure. Furthermore, ECM structures involve movement.
16.
146 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
pronoun has to be interpreted in the domain of the main clause (Extension of the binding domain). (32)
Binding Domain Extension ~ding domain extension
ACC Juan quiere b que+(el.)k
&P tk venga]]
]. want.3sG that (he) come.3sG.SUBJ 'Juan wants that he comes.'
The extension in (32) takes place only because the sentential complement involves a simple CP structure. Non-obviative clausal complements, in contrast, are assumed to be included in a double CP structure, cf. (33). The complement's subject pronoun has, as before, to LF-adjoin to the closest C head. In double CP structures this C head is empty and it is bound by the overt operator-like complementizer que which is located in the higher CP (Lujan 1999: 111). The matrix verb's Case feature is located in the higher CP. The LF-adjoined pro cannot absorb the Case feature since it is unavailable in the lower CP and, thus, pro does not extend the domain of interpretation. Consequently, the matrix subject is not part of pro's binding domain and, according to Principle B, the main clause subject can act as its antecedent. (33)
No Extension of the Binding Domain Case No binding domain extension
~ b que b 0c+(pro;1)k &P tk sea la persona mas apta para e1 puesto]]]
Ana duda
A. doubt.3sG that be.3sG.SUBJ the person best suited for the job ~na doubts that s!he is the
best suited person for the job.'
This approach to obviation can be modified for the CLLD and CLRD pattern. If Lujan (1999) is correct and obviation is induced by the combination of Case requirements of the matrix verb and LF-adjunction of pronouns, then CLLD is supposed to interrupt the binding domain extension exemplified in (32). I assume that this happens in the following way. CLLD, as normally assumed, is located in the C-domain of the clause. I assume with Rizzi (1997) that the CP is split into the two functional projections ForceP and FinP. Thez complementizer is generated in FinP and then moves up to ForceP. At LF the null subject of the embedded subjunctive has to move to the C-domain and adjoins to the closest head inC, namely Fin°. Since Fin° and Force0 together represent C0, the pronoun moves further up to the complementizer que. This allows for the binding domain extension in (32).
Chapter 4. Syntactic aspects of Catalan clitic left- and clitic right -dislocation 147
I now assume that if a further functional projection appears between Fin° and Force0, pro cannot reach que in Force 0• Such a functional projection is TopP, which appears only when it is needed. In the case of left-dislocated constituents, TopP is needed and this intervention impedes the extension of the binding domain: The only option for pro is to stay at the empty head Fin°. Similar to the non-obviation pattern in (33), the LF-adjoined pro cannot absorb the Case feature, which is located in Force0, and thus pro does not extend the domain of interpretation. Consequently, the matrix subject is not part of pro's binding domain and, according to Principle B, the main clause subject can act as its antecedent (34). (34)
Case
No binding domain extension
~
Giann~ spera lForceP che hopP all'esame dilinguistica lFinP 0+(pro;1j)k &P tk abbia fatto
pochi errori]]]].
Gianni hopes that at-the exam of linguistics has(subj) made few mistakes 'Gianni hopes that he has made few mistakes on the linguistics exam.'
As for CLRD, if a CLRD constituent were structurally in the same position as a CLLD constituent it should also hinder pro from reaching the case assigned complementizer in ForceP. The data on the interaction of obviation and CLRD has shown that this is not the case. In contrast, if one assumes a clause-internal analysis of CLRD, the right-dislocation does not impede the LF-movement of the pronoun from Fin° to Force 0 and as such does not hinder the extension of the binding domain. 41.3
Conclusion
In Section 4.1.2, the different syntactic approaches to clitic left-dislocation (CLLD) and clitic right -dislocation ( CLRD) are introduced: the mirror hypo the sis (Vallduvf 1993), the Split-Topic Hypothesis (Villalba 1996, 1999, 2000; but also Cecchetto 1999, and L6pez 2003, 2009a), and a version of the mirror hypothesis which assumes remnant movement in the case of CLRD (Samek-Lodovici 2006; but also Kayne 1994 and Zubizarreta 1998). Section 4.1.2 concentrated on three tests dealing with the CLLD/CLRD. The two tests by Samek-Lodovici (2006; licensing of n-words and binding effects) showed that Catalan behaves differently from Italian and does not support a clause-external analysis. The third test has not been considered so far in linguistic research and is based on the interaction of obviation and CLLD. I showed that whereas CLLD causes obviation to disappear, CLRD does not do so. By assuming that the position for CLRD is clause-internal, it could account for the difference. Based on the three tests, I conclude that a clause-internal analysis for Catalan is the best choice,
148 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
exactly as argued by Villalba (1996, 1999a,b, 2000) and L6pez (2003, 2009a). It is not discussed if CLLD and CLRD constituents are derived by movement or by base-generation in their surface position. Due to the fact that there is no base-generation approach that assumes a clause-internal position for CLRD, I adopt the analysis as presented by Villalba (2000). As a result, I also assume a movement approach to CLLD and CLRD.
CHAPTER5
Prosodic phrasing of Catalan elitic left- and clitic right-dislocation
1his chapter deals with the prosodic phrasing of CLW and CLRD in Catalan. 1 The results of the experiment show that embedded clitic left-dislocations are typically not preceded by a prosodic phrase boundary, while clitic left-dislocations in general are obliga.torily followed by a prosodic boundary. Clitic right-dislocations are obligatorily separated from the preceding main clause by a boundary. The appearance of CLLD in embedded contexts is a topic that has not yet been addressed by intonational research in general. I present experimental data that cannot be explained by Frascarelli (2000) and Prieto (2005). The relevant data concern complex CLLD structures presented in Villalba (2000) and L6pez (2003, 2009a): left-dislocation out of clitic left-dislocations and embedded left-dislocations. The hypotheses for the experiment are based on Frascarelli (2000). Her work constitutes a logical point of departure, because she presents the only approach including CLLD and CLRD but does not consider embedded clauses. I show that the formulation of the Topic Prosodic Domain (Frascarelli 2000: 63) is too restricted for the Catalan data. The stochastic OT analysis I present is based on the modified version of Prieto's (2005) analysis (cf. Chapter 3). In order to account for dislocations the constraint ALIGN-ToP,R, is also introduced, which accounts for the obligatory right boundary. 1his constraint does not demand a boundary to the left and thus enables a prosodic grouping with preceding material. By considering branching and non-branching dislocations in the experimental data, I am able to show that the restructuring of non-branching topics does not occur in Catalan. Non-branching topics are immediately followed by prosodic phrase boundary even at a fast speech rate although a weakening of the boundaries takes place. The chapter is structured in the following way. In Section 5.1 background information on dislocations in several Romance languages is given. The hypotheses
This chapter circulated previously as Feldhausen (2006a), an early manuscript presenting first results. The conclusions drawn in Feldhausen (2006a, b) and here do not dtifer, although the analysis is slightly dtiferent. 1.
150
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
are presented in Section 5.2. The experiment design is described in Section 5.3. In Section 5.4 the results of the experiment are illustrated and described. The theoretical approach to dislocations is given in Section 5.5. Section 5.6 concludes this chapter.
5.1
Background
Previous studies on Catalan (Bonet 1984, Recasens 1993, Prieto 2002a, Astruc 2005) agree with respect to the prosodic behavior of clitic left- and right-dislocations. CLLD constituents are given completely independent contours. Generally; they are accented and end with a continuation rise (Prieto 2002a: 411, Astruc 2005: 61). Right-dislocations are detached from the preceding clause and have a very low pitch without any perceivable prominence. Astruc (2005: ch.3) shows that rightdislocations are indeed unaccented. 2 Prieto (2002a: 410f.) highlights that the main clause of both types of dislocations has the same intonational characteristics as a neutral declarative. A progressively falling contour begins after the last prenuclear accent and continues until the end of the sentence. The nuclear pitch accent can be described by means of an L* accent, because there is no relevant pitch movement during the accented syllable. The nuclear accent is followed by a low boundary toneL%. Right-dislocations in Spanish, for example, are described in Zubizarreta (1998: 154ff.) as being accented, but their pitch range is subordinate to that of the main clause. As in Catalan, right -dislocations are detached from the main clause and constitute a prosodic phrase of their own, which is more likely the Intonational Phrase than the intermediate phrase. Similar patterns are found in Lambrecht (1981) for French. He says that leftdislocations are accented, while right-dislocations are deaccented. In contrast to Catalan, Lambrecht (1981) states that right-dislocations are integrated into the same prosodic unit as the main clause. Ladd (1996: 141f.) states that French rightdislocations copy the last tone of the matrix sentence. In declaratives the rightdislocation is low, whereas it is high in questions. 3 Thus, the intonation of right-dislocations depends entirely on the intonation of the matrix clause.
Catalan right-dislocations occur not only with declarative sentences. but also with interrogatives. When occurring with interrogatives they seem to be accented and possess a contour that duplicates the contour of the Irudear accent of the main clause, but with a lower pitch (Bonet 1984: 34, Recasens 1993: 214). 2.
3· This pattern is reminiscent of the duplication in Catalan as described in Bonet (1984: 34) and Recasens (1993: 214).
Chapter 5. Prosodic phrasing of Catalan clitic left- and clitic rlght -dislocation
Frascarelli (2000) presents a detailed prosodic and syntactic analysis of Topic and Focus in Italian. Left- and right -dislocations in Italian are consistently separated from the main clause on the Intonational Phrase level (Frascarelli 2000: 34&63). Left-dislocations are accented and their pitch accent differs according to their discourse roles (L*+H for aboutness/shifting topics; H* for contrastive topics; and L* for familiar topics; cf. Frascarelli & HinterhOlzl 2007). Frascarelli & Trecci (2006) note that right-dislocated familiar topics also bear the low pitch accent L* (but they are taken by the authors as being 'destressed'). Some important aspects of Frascarelli's (2000) analysis are presented in greater detail in the next section. All of these studies are similarly concerned with CLLD and CLRD in simple clauses (i.e. root clauses without embedded clauses). As far as I know, there has been no intonational study undertaken with respect to embedded left-dislocations. Only Frascarelli & Treed (2006) include some embedded clauses in their study. However, they are mainly concerned with the use and position of subjects and their tonal realization and do not investigate their phrasing pattern.4
5.2
The hypotheses
The hypotheses for the experiment are based on the work by Frascarelli (2000). For this reason, the relevant features of this approach are outlined before the hypotheses are presented. After that, it is explained how the hypotheses can be tested. Two formalizations ofFrascarelli's (2000) approach are important for the present work: the Topic Prosodic Domain and Topic Restructuring. The first formalization deals with the prosodic domain of topics. (1). It is useful in assisting the PF component to recognize Topic constituents and to translate them correctly into a prosodic structure. (1)
Topic Prosodic Domain (Frascarelli 2000: 63) A Topic is minimally and exhaustively contained in an I[ntonational Phrase, I. F.].
(2)
(Topic) TP
Formalization (1) says that topics must be minimally and exhaustively contained in an Intonational Phrase, i.e. they have an immediate left and right boundary. In (2) an abstract schema of (1) is given. Corresponding Italian examples with left-dislocations (left-hand topics in Frascarelli's terms) are given in (3a) and (4).
4· The majority of the subjects in the study by Frascarelli & Treed (2006) are realized with a low tone L* (and are thus familiar topics) and they appear in any clausal type. Aboutness-shift topic subjects, in contrast, are seldom present in embedded clauses.
151
152
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
It is correctly predicted by (1) that there is an intonational phrase boundary on both sides of the topic constituent in (3a) and (4). (3)
Italian Non-Branching Topics (taken from Frascarelli 2000: 48) 5 a. [[questo libro]~ 1 [[[k]onosco]cp [l'autore]cp [che l'ha scritto]cpJr this book know-lsG theauthor that ithave-3sGwrite-PP 'I know the author who wrote this book: b.
(4)
scritto]cp]y [[questo libro]cp [[h]onosco]cp [l'autore]cp [che l'ha this book know-1 sG the author that it have-3sG write-PP 'I know the author who wrote this book:
Italian Branching Topics [[gli amici]cp [di Sara]~ 1 [[[d3]ianni]cp Gianni the friends of Sara
(taken from Frascarelli 2000: 47) [e partito]cp [senza be-3so leave-PP without
neanche salutarli]cp]I even to say good-bye-to.them 'Gianni left without saying good-bye to Sara's friends:
In (3b) a restructuring effect can be seen. Frascarelli notes that non-branching topics, in contrast to branching topics, generally restructure into adjacent intonational phrases when the speech rate increases (Frascarelli 2000: 48). For this reason, (3b) is possible. The right intonational phrase ("I") boundary of the topic disappears and the topic is part of the intonational phrase of the main clause. This process is formalized by (5). (5)
Topic Restructuring (cf. Frascarelli 2000: 63) If non-branching, a Topic may restructure into the adjacent constituent, on either side. [[ .. -l'P lr [[ ... ]q> [ ••• ]'P lr => [[ ... ]q> [•• -l'P [... ]'P lr Topic Sentence Topic Sentence
The topic restructuring process can override the minimal and exhaustive phrasing of topics (cf. (1 )). The formalization correctly predicts for Italian that non-branching dislocations can be incorporated in a preceding (or following) intonational phrase, whereas branching CLLDs do not reconstruct and thus do not phrase together with other elements.
5· Evidence for ImP-boundaries in (Toscanian) Italian comes from spirantisation (N&V 1986/2007): plosives are realized as fricatives when situated between two vowels. The [h] in (3b) is caused by spirantisation and signals that there is no IntP-boundary preceding the word In (3a), however, the word is preceded by such a boundary. For this reason, spirantisation cannot apply and the underlying phoneme lkl is realized as [k]. Spirantisation is a domain span rule (N&V 1986/2007), and the target position must not be at the edge of a prosodic constituent.
Chapter 5. Prosodic phrasing of Catalan clitic left- and clitic rlght -dislocation 153
Clearly, the two formalizations work fine for CLLD and CLRD in simple clauses. However, it is worth pointing out that the left boundary of CLLD constituents comes naturally in a simple clause, due to the fact that nothing precedes the topic constituent. This can be seen in the schema in (2): there is no material preceding (Topic). Consequently, one important question arises: What happens when CLLD structures are embedded? The formulation of the Topic Prosodic Domain as given in Frascarelli (2000) can be applied to embedded CLLD - even though it was originally developed for simple clauses. It predicts that embedded CLLD is also minimally and exhaustively contained in a prosodic phrase: according to (1), only the grouping in (6a) is a valid phrasing. According to (5), the groupings (6b,c) are invalid, if the topic is branching. They are valid, if the topic is non-branching. 'VO' stands for the matrix verb, '.. : stands for additional material preceding the matrix verb. (6)
a.) ... yo (Topic) YP b.) ( ... yo Topic) YP c.) ... V0 (Topic YP)
Previous studies on Catalan show that, in general, left-dislocations end with a continuation rise (Prieto 2002: 411, Astruc 2005: 61). I claim that this boundary is obligatory and that dislocations do not restructure. Furthermore, based on Frascarelli's (2000) formalizations and the role of embedded dislocations, I claim that Catalan dislocations do not have an obligatory left boundary. Consequently, only the groupings (6a,b) are possible. The two following hypotheses are set up: Hypothesis 1: Left-dislocations hm•e only a right boundary and this boundary is obligatory. Hypothesis 2: Catalan left-dislocations do not re.structure. 6
Hypothesis 2 is derived from hypothesis 1. If the right boundary is obligatory, restructuring is not possible. The crucial test for hypothesis 1 concerns cases where embedded CLLD (branching and non-branching) phrases with preceding material of the matrix clause at a normal speech rate. At a fast speech rate, branching topics should phrase with preceding material. Thus. if there are branching dislocations in data that phrase with preceding material at a normal and fast speech rate one can be sure that the grouping is not a result of the restructuring process. The grouping is rather a result of the right boundary of the dislocations. For this reason, I set up data consisting of cases of embedded CLLD; these are mainly instances of so called left-dislocations out of CUD (cf. below). Hypothesis 2 is based on (5). The crucial
The relevant notion for restructuring is the prosodic phrase. Thus, the (SV)(O) phrasing of Prieto (2005) can be taken as a result of a restructuring process of (S)(VO).
6.
154 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan test for hypothesis 2 concerns cases with non-branching dislocations. If they do not restructure at a fast speech rate, the findings can be interpreted to indicate that Catalan dislocations do not restructure. However, if they do restructure, it is of interest if branching topics also restructure. If there are instances of restructuring branching topics, (5) cannot be maintained for Catalan. A further hypothesis can be constructed from the special prediction of hypothesis 1 that left-dislocations do not behave like (preverbal) subjects. If the right boundaryofleft-dislocations is obligatory, no dislocation should phrase with following material. If the matrix subject is a left-dislocation, matrix (SV) should not be possible (recall that the complex SVO experiment (Chapter 3) shows that matrix (SV) phrasing increases when the object is sentential). The balance effects described in Prieto (2005) do not appear. Hypothesis 3 states as follows: Hypothesis 3: The obligatory right boundary has the effect that left-dislocations do not ph rase with following material if the object is long (branching or sentential). The crucial test for hypothesis 3 concerns cases with non-localleft-dislocations (cf. below): Ifleft-dislocations acted like preverbal subjects, there should be instances where non-branching non-localleft-dislocations phrase with the following matrix material. Corresponding examples for the three hypotheses are presented now. Branching and non-branching topics are given in (7) and (8). Non-branching topics consist of one prosodic word, such as (7). Branching topics consist of two different groups. The topics of the first group are made up of two prosodic words (Sa), while the topics of the second group are made up of at least three prosodic words, (Sb). (7)
Non-branching topics w
Les taules1, les1 vaig portar al pis. The tables CL.ACC PST.lSG bring to-the flat 'I brought the tables to the flat: (8)
Branching topics
w
w
a.
Les taules1 de Barcelona, les1 vaig portar al pis. The tables of B. CL.Acc PST.lsG bring to-the flat 'I brought the tables from Barcelona to the flat:
b.
A1s ve"ins catalans de l'altre co stat de l'Ebre, to.the neighbor.PL cat alan of the.other shore of the.Ebre
w
w
w
w
w
els volen robar l'aigua. CL want.3PL steal.INF the.water 'They want to steal the water from the Catalan neighbors from the other side of the Ebre river:
Chapter 5. Prosodic phrasing of Catalan clitic left- and clitic rlght -dislocation 155
A left-dislocation between a matrix clause and an embedded clause is called an embedded left-dislocation (cf. Baltin 1982: 19, Authier 1992: 329, Lasnik & Saito 1992: 76). An example is given in (9). The DP les taules 'the tables' is left-dislocated and embedded. (9)
Embedded CLLD [La Maria va [que les taules, les dir va portar the M. PST.3SG say.INF that the table.PL CL.ACC PST bring.INF al pis lcP2 lcrt· to.the flat 'Mary said that (s)he brought the tables to the flat:
The embedded clause (CP2) is a sentential complement of the matrix verb, for which I used the assertive predicate dir 'say' in the experiment. Dir is a weak intensional predicate generally selecting the indicative mood for its argument clause (cf. Farkas 1992, Quer 2001). Structure (9) is not the only one that can test hypothesis 1. L6pez (2003: 196, 2009a: 148) shows that it is possible in Catalan to left-dislocate a constituent out of an embedded CLLD constituent. 7 An example is given in (10). (10)
(CL)LD extracted from embedded CLLD (adapted from L6pez 2003: 196) [a Del seu avi] la Maria diu que [p les histories t(a)] of.the her grandfather the Maria say that the story.PL la Joana les coneix totes the Joana CL.ACC know ali.PL
t(~)
'Maria says that Joana knows all of her grandfather's stories:
First, the complex DP [~ les histOries del seu avi] in (10) is left-dislocated to the left periphery of the embedded clause. The accusative clitic les appears in front of the embedded verb. Next, the PP constituent [a del seu avi] inside that DP is extracted and then holds a position in the left periphery of the matrix clause. The PP, however, is not doubled by a clitic (cf. L6pez 2009a: 148: fn.1 for details). In both (9) and (10) there is material preceding the (embedded) left-dislocation which represents the foundation for testing hypothesis 1. Most of the relevant examples in the experiment for testing the hypothesis are constructed along the lines of (10). Before proceeding with the experiment description, two further terms have to be introduced: local and non-local dislocation. Local CLLD means that an element is moved to the left periphery of the same clause. This is the case for both left-dislocations in simple clauses, such as (7) and (8),
7. This is possible in spite of claims in the literature that dislocations are opaque domains for extraction. C£ L6pez (2009a: 148£) for further information.
156 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
and embedded left-dislocations, such as (9) and (10). Instances of multiple dislocations (or iterative dislocations) as in (11) are also local. Local CLRD means that the constituent is moved to the right of the same clause, cf. (13b) below. (11)
(Local) Iterative CLLD Amb en Pere 1, del llibre 2, ~'h.i 1 va parlar ahir. with the Pere of.the book cL-CL.Loc PST talk.INF yesterday '(S)he talked with Pere about the book:
Non-loca.l CUD means that an element is moved out of an embedded clause up to the left periphery of the matrix clause. This is the case of the PP in (10). It is also the case of the DP les taules 'the tables' in (12). Non-local CLRD is not possible, because CLRD is clause-bounded and therefore always local (cf Villalba 2000: 266). (12)
5·3
Non -local CLLD Les taules [el Joel va dir [que les va portar al pis.]cPllTP the table.PL the J. PST say.INF that CL.ACC PST bring.INF to.the flat 'Maria said that Joel brought the tables from home:
The experiment
To examine the prosodic structure of CLLD and CLRD a production experiment with 12 (9 + 3) subjects based on scripted speech was conducted. "Scripted speech is produced on the basis of written material which is read out" (Gussenhoven 2004: 10). The first nine subjects were recorded at a normal speech rate, while the last three subjects were recorded at a fast speech rate. The locus of the experiment of the first nine subjects in Table 1 was the Unive1-sitat Autonoma de Barcelona. (UAB) in Bellaterra (Spain). The subjects were recorded in a quiet room and a DAT recorder was used. Among the nine subjects8 seven were female and two were male, ranging in age from 22-39years old (0 ,29.3 years old). Four of the subjects were linguists and hence not totally nai've to the purpose of the experiment. 9 1he locus of the last three subjects in Table 1 was Berlin (Germany). All three subjects were female, non-linguists, and ranged in age from 21-26 old (0 ~24.3 years old). Al112 subjects were native speakers of Central Catalan.
8. Originally, 12 speakers were recorded, but three speakers (# 8, 9, and 10) had to be eliminated due to the bad quality of the recording and to a strongly emphatic prommciation. 9·
The results indicate that there is no difference between linguists and non-linguists.
Chapter 5. Prosodic phrasing of Catalan clitic left- and clitic rlght -dislocation 157 Table 1. Detailed information of recorded subjects (numbered speakers recorded in Barcelona, June 2005; remaining three speakers recorded in Berlin, January 2008) Speaker l_SA
Sex
Age
Profession
f
28
employee
2_PP
f
39
3_AV
f
24
4_NC
m
33
S_CA
f
22
6_CC
f
22
f
22
ll_SP
f
39
12_XV
m
35
7_AM
YH
f
21
RP
f
26
MM
f
26
Origin and L1
Barcelona (Cat) linguist Figueres (Cat) Ph.D. student Manresa (Cat) linguist Barcelona (Cat & Spanish) student Barcelona (Cat) student Barcelona (Cat) student Cabrtanes (Cat) linguist St. Feliu de Gufxols (Cat) linguist Barcelona (Cat & Spanish) student Barcelona (Cat & Spanish) Ph.D. student Barcelona (Cat) self-employed Terrassa (Cat.)
Parents' L1 ~:Cat
c3: Cat ~:Cat.
o: Spanish ~:Cat
c3: Cat ~:Spanish
c3: Cat ~:Cat.
o: Spanish ~:Cat
c3: Cat ~:Cat.
c3: Cat ~:Cat.
c3: Cat ~:Spanish
c3: Spanish ~:Cat.
c3: Spanish ~:Cat
c3: Cat ~:Cat
c3: Cat.
Material: A total of 32 different basic sentences were used (cf. appendix). Of these, 20 sentences included CLLD constituents; eight sentences included CLRD constituents, and four sentences included both CLLD and CLRD. Each sentence was uttered by all 12 speakers (cf. Table 1). Thus, the experiment contained 384 sentences altogether. 288 of the sentences were uttered at a normal speech rate (9 speakers x 32 sentences); 96 sentences were uttered at a fast speech rate (3 x 32). All recorded data was controlled with respect to information structure. Each target sentence was introduced by a context question. The context question purposely mentioned the dislocated constituent of the target clauses in order to guarantee that the dislocated part was given (cf. Chapter 1). An example is given in (13). The accusative object les taules 'the tables' is explicitly mentioned in context, and then dislocated to the left and to the right in ( 13a,b) respectively.
158 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
(13)
Example for target sentences with CLLD and CLRD 10
Context (que.stion): Que vas fer amb les taules? what PST.2SG do.INF With the table.PL 'What did you do with the tables?'
Target sentences: a. CLLD: Les taules1, les1 vaig portar al pis. The tables CL.ACC PST.lSG bring to-the flat 'I brought the tables to the flat:
b.
CLRD: vaig portar a1 pis, les taules1• CL.ACC PST.lSG bring to-the flat the tables 'I brought the tables to the flat: Les1
In order to test the hypotheses, the material was intermittently controlled for prosodic and syntactic aspects. The prosodic and syntactic aspects may also overlap each other. 18 basic sentences are controlled for the prosodic structure of the dislocations. They include branching and non-branching topics, as illustrated in (7) and (8): four sentences include non-branching left-dislocations and eight sentences include branching left-dislocations, whereas two sentences include non-branching right-dislocations and four sentences include branching right-dislocations. As for the syntactic structure of the dislocations, there are two main groups. One group includes embedded left-dislocations, the other group includes non-embedded dislocations. With respect to embedded left-dislocation, six basic sentences are controlled for it (two of them are 'simple' embedded left-dislocations, as in (9);
In each basic sentence, a comma was placed after each CLLD constituent and before each CLRD constituent - in contrast to the three experiments described in Chapter 3 (simple and complex SVO, and CLLD vs. S). The normative tradition says that for Catalan Ia dislocaci6 a l~querra 'CLLD' can be orthographically separated by a comma from the rest of the sentence, whereas la dislocaci6 a la dreta 'CLRD' must be orthographically separated. This rule is unwritten but widely accepted. Yet, in texts one can find dear instances of CLRD without a comma. It is well known that this punctuation marl<: indicates a slight pause or a break between parts of a sentence (Cowie 1989: 229 ). An important question arises from this: whether or not this orthographical symbol influences the subject of the experiment and causes him/her to produce a pause. In the experiment conducted, this did not seem to be the case. To anticipate a finding of the CLLD vs. S experiment in Chapter 6: speakers also produce many dear IntP breaks even when there is no punctuation mark in the stimulL Furthermore, despite the comma in the CLLD/CLRD experiment, speakers vary between IntP- and ip-boundariessimilar to the pattern of the experiments described in the third chapter. In addition, speakers are in general influenced by their orthographical education and might 'read' the punctuation marks even when they are not there.
10.
Chapter 5. Prosodic phrasing of Catalan clitic left- and clitic rlght -dislocation 159
four of them are left-dislocations out of embedded left-dislocation structures, as in (10))_11 The other sentences do not have embedded left-dislocations. They include either local or non-local dislocations, as in (13a,b) and (12) respectively. 12 Procedure: The subjects were recorded in a quiet room where they were sitting down at a table in front of the recording microphone. The data was presented on printed out paper sheets.B The subjects were told to read out each single sentence only after they had been asked the suitable context question. In addition, they were told to read out the sentences in a conversational style without being given any specific instructions regarding the phrasing. The subjects in Spain were told to read out the sentences at a normal speech rate, while the subjects in Berlin read them at a fast speech rate. The sentences were digitized (.wav files, sample rate 22.050Hz) and F0 tracks were analyzed using PRAAT (Boersma & Weenink 2008). Subsequently, a prosodic analysis of the spoken sentences was conducted along the lines described in Section 3.2. The phrase boundaries were determined on the basis of intonational evidence along the criteria set up in Chapter 2.
5·4
Results
In this section the results of the experiment are described and illustrated by various figures and intonation contours. In 5.4.1, it is shown that embedded CLLD is typically not preceded by a boundary tone (cf. Figure 4). Then, it is shown that leftdislocations are almost always followed by an intonational boundary (i.e. ip and IntP; cf Figure 10). After that, it is illustrated that right dislocations are immediately preceded by intonational boundaries at a normal and fast speech rate (cf. Figure 11 ). Finally, a phonetic characteristic of right-dislocations is presented: the longer the dislocation (i.e. the more prosodic words), the more probable a high realization of the contour with respect to the low boundary tone of the preceding main clause is (cf. Figure 14). Section 5.4.2 summarizes the findings, while the findings are discussed in depth in Section 5.4.3.
n. Ultimately, only one of the 'simple' embedded LD clauses was used, Le. five basic clauses were used for the results. 0 nly the matrix clause of the excluded sentence contained a raising verb and thus was much shorter than the matrix clause of all other examples. All CLRD sentences are local (Le. eight basic sentences). Six CLLD sentences are local, six non-local (The ill out of CLLD sentences are not included). Four sentences include multiple dislocations, as in (11) (CLLD: two sentences; CLRD: two sentences). Four sentences include left- and right -dislocations at the same time. 12.
13.
The target sentences were not randomi2ed and were not interspersed with fillers.
160
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan 54.1
Results
Figure 1, Figure 2, and Figure 3 illustrate that embedded CLLD is typically not preceded by a boundary tone. The overall picture of the results for the left edge of an embedded dislocation is presented in Figure 4. The example in Figure 1 shows the prosodic phrasing of the sentence Sembla que delllibre, en va parlar ahir Ia Maria •It seems that Maria talked about the book yesterday: While there occurs a prosodic boundary of the type H- at the right edge of the left-dislocated constituent delllibre, no boundary occurs at its left side. The pitch contour on the complementizer que That' is phonologically unspecified and does not show any particular movement It can rather be described in terms of transitions from the high peak of the first pitch accentL+>H* (located onsem of sembla ·useems') to the low target of the second pitch accent L+ >H* (located on lli of llibre ~ook).
Figure 1. Catalan (Matrix CLLD)(emb. clause) phrasing- Waveform, spectrogram, and FO trace for the sentence Sembla que delllibre en va parlar ahir Ia Maria 'It seems that Maria talked about the book yesterday' of speaker 2 (sentence bcn_pers2_8b): non-branching, embedded CLLD
Figure 2 and Figure 3 give the pitch contour of a sentence where a dislocation is extracted from an embedded dislocation, as in (14). Here, the embedded dislocation is constituted by three prosodic words, i.e. it branches. Figure 2 shows the contour at a fast speech rate, while Figure 3 shows the contour at a normal speech rate. (14)
embedded CLID with three prosodic words (I)
(I)
[De Bordeus] 1 Ia Maria diu que [fampolla de vi rosattd 2 of B. the M. say that the.bottle of wine rose laz va comprar el Joel the PST buy.INF the J. 'Mary said that Joel bought the bottle of red wine from Bordeaux:
Chapter 5. Prosodic phrasing of Catalan ditlc left- and clitlc right-dislocation
~ -h!~.,_...._""~~~ '-i ':'_ ,.;. ~.;-c-: +-'i-!+-~~-5-'. -i- - ;.:'- 'i- !:- '- 'i'~~+5-+-:,~:-'-- '7-i'~~~:: - · ::·.5 -+'
300
~250 +:!~'· ----------!:--J~¥.------- 1- -+f ___ .,f ___ ,___ ,_+--------!---!'----+-!-----,·-~---:fl,___, ___ ., __________ "'-!-!-'-- y-----!------!'---l ~200 +~J·, --------~\Jf~----·~----v·~'~~~~~~------- ~-~'~ --~~- \--C.,.. :....:.. ,.:-~-~">' -:, ...1,.... :.;-----•---I
~
:.~ -. !'-i.i:, ~ ~ :.~'. ~ '~>_.>.... _ -.i;"'-"'......., : ' ' ~150 +•-------------·------~·----------·----~---·---•--•'-~ ------·----·-----·--·'--' -~~~~----·----:·----·~---· --------·-··~ ----.-~~ · - · ---1 51oo +:-------------:1 '~-----'-_,:_·_______ ~,: ~r_,:_,_, ___ ,__ ,____'_____ , ___ , _____ ,__ ,_ ,__ ____ , ____ ,____ , ____ , ____________ ,_, ___ •____ ~ ___ ,______ -,' ___
1
~c 50 ~f~-·== ·"~,._~,==~~~ ·'•~,~~ ~~~~~~'=·!=*~~£f~~:== · t~~~==~'~, &:
'L-L%
-H%
De Bordeus
!a Maria
d' q
LD
s
vee
l'ampoll de vi I rosat
~P
CLLD
!a co;rar cl
el Joel
v
Figure 2. Catalan (LD)(SVqCLLD)(VS) phrasing at a fast speech rate- Waveform, spectrogram, and FO trace for the sentence De Bordeus laMaria diu que l'ampoUa de vi rosat la va comprar el Joel 'Mary said that Joel bought the bottle of red wine from Bordeus' of speaker YH (sentence 12b_YH): branching. embedded CLLD
Figure 3. Catalan (LD)(SVqCLLD)(VS) phrasing at a normal speech rate- Waveform, spectrogram, and FO trace for the sentence De Bordeus laMaria diu que l'ampoUa de vi rosat lava comprar el Joel 'Mary said that Joel bought the bottle of red wine from Bordeus' of speaker 3 (sentence bcn_pers3_12b): branching, embedded CLLD
Figure 2 and Figure 3 also show that the embedded left-dislocation is not preceded by a boundary tone, even though it consists of three prosodic words. There is no tonal movement signaling a boundary. The small rise of FO on the complementizer que lhat' in Figure 3 is a consonantal effect and cannot be attributed to any boundary tone. Thus. the local CILD constituent is phrased together with the
161
16:1
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
preceding verb. The matrix subject is also part of that prosodic group, because there is no boundary following the subject. With respect to the right boundary of dislocations, they clearly appear in both figures. The non-local dislocation De Bordeus 'from Bordeaux' is marked by H- in Figure 2 and by H% in Figure 3. The local CLLD l'ampolla de vi rosat 'the bottle of red wine' is marked in both figures by the IntP-boundary tone H%. Figure 4 summarizes the (non-) realization of boundaries at the left edge of embedded left-dislocations by giving the number (in percent) of boundaries occurring between the matrix verb and the embedded CLLD constituent (including the complementizer). The left bar gives the percentage values for a normal speech rate, the right bar for a fast speech rate. At a normal speech rate, in 64% of the cases no boundaries were placed. In 20% of the cases it is unclear if there is a boundary or not Thus, in 84% of the cases, embedded CLLD is not preceded by a clear prosodic break. The number of clear boundaries only comes to 16% (14% ip-boundary, 2% IntP-boundary). At a fast speech rate, the instances of no or unclear boundaries also represents the majority (66%), while the number of clear boundaries comes to 34%. Interestingly, the number of no or unclear boundaries is smaller than at a normal speech rate. Nevertheless, clear boundaries are not typical at a fast speech rate either. Boundaries preceding emb.CLID
= ~
~
100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%
o no boundary lflundear oip
• IntP
-
-
normal speech rate
fast speech rate
64
33
20
33
14
27
2
7
Figure 4. Percentages ofboundary types preceding embedded CLLD constituents
In sum, Catalan shows a clear tendency not to place a boundary before embedded left-dislocations. The language does so, irrespective of any branchingness. The figures further indicate that Catalan has boundaries marking the end of a leftdislocation. This aspect is presented in greater detail now. My study confirms the results by Prieto (2002: 411) and Astruc (2005: 61) that left-dislocations are accented and (typically) end with a continuation rise. Exam-
Chapter 5. Prosodic phrasing of Catalan ditlc left- and clitlc right-dislocation 163
pies for local non-branching left-dislocations are given in Figure 5 and Figure 6, in which the boundary is realized asH- and as H-H% respectively. The accentuation of the fronted constituent can be very well seen in Figure 7, which illustrates a local branching left-dislocation. The first pitch accent. located on the syllable tau of taules lables: is realized by L+>H*. The second pitch accent is realized by a low pitch accent L* followed by an H-H% boundary tone.
~
~250 ~4-~~~--~4-~~~,r--~r+~~~--~4-~
5210 t······,········l•········j.-'---·-----·~j---------~:·········· ~f········ ~· ·· ~·--j--·----------··,----·-~·--·--··,--·------l :::J
~1~ +------'--··----l~---+--'<----,~~,-----·t+'·----·---- i·' --------··--·'·--'--·----------··'----··,~···"··'--·------l
""
~130 t-----+T·w~f'-----~~-----~~~-~~~ :--.-~-: - ' - ,, ., -- ,~w--·--------HI'+--·•~~~~,>--·------I
5
90 t-----+~"'-·-·-------~=~'------~----+------=----;--~,~ ·: · :~ - ~:,;; ----·f'-~' 1 ------- m-~-------------+--·------l
-g~ so i=~====~==~==~======~==~====~~ &:: Les taules
les
vaig portar
al pis
CLLD
cl
v
pp
Figure 5. Catalan (CLLD)(main clause) phrasing- Waveform, spectrogram, and FO trace for the sentence Les taules les vaig portar al pis 'I brought the tables to the flat' of speaker 4 (sentence bcn_pers4_1a): local, non-branching CLLD, BI3
~
e
e-
.,c :::J
0"'
~
'3c ., ~
-a
c
500 410 320 230 140
so
:::J
IL
Les taules
les
vaig portar
al pis
CL!D
cl
v
pp
Figure 6. Catalan (CLLD)(main clause) phrasing- Waveform, spectrogram, and FO trace for the sentence Les taules les vaigportar al pis 'I brought the tables to the flat' of speaker 6 (sentence bcn_pers6_1a): local, non-branching CLLD, BI4
164
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
L*
L+ >H*
H-H%
H*
L-L%
0
4
Les taules
L*
de Barcelona
4
les
vaig portar
al pis
cl
v
pp
CLLD
Figure 7. Catalan (CLLD)(main clause) phrasing- Waveform, spectrogram, and FO trace for the sentence Les taules de Barcelona les vatgportar al pts 'I brought the tables from Barcelona to the flat' of speaker 12 (sentence bcn_persl2_2c): local, branching CLLD, B14
The need for a right boundary of left-dislocated constituents becomes even clearer in sentences with multiple left-dislocations. Each dislocation ends with a high boundary tone. Figure 8 shows an example in which both edge tones are realized as H- H%, while Figure 9 illustrates an instance in which the first edge tone is realized asH- andthesecondedge tonebyH-H%.
~
!:'; 400 .,c 340
""l."' ' ett-i~ .~-~ l.s
::s
.,<:7' 280
.t:l
.. 1 .. ~~
2!
220
~
I. I 100
.,c 160
""ILc::s
... ~
t: ,:·
L+
Amb en Pere CLLD 1
H
%
. """ .
it:. /
1iii
-~ *
H
1.-
·~ ~~ ·
-
r"""
s
I
-· ~I
7j
'X
..a ill. ~~ L+ *
%
.%
delllibre
p'h
va parlar
ahir
CLLD 2
lc~~
v
Adv
Figure 8. Catalan (CLLD)(CLLD)(main clause) phrasing- Waveform, spectrogram, and FO trace for the sentence Amb en Pere dellltbre n'ht va parlar ahtr '(S)he talked with Pere about the book' of speaker 6 (sentence bcn_pers6_7a): iterative CLLD, Bl4 + Bl4
Chapter 5. Prosodic phrasing of Catalan ditic left- and clitic right-dislocation 165
La cervesa
a Barcelona
molt cara
v
A
Figure 9. Catalan (CLLD)(CLLD)(maln clause) phrasing- Waveform, spectrogram, and FO trace for the sentence La cervesa a Barcelona Ia hi venen molt cara 'They sell beer very expensive at Barcelona' of speaker 5 (sentence bcn_pers5_7b ): Iterative CLLD. Bl3 + Bl4
Figure 10 shows that left-dislocations are almost always followed by an intonational boundary (i.e. ip and IntP) at a normal and fast speech rate (left and right bar respectively). The figure gives the value in %. The figure combines branching and non-branching CLLD constituents, because their values do not differ significantly.'" For the same reason. the figure does not distinguish between local and non-local dislocations either. 15 The number of lntPboundaries decreases significantly at a fast speech rate. while the number of ip-boundaries increases. At a normal speech rate 65,5% of the boundaries directly after the CLLD constituent are realized on the lntP-level. while 33,5% are realized on the ip-level Therefore almost all left-dislocations, irrespective of their being branching or not. are followed by a dear prosodic break (i.e. 99%
Percentage values of branching and non-branching topics at a normal speech rate (data of muhiple CLLD excluded): Branching (IntP: 63%; ~: 37%); Non-Branching (IntP: 72%; ip: 28%).
14-
15- At a normal speech rate. local non-branching dislocations ha~ 67% IntP-boundaries
and 33% ip-boundaries. Non-local non-branching dislocations have 78% IntP- boundaries and 22% ip-boundaries. At a fast speech rate. the number of ip-boundaries of non-local nonbranching dislocations sums up to 100%.
166 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
(65,5% + 33,5%)). At a fast speech rate only 10% of the breaks are IntP-boundaries, while 69% of them are ip-boundaries. In contrast to a normal speech rate, the number of no or unclear boundaries rise. They come to about one fifth (21 %) of the cases. Nevertheless, nearly 80% of the left-dislocations at a fast speech rate are marked by a clear right boundary. Non-local non-branching leftdislocations (cf. hypothesis 3) are always (100%) followed by ip-boundaries (at a fast speech rate). CLLD boundaries
'==r====1====r=======1===
90% 1-f---------l 100% 80% f------1 70% f------1 60% f-----50% f-----40% f-----30% 1---20% 1----10% f-----0% f - - - -
Figure 10. Percentage values of boundary types immediately following branching and non-branching CLLD constituents (local and non-local)
Figure 2 and Figure 3, above, also illustrate the obligatory right boundary. Although Figure 10 does not include embedded CLLD, the obligatoriness of the right boundary is valid for any left-dislocation. The two figures show that there is a clear boundary after both dislocations. An ip- and IntP-boundary after De Bordeus 'from Bordeaux' and an IntP-boundary after l'ampolla de vi rosat 'the bottle of red wine'. Figure 11 indicates that right dislocations are immediately preceded by intonational boundaries at a normal and fast speech rate (left and right bar respectively).16
The criterion for the CLRD-preceding boundary must be briefly explained. The boundary is located directly after the constituent bearing sentence accent and thus marks the end of the main clause. The boundary is main clause-final (but recall that the boundary cannot be located at the end of TP, since CLRD in Catalan is clause-internal (ct: Chapter 4)). The main clause-final boundary is categorized as an ip-boundary, when the sentence without the 16.
Chapter 5. Prosodic phrasing of Catalan clitic left- and clitic right -dislocation 167
The figure indicates the value as a percentage. While the percentage of IntP- and ip-boundaries is more or less balanced at a normal speech rate (53% vs. 47% respectively), the number of ip-boundaries increases significantly at a fast speech rate (88%). There are even some unclear instances (8%). The figure combines, as before, branching and non-branching CLRD constituents. However, there is a difference between branching and non-branching constituents. While the boundaries preceding branching right-dislocations are mostly realized on the IntP-level (64%), the boundaries preceding non-branching right-dislocations are mostly ipboundaries (67%). Boundaries perceding CLRD 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%
, - - -- , - - - - - - - - - -, - - - - - - - - -r - - - - - - - - - , .- - - -
r-------1 f-----1 f-------1 f-------1
r------r------r------r------r------r-----
normal speech rate
fast speech rate
Figure 11. Percentage values of boundary types immediately preceding branching and non-branching CLRD constituents
Figure 12 and Figure 13 present the intonation contour of corresponding examples. Both figures show that the contour of the main clause ends in a low boundary tone. While there is only an ip-boundary tone in Figure 12, there is an IntP-boundary tone preceding the branching dislocation in Figure 13.
RD-constituent would be perceived as having an abbreviated or chopped-otf ending. It is categorized as an IntP-boundary when the sentence without RD is perceived as not being chopped otf (i.e. having a 'normal' end). It is also categorized as an IntP-boundary when there is a pause intervening between the main clause and the right -dislocation.
168
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
'N'
e3oo +-~+-~~--~~1-~-T i:)-
s::s 250 +-+---+---------+1----
~200 t-r-t-----~~~~~~
J::
<;I
150 +-t---ho
S lOO t-t:~~~r.J~~~~j}--~~;;-.~~~~~~~:t--j ~ 50 td~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ &:
vam comprar
a Barcelona
elllibre
v
pp
CLRD
Figure 12. Catalan (main clause)( CLRD) phrasing- Waveform, spectrogram, and FO trace for the sentence El vam comprar a Barcelona, elllibre We bought the book in Barcelona' of speaker 12 (sentence bcn_pers12_14e): CLRD with one prosodic word, Bl3
3.5
als ve'ins catalans de l'altre cos tat de l'Ebre DO
CLRD
Figure 13. Catalan (main clause)( CLRD) phrasing- Waveform, spectrogram, and FO trace for the sentence Els volen robar laigua, als vei"ns catalans de laltre cos tat de l'Ebre They want to steal the water from the neighbors of the other side of the river Ebre' of speaker 1 (sentence bcn_persl_l6a): CLRD with five prosodic words, Bl4
Before proceeding with the conclusions of the results, one intonational aspect concerning right-dislocations must be mentioned The flat and unaccented contour of the right-dislocated constituent can be lowe~; higher, or it can be as high
Chapter 5. Prosodic phrasing of Catalan clitic left- and clitic right -dislocation 169
as the low boundary tone of the preceding main clause. The longer the dislocation (i.e. the more prosodic words), the more probable a high realization of the contour is. The pattern can also be seen in Figure 12 and Figure 13. While the contour of the short CLRD constituent in the former figure is a bit lower than the low ipboundary tone L-, the contour of the long CLRD constituent in the latter figure is higher than the low IntP-boundary tone L-L% after l'aigua 'the water'. Figure 14 illustrates these findings. As shown in Figure 14, in short right-dislocations the number of contours that are realized higher than the preceding low boundary tone adds up to only 11%, while the number increases to 61% in very long dislocations. Exactly the reverse pattern occurs with respect to a lower realization. While in short dislocations the number oflow realized contours adds up to 61%, the number consistently decreases to only 11% in very long dislocations.
70 60
,.....
..
50
~
40
1:! cu
30
~ cu IJ...
Height of CLRD contour
-----
1/Jr"""
20
-··
~
-··-
/ ..¥
-+-higher _._lower ··-&···equal
1 pros. word 11
61 28
/
~--.
10
0
/
2 pros. words 17 44 39
~
•
-.. ~
4 & 5 pros. words 61 11
28
Figure 14. Correlation between the length of CLRD constituents (in prosodic words, w) and the height of their pitch contour with respect to the low boundary tone of the preceding main clause
5.4.2
Summary
To summarize the results, I illustrate the typical contour and phrasing pattern of Catalan sentences with dislocations, (Figure 15 and Table 2). The example in Figure 15 is pieced together from a non-local CLLD constituent, the matrix-clause, an embedded CLLD constituent (i.e. local CLLD), the embedded/subordinated clause, and finally a CLRD constituent (from the left to the right). These syntactic entities are pictured by normal and fat straight lines. The waveforms above the straight lines reflect the corresponding intonation contours.
170
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
/VJ~ f (CL)LD
If matrix clause
l
Contour and breaks
Syntactic entities
CLLD embedded clause CLRD
Figure 15. General contour and structure pattern in Catalan dislocation structures
Each single prosodic phrase displays a clear down step. There is typically a continuation rise after each CLLD. These abrupt rises also display a downstep: the second abrupt rise is downstepped with respect to the previous abrupt rise. The second prosodic phrase in this figure is created by the matrix clause and the embedded CLLD constituent, which are not separated by a prosodic break. The third (i.e. the penultimate) prosodic phrase comprises the subordinated clause, typically ending with a Low boundary tone. The ultimate prosodic phrase comprises the CLRD, which is unaccented and has a flat contour. Table 2 illustrates the prosodic grouping of dislocation structures in greater detail. The first five examples show the grouping for structures including clitic leftdislocations. The three last examples show the grouping for structures including CLRD. Table 2. Dislocation structures and their prosodic phrasing
1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
local CLLD non-local CLLD ( CLLD ) embedded CLLD (Matrix (CL)LD out ofCLLD ( LD ) (Matrix iterative CLLD ( CLLD )
6. 7.
local CLRD iterative CLRD
CLLD & CLRD17 8. (CL)LD out ofCLRD
( CLLD ) ( Matrix) CLLD ) CLLD) ( CLLD )
( ( ( ( (
main clause emb. clause emb. clause emb. clause main clause
) ) ) ) )
( main clause ) ( CLRD ) ( main clause ) ( CLRD ) ( CLRD ) ( LD )
( Matrix
emh clause ) (CLRD)
Whereas left-dislocations are almost always marked by a clear boundary to their right (99% at a normal speech rate, cf. Figure 10), they show a strong
Further structures with CLLD and CLRD are considered in the experiment, but not mentioned in the table. Their grouping is shortly given here:
17.
(a) CLLD and CLRD: (CLLD) (Matrix+ emh clause) (b) LD out ofCLRD: (Matrix LD) ( emb. clause)
(CLRD) (CLRD)
Chapter 5. Prosodic phrasing of Catalan clitic left- and clitic rlght -dislocation 171
tendency not to be preceded by a left boundary in embedded contexts (84% at a normal speech rate, cf. Figure 4). This is shown in Examples 1 to 5. All dislocations have a right boundary: the embedded dislocations in Example 3 and 4 are not preceded by a boundary and phrase with the matrix clause. In case of multiple dislocations, as in Example 5, the preceding boundary of the inner CLLD constituent results from the right boundary of the first dislocation. In respect to a fast speech rate, the number of left boundaries of embedded CLLD increases from 16% (at a normal speech rate) to 34% (Figure 4). This is not pictured in Table 2. The criterion of branching does not play an important role. Consequently; Table 2 does not distinguish between branching and nonbranching left-dislocations. They show the same pattern: boundary tones are weakened at a fast speech rate yet are still apparent. Branching and non-branching right-dislocations differ. Boundaries of non-branching constituents are mostly realized as ip-boundaries. Right-dislocations are almost always separated from the preceding main clause by a boundary tone (100% at a normal speech rate), cf. Example 6 and 7. A fast speech rate has the effect that the boundary tones are 'weakened'. The number of ip-boundarytones increases at a fast speech rate (Figure 10 and Figure 11). Nevertheless, both types of dislocations are still separated from the main clause. Finally; it is possible that left-dislocations and right-dislocations appear in the same clause. Example 8 in Table 2 shows the grouping of a non-localleft-dislocation, which is extracted from an embedded right-dislocation (for an example cf. (22) in Section 5.5.2). This configuration combines the typical patterns for left- and right dislocations: the left-dislocation is separated from the following clause by a prosodic break. while the right dislocation is preceded by a prosodic break. 5·4·3
Discussion
All three hypotheses are fulfilled. As for hypothesis 1, it is shown that embedded CLLD (branching and non -branching) phrases with preceding material of the matrix clause at a normal speech rate and that branching topics phrase with preceding material at a fast speech rate. Hence, phrasing (6b), repeated here for convenience sake, is typical for Catalan. Frascarelli's (2000) Topic Prosodic Domain cannot be maintained for Catalan embedded left-dislocations. (6)
b.( ... V0 Topic) TP
Nevertheless, there are some cases where embedded dislocations are preceded by a clear boundary. The Topic Prosodic Domain could be a possible explanation for these. However, it is claimed in Chapter 3 that ALIGN-CP.L is responsible for the separation of the embedded CP from the matrix clause by a prosodic break. Thus, nothing hinges on a left boundary induced by the topic prosodic domain. The preceding boundary can also be explained by the independently motivated constraint
172
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
ALIGN-CP,L. By comparing the object clauses without embedded left-dislocations (Chapter 3) and object clauses with left-dislocations, one clear difference appears. While the clauses without left-dislocations are precededbya boundary in 80% of the cases, the clauses with embedded CLLD show exactly the reverse. 84% of them are not preceded by a clear boundary. I take this as a sign that dislocations do not only have a right boundary, but also impede the occurrence of a preceding boundary. This behavior is definitely not predicted by the Topic Prosodic Domain. As for hypothesis 2, it is fulfilled with respect to the notion of prosodic phrase. Nearly 80% of the dislocations are followed by a clear prosodic break at a fast speech rate (cf. Figure 10). Despite this clear result, the remarkable difference between a normal and fast speech rate has to be considered. I interpret the strong increase of ip-boundaries to be a weakening of the prosodic phrase break and not an indication of restructuring. This interpretation is based on the findings of Chapter 3: there is a strong variation concerning the nature of the prosodic break. Subjects are just as frequently separated by IntP-boundary tones as by ip-boundary tones (cf. Section 3.3.2). No clear criteria can be established for predicting when an ipor an IntP-boundary appears. For this reason, it is more appropriate to speak of a weakening of the prosodic ph1·ase to capture the downgrading of the boundaries. With respect to the different nature of the boundaries, Astruc (2005: 154) has similar findings for sentential adverbs. No clear criteria can be mentioned for the appearance of one type ofboundary or the other which further supports the view taken here. Frascarelli (2000) shows that Italian topics restructure with respect to the intonational phrase level. In her account, there is also still a boundary of the immediate lower level (i.e. the phonological phrase in her terms), cf. (3). With respect to IntP and ip, Catalan shows the same behavior as Italian. Nevertheless, there is a fundamental difference between the grounding of the prosodic levels. Frascarelli (2000) assumes N&V's (1986/2007) relation-based mapping (cf. Chapter 2) for phonological phrases. Thus, they are directly derived from the syntactic structure and are clearly distinguished from IntP-boundaries. As for Catalan, although I also introduce boundaries by syntactically grounded constraints (edge-based mapping), the constraints do not differ between IntP and ip (even though I assume both levels). This is a consequence of the variation of the nature of the boundaries. 18
Even when it is argued that the increase of ip-boundaries at a fast speech rate is due to a restructuring process, Frascarelli's (2000) formalization cannot be maintained for Catalan. Both non-branching as well as branching dislocations are followed by ip-boundaries. This means that a restructuring process is not limited to non-branching topics as predicted by Frascarelli's Topic Restructuring.
18.
Chapter 5. Prosodic phrasing of Catalan clitic left- and clitic rlght -dislocation 173
Although I refer mainly to the term prosodic phrase, the weakening of the prosodic phrase boundary constitutes an argument for assuming both prosodic levels in Catalan: ip and IntP. As for hypothesis 3, the data of non-local non-branching dislocations indicate that they do not restructure with following matrix material (cf. Figure 10 and discussion of hypothesis 2). The obligatory right prosodic boundary of left-dislocations distinguishes them from preverbal subjects. Preverbal dislocated subjects are supposed to never phrase with following material. Thus, hypothesis 3 is also validated. It is noteworthy, however, that the absolute number of instances of non-branching, non-local dislocations is very small in the experiment, totaling only 18 sentences (cf. appendix sentences 9a and 9e). In order to have more data comparing left-dislocations and preverbal subjects, the CLLD vs. S experiment (experiment 4) was conducted (Chapter 6). To anticipate one result of this experiment: it is shown that preverbal nondislocated subjects phrase significantly more often with following material than dislocated subjects. Right -dislocations have not yet been discussed. The data on right-dislocations show that they are nearly always separated from the preceding main clause. In contrast to left-dislocations, branching plays a role in the strength of the prosodic phrase boundary. Branching right-dislocations generally have a stronger boundary than non-branching CLRD: there are more IntP-boundaries with branching right-dislocations than with non-branching right-dislocations. The latter are mostly preceded by ip-boundaries (67%). Furthermore, research on right-dislocations with different length leads to a new indicator which is useful in determining which prosodic level the phrase should be located on. In the literature, a flat contour of right-dislocations is interpreted as signaling a different prosodic phrase (e.g.Zubizarreta 1998: 154ff., Astruc 2005: ch.3). I adopt thisviewhere. However, there is more to say with respect to the flat contour, due to two interesting correlations. The different height of the contour with respect to the preceding low boundary tone (cf. Figure 14) correlates with the length of the dislocation. In addition, the length of the dislocation correlates with the boundary types. As a consequence, I interpret a high flat contour as signaling an intonational phrase. A lower or equally high flat contour signals an intermediate phrase (that can be promoted to an IntP if it is preceded by a pause). I conclude that the reason for this high contour is a result of its length. The speaker requires more air to utter the constituent and must therefore begin speaking at a higher pitch in order to do so (This looks like an instance of preplanning). This, however, is a question for further research and cannot be addressed here. These findings are the main contribution of this work concerning rightdislocations. Further characteristics mentioned in Astruc (2005) are taken for
174 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
granted: right-dislocations have a very low pitch without any perceivable prominence, i.e. they are unaccented.
A theoretical approach to Catalan dislocation structures
5·5
In this section the theoretical account for the intonational phrasing of Catalan CLLD and CLRD structures is presented 1his analysis is based on the stochastic OT approach proposed in Section 3.4. Two further constraints are added: ALIGN-ToP,R and ALIGN-vP,R. The first one is a constraint which accounts for the obligatory right boundary of dislocations (i.e. topics). The second one is a constraint that accounts for the obligatory boundary preceding the right-dislocation. It is based on the clauseinternal analysis of CLRD (cf. Chapter 4). The goal of this section is to account for the groupings indicated in Table 2. 19 However, not all eight configurations are presented in detail. I mainly concentrate on two configurations: embedded left-dislocation and LD out of CLRD. This section is structured in the following way. In Section 5.5.1 the two new constraints are motivated. In Section 5.5.2 the constraint hierarchy is presented. The hierarchy is illustrated by OT tables for several dislocation structures. 5·5·1
Two further constraints: ALIGN-ToP,R and ALIGN-vP,R
The first new constraint is defined in (15). It is motivated by the results of the intonational experiment. It accounts for the obligatory right boundary of dislocations. In addition, it says nothing about a boundary to the left and thus enables a grouping with preceding material: grouping (6a) and (6b) correspond to (15), but (6c) violates the constraint. (15) (6)
(16)
ALIGN-TOP,R Align the right edge of a topic constituent to the right edge of a prosodic phrase.
a.... Y 0 (Topic) YP b.( ... VO Topic) YP c.... Y 0 (Topic YP) Possible phrasing of a non-dislocated preverbal subject (non-branching): (S Y) ...
The already existing constraint ALIGN-XP,R cannot account for these patterns. The experiment shows that preverbal non-dislocated subjects are able to phrase with
Certain constructions of Table 2 show variation. Stochastic OT is developed for accounting for variation and frequency effects. However, in order to avoid a complex analysis, I do not account for possible variation among single constructions, but merely present OT tables for the most relevant structures of Table 2. 19.
Chapter 5. Prosodic phrasing of Catalan clitic left- and clitic rlght -dislocation 175
following material, as in (16), while preverbal non-branching dislocations never do, as in (6a,b). Thus, the right boundary derived by ALIGN-XP,R is not as important as the right boundary derived by ALIGN-ToP,R, because (16) is possible, but not (6c). Due to the fact that ALIGN-ToP,R does not introduce a prosodic boundary on the left of a CLRD constituent, the question arises of how the boundary between the focus domain (i.e. the main clause) and the right-dislocation is accounted for. (17)
Boundary separating the main clause from a CLRD constituent: ... main clause) (CLRD)
I postulate that the boundary must emerge from the focus domain. This idea is not new. Vallduvi (1993: 119, 2002: 1253) and Frascarelli (2000: 34), for example, say that the linguistic material which is not part of the focus domain is not part of the core clause. Based on this, Frascarelli (2000: 62) establishes a clear relation between the focus domain (consisting of the syntactic FP node) 20 and prosodic phrasing: a broad focus sentence is exhaustively contained in an IntP (Broad Focus Prosodic Domain generalization). My Catalan data generally support this view, because a left-dislocated topic has a right boundary and a right-dislocated element is also prosodically separated from the preceding focus domain in simple clauses, as in (17). However, Frascarelli's (2000: 62) Broad Focus Prosodic Domain, i.e. the 'phonological translation' of the syntactic FP node into an intonational phrase, cannot be applied to Catalan: the CLRD element is located within the TP-domain (Chapter4): [ [CLRD IntTopP] 1P] (cf. (19a,b)). In the approach assumed here, the boundary between the focus domain and the right-dislocation is derived otherwise: I propose that vP is right-aligned with a right boundary of a prosodic phrase. This proposal is based on work by Ishihara (2004, 2007a) and Kratzer & Selkirk (2007). The authors assume that phases (Chomsky 2000: 106, 2001, and subsequent work) present the syntactic entity for deriving prosodic categories. Whereas Kratzer & Selkirk (2007) take only the very left position of the Spell-Out domain as the domain relevant for prosodic constituency (their spellout edge), Ishihara (2004, 2007a) takes the whole Spell-Out domain as a prosodic constituent. I propose that- in accordance with the property of Catalan being a right-alignment language (Prieto 2005) - only the right edge of the vP phase is relevant for the "syntactic grounding of prosodic categories" (Selkirk 2005: 31). The following OT-constraint summarizes this idea, (18). (18)
ALIGN-vP,R Align the right edge of vP to the right edge of a prosodic phrase.
20. FP stands for Focus phrase. It constitutes the XP immediately above TP. Furthermore, instead ofTP Frascarelli (2000) originally uses the notion "AgrSP (i.e. the highest node derived from the splitting of the original IP node)" (Frascarelli 2000: 86).
176
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
Due to the movement of vP into the internal FocP, as in (19a), the right boundary of the prosodic phrase precedes the right-dislocated element, as in (19c) -even though the element is part of the TP-domain, cf. (19b). (19)
a.
TP
~
NegP
~
Neg
FocP
~
vP;
IntTopP
~
CLRD b. c. (
vP] CLRD] )p (CLRD)p
i'P-1
TP]
Syntactic Structure
Prosodic Phrasing
Let us assume that in a phase-approach the right edge of the prosodic boundary originates simultaneously with the vP phase. At this moment, the vP is still in its base position, i.e. in the complement position of CLRD. When internal FocP is merged in a CLRD configuration, vP internally merges (i.e. 'moves') into the specifier of FocP. The copy of vP in [Spec,FocP] includes the prosodic boundary, which was formed with the vP phase before. In this position the prosodic boundary induces the prosodic separation of the right-dislocated constituent. The lower copy of vP (the one in the base position) will be deleted at the next higher phase (CP). The higher phase contains two occurrences of vP (the one in FocP and the lower one). The PF operation that deletes non-initial copies in a chain (Chomsky 1995: 252f., Hornstein, Nunes & Grohmann 2005: 242f., Legate 2003: 512) causes the lower vP copy to be deleted. The idea that prosodic properties assigned in a phase can move with constituents has been already discussed in Legate (2003). Legate (2003) renders Bresnan's (1972) theory into a phase account that the nuclear stress rule (NSR) applies cyclically. Legate (2003: 512) shows that an object, which receives primary stress in its base position, takes along stress when moving away. In an OT-approach, which I execute here, ALIGN-vP,R may simply apply to the moved vP, entailing the right boundary of the core clause, which separates the CLRD constituent. Based on the results of the experiment, ALIGN -vP,R has to be ranked high. The boundary is obligatory. 5.5.2
The constraint hierarchy
In order to account for the data, the constraint hierarchy (20) is proposed. The hierarchy shows that the two new constraints are the highest ranked constraints.
Chapter 5. Prosodic phrasing of Catalan clitic left- and clitic right -dislocation 177
Although it is indicated that ALIGN-ToP,R is ranked higher than ALIGN-vP,R, I remain agnostic to the exact ranking of these two constraints. The two constraints do not interact at all and therefore it is also possible that ALIGN-vP is ranked higher than or as high as ALIGN-ToP,R. It is merely important that they are ranked higher than the four further constraints. (20)
Constraint hierarchy for Catalan (including dislocations) aMBE
e AL-TOP
.
~j AL-VP
)
[ ~
b AL-CP,L
\
~ I
)C M-N-P ~ d AL - XP ,R
l •
Hierarchy (20) is based on the ranking proposed for Catalan clauses with sentential objects (MAx-BIN-END >> ALIGN-CP,L » MIN-N-PHRASES >> ALIGN-XP,R; cf. Chapter 3). There is one slight difference. While the constraint demanding that a sentence final prosodic phrase consist of maximally two phonological words (MAx-BIN-END) does not overlap the two lower ranked constraints in the grammar proposed in Section 3.4, it does so in the present case. The grey box, i.e. the standard deviation (cf. Chapter 3, Section 3.4.3.3), overlaps with ALIGN-CP,L and MIN-N-PHRASES. Thus, it is possible that the selection point of MAx-BIN-END is sometimes located after the selection points of ALIGN-CP,L and MIN-N-PHRASES. This is necessary to account for the complex structures where a left-dislocation is extracted from a local CLLD, cf. (10), or where a left-dislocation is extracted from an embedded CLRD constituent. Otherwise, MAx-BIN-END is typically ranked higher. In what follows, it is shown how the hierarchy accounts for different dislocation structures. I concentrate on two complex structures (LD out of CLLD and LD out of CLRD; cf. Example 4 and 8 of Table 2) and on two simple structures (local CLLD and CLRD; cf. Example 1 and 6 of Table 2). I begin with an analysis of the two left-dislocation structures. Embedded left-dislocations constitute the crucial data for ALIGN-ToP,R. For this reason, the more complex CLLD construction is considered first Example (10) is repeated here for convenience sake. As indicated in Table 2 the prosodic grouping of (10) is (21). Table 3 gives the corresponding OT table. (10)
(CL)LD extracted from embedded CLLD
(adapted from L6pez 2003: 196)
[ v [q LD s CLLD la Maria diu que [~ 1es histories t(a)] [a Del seu avi] of.the her grandfather the Maria say that the story.PL
s
v
Q
]]
la Joana les coneix totes t(/3) the Joana CL.Acc know all.PL 'Maria says that Joana knows all of her grandfather's stories:
178 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan (21)
Prosodic grouping of(lO) according to Table 2 (LD)(SVqCLLD)(SVQ)
Table 3. Catalan (LD)(Matrix CLLD)(embedded) phrasing
e
c
[LDS V [q CLLDS VQ]]
ALIGNToP,R
MIN-NPHRASES
(LD S V q CLLD S V Q)
*!*
a
b
d
MAX-BIN- ALIGN-CP,L ALIGN-XP,R END
*
*
*
***
***
*
*
**
(LD)(S)(V q CLLD) (S VQ)
****!
*
*
*
(LD)(S)(V q CLLD) (S)(VQ)
****!*
*
(LD)(S V q CLLD) (S)(VQ)
****!
*
(LD)(S V)(q CLLD) (S VQ)
****!
~
(LD)(S V q CLLD) (S VQ)
*
* **
The winning candidate in Table 3 is (21). It does not violate the highest ranked constraint ALIGN-ToP,R. Due to the possibility of different selection points in stochastic OT, it is possible that MIN-N-PHRASES turns out to be the second highest constraint. The decision for the optimal candidate is made by MIN-N-PHRASES. ( 21) violates the cumulative constraint the least. Every other candidate (fatally) violates MIN-N-PHRASES (at least) four times- besides the first candidate, which already violates ALIGN-ToP,R. This shows that the topic constraint is necessary. It guarantees that topics have a right boundary and correctly disfavors the first candidate.21 The table further shows that MAx-BIN-END must occasionally be ranked higher than MAx-BIN-END and ALIGN-CP,L in order to account for the right candidate.22
2.1. If ALIGN-XP,R were responsible for the right boundary of dislocations (as already disproved), it would have to be the highest ranked constraint in order to delete the effect of MIN-N-PHRASES. But if this were the case, the fourth candidate having a boundary after the dislocations and after each subject would incorrectly win. 2.2.. Stochastic OT implies that different rankings among the overlapping constraints are also possible - reflecting frequency effects among the candidates (cf Chapter 3). Variation also occurs among complex CLLD structures. For example, if ALIGN -CP,L were ranked higher than MAx-BIN-END and MIN-N-PHRASES (Le. ALIGN-TOP,R » ALIGN-CP,L »MAx-BIN-END» MIN-N-PHRASES » ALIGN -XP,R), the last candidate of Table 3 would win. This constraint order reflects the cases of Figure 1 that have a boundary preceding the embedded left-dislocation.
Chapter 5. Prosodic phrasing of Catalan clltic left- and clltic right -dislocation 179
Before proceeding with an example for the second new constraint ALIGN -v P,R, I want to give an example of a less complex CLLD sentence: a local non-branching left-dislocation as in (7), repeated here for convenience sake. (7)
Non -branching topics pp CLLD v Les taules1, les1 vaig portar al pis. The tables CL.ACC PAST.lSG bring to-the flat 'I brought the tables to the flat:
Table4. Catalan (CLLD)(V PP) phrasing e
CLLDVPP (CLLDVPP)
c
d
AUGN-TOP,R MAX-BIN-END MIN-N-PHRASES AUGN-XP,R *!
..- (CLLD)(V PP)
*
*
*
**
(CLLD)(V)(PP) (CLLD V)(PP)
a
***! *!
**
*
The second candidate is the winning candidate in Table 4. It does not violate the highest ranked constraint ALIGN-ToP,R nor does it violate MAx-BIN-END, yet violates MIN-N-PHRASES only twice. Although the third candidate does not violate the two highest constraints either, it violates MIN-N -PHRASES more often than the winning candidateP The constraint ALIGN-vP,R is only necessary in constructions with rightdislocations, otherwise its effect is not detectable. This constraint plays an important role in very complex CLRD structures. In (22) a constituent is extracted from a right-dislocation and hosts a position in the non-local C-domain. This construction is similar to the one in (10), besides the difference that the first step of the clitic dislocated element does not go to the local C-dornain but to the CLRD position. The similarity consists of the movement of a part of the dislocation into the non-local position. The grouping of this sentence is given in (23), while the corresponding OT table is given in Table 5.
Instead of illustrating and discussing variation in complex CLLD structures, however, I concentrate on illustrating the groupings indicated in Table 2. 23· Table 4 further indicates that AuGN-ToP,R is not absolutely necessary here. Candidate 2 also wins without the topic constraint. One can conclude from Table 3 that AuGN-ToP,R becomes important in more complex structures. Furthermore, candidate 2 also always wins in any possible order of the overlapping constraints.
18o Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
(22)
(CL)LD extracted from embedded CLRD LD S V [q v s De Bordeus, la Maria diu que la va comprar el Joel of Bordeaux the M. say that CL.ACC PST buy.INP the J. ]] CLRD l'ampolla de vi rosat. the.bottle of wine rose
'Mary said that Joel bought the bottle of red wine from BordeaUX: (23)
Prosodic grouping of (22) according to Table 224 (LD)(SVqVS) (CLRD)
Table 5. Catalan (LD)(Matrix + emb. clause)(CLRD) phrasing.2s e
f
[LD S V [q VS CLRD]]
AuGNToP,R
ALIGNvP,R
(LD S V q VS CLRD)
*
*
..-(LD)(SV q VS) (CLRD)
c
a
MIN-NMAXPHRASES BIN-END
b
d
AUGNCP,L
AUGNXP,R
*
*
*
***
***
*
*
*
(LD)(S V)(q V S)(CLRD)
****!
*
(LD)(S)(V)(q V S) (CLRD)
****!*
**
(LD)(S V q V S CLRD)
*
**
*
*
**
The winning candidate in Table 5 is (23). It does not violate ALIGN-ToP,R nor ALIGN-vP,R. The decision is made by MIN-N-PHRASBS, which is ranked higher than MAx-BIN-END and ALIGN-CP,L. The winning candidate has the fewest violations of MIN-N-PHRASES among the candidates that are not eliminated by the two highest ranked constraints. There are two candidates that violate the higher-ranked constraints: the first and the last candidate. The crucial candidate for motivating ALIGN-vP,R is the last one: (LD)(SVqSV CLRD). It does not violate ALIGN-ToP,R because there is a right boundary after the left-dislocation. In addition, it violates MIN-N-PHRASBS only twice, because it does not have a boundary preceding the right-dislocation. The winning candidate violates MIN-N-PHRASBS three times because it has a boundary preceding the
24·
The grouping of (22) is given in the footnote of Table 2.
25. The table shows that AuoN-ToP,R and AuoN-VP,R are equally ranked As previously said with respect to the hierarchy in (20), the exact ranking of these two constraints is of no importance.
Chapter 5. Prosodic phrasing of Catalan clltic left- and clltic right -dislocation
right-dislocation. However, the high ranked constraint ALIGN-vP,R guarantees the boundary at the end of the main clause. And the candidate (LD)(SVqSV CLRD) fatally violates this constraint. If it were not there, the last candidate would wrongly win. The ranking in Table 5 deviates from the normal order of the constraints in (20). As in Table 3, the constraint MIN-N-PHRASES is ranked relatively high. This is possible because its standard deviation overlaps with constraints that normally have a higher ranking value.26 Finally, the OT table for a simple CLRD structure is given. As indicated in Table 2 sentence (13b), repeated here, has the grouping (V PP)(CLRD). How the constraint ranking accounts for this grouping is presented in Table 6. (13)
b.
non-branching CLRD
v
pp
CLRD vaig portar al pis, les taules1• CL.ACC PAST.lSG bring to-the flat the tables 'I brought the tables to the flat: Les1
Table 6. Catalan 01 PP)(CLRD) phrasing e
VPPCLRD (VPPCLRD)
f
a
c
AuGN-TOP,R AI.IGN-VP,R MAX-BIN-END MIN-N-PHRASES AUGN-XP,R *
*
*
..- (V PP)(CLRD)
**
(V)(PP)(CLRD)
***!
(V)(PP CLRD)
d
*
*
**
*
*
The second candidate of Table 6 wins. It does not violate the highest ranked constraints ALIGN-ToP,R and ALIGN-vP,R nor does it violate MAx-BIN-END. It violates MIN-N-PHRASES twice, but less often than the third candidate. Although the third candidate does not violate the three highest constraints either, it violates MIN-N-PHRASES three times. Similar to the pattern of ALIGN-ToP,R in Table 4, the new constraint ALIGN-vP,R is not absolutely necessary in Table 6. The two new constraints introduced are only necessary in more complex structures.
26. Exactly as in Table 3, variation in the grouping of the complex structure is possible. For example, if AuGN-CP,L were ranked higher than MAX-BIN-END and MIN-N-PHRAsEs (Le. AuGN-ToP,R >> AuGN-vP,R >> AuGN-CP,L >> MAx-BIN-END>> MIN-N-PHRASES >> AuGN-XP,R) the third candidate, namely (LD)(SV)(qVS)(CLRD), would win.
181
182
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
5.6 Conclusion This chapter shows that the two new constraints ALIGN-ToP,R and ALIGN-vP.R combined with the modification of Prieto's (2005) approach to simple SVO structures can account for the prosodic patterns of dislocations in Catalan. Empirical data indicate that dislocations are not minimally and exhaustively contained in a prosodic phrase. Dislocations do not have an obligatory left boundary, while they have an obligatory right boundary. This pattern is characterized in the high ranked constraint ALIGN-ToP,R. This constraint guarantees the right boundary. The low ranked constraint ALIGN-XP,R cannot perform this task. The separation of right-dislocations from the preceding clause is guaranteed by the second new constraint ALIGN-vP,R. Both constraints represent the fundamental differences to the approach ofFrascarelli (2000). First, ALIGN-ToP,R substitutes the Topic Prosodic Domain (Frascarelli 2000: 63) and can account for the embedded CLLD pattern. In further research it would be interesting to see if embedded dislocations in Italian phrase similarly to embedded dislocations in Catalan or if they 'obey' the prediction of the Topic Prosodic Domain. Second, ALIGN-vP.R is necessary in my approach, while it is not in Frascarelli (2000). In Frascarelli (cf. Frascarelli 2000: ch.4) the right-dislocation (i.e. her right-hand topic) is extra sentential and not dominated by TP (or by F(ocus)P(hrase)). As broadly shown in Chapter 4, Catalan right-dislocations are sentence internal and dominated by TP.
CHAPTER
6
Left-dislocations and preverbal subjects
Chapter 6 is dedicated to the prosodic difference between CLLD and preverbal subjects. It is shown that non-dislocated preverbal subjects are less often separated by a prosodic phrase from following material than left-dislocations. The finding supports the constraint ALIGN- ToP (Chapter 5), which calls for an obligatory right boundary after dislocations in the grammar independent of branchingness and constituent length. Section 6.1 introduces the hypotheses. Section 6.2 describes the specific experiment design (please recall the general outline of the experiment is described in Chapter 3, Section 3.2). The results of the experiment are given in Section 6.3. A discussion of the results follows in Section 6.4. The discussion begins with the proof of the hypotheses. A brief comparison follows, with the findings of the study on subjects of Frascarelli & Treed (2006) presented. I conclude that Catalan preverbal subjects differ from Italian preverbal subjects. Following this, a question is posed: can the CLLD vs. S experiment count as a crucial test for the existence of non-dislocated preverbal subjects? I conclude that the experiment clearly supports the hypothesis and that non-left-dislocated preverbal subjects do, indeed, exist. The experiment cannot, however, constitute a test for the status of a preverbal subject, because the phrasing pattern is not obligatory. In closing, it is shown that the theoretical approach introduced in Chapter 3 and 5 can easily account for the results of the experiment without modifications of the established theory.
6.1
The hypotheses
In the present study, the prosodic patterns of both non-dislocated preverbal subjects (Chapter 3) and clitic left-dislocations (Chapter 5) are shown. The two areas are now combined. Based on Chapter 3 and 5 a conclusion can be made that there is a difference between preverbal subjects which are part of the focus domain and left dislocated elements. Non-dislocated non-branching preverbal subjects should have the tendency to phrase with following material if the object is
184 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
long (Chapter 3, cf. also Prieto 2005, D'Imperio et al. 2005). By contrast, dislocated non -branching preverbal subjects should not show this tendency; due to an obligatory right boundary after a left-dislocation (Chapter 5). Consequently; the following hypotheses are set forth: Hypothesis 1: Non-branching preverbal subjects that are part of the focus domain show a clear tendency to phrase with following material, while those subjects not part of the focus domain are delimited from following material by an intonational boundary. Hypothesis 2: Givenness overrides branchingness and constituent length.
Hypothesis 1 summarizes the first paragraph of this section. Hypothesis 2 is a consequence of the tlrst hypothesis. If being in the focus domain is the relevant factor, the status of givenness determines the call for a boundary (cf. ALIGN-ToP,R, Chapter 5). This factor is in fact stronger than the prosodic and syntactic length of the constituents. The hypotheses can be tested by employing exactly these factors. The hypotheses are validated when the number of non-dislocated non-branching preverbal subjects which phrase with following material in long object conditions is significantly higher than the number of dislocated non-branching preverbal subjects which phrase with following material. The idea that givenness plays a crucial role for dislocated subjects stems from the findings in the preceding chapters. As seen in the section on the syntactic arguments for non-dislocated preverbal subjects (Chapter 1), information packaging is one cue to tlguring out the status of the preverbal subject: a thematic subject is dislocated, whereas a rhematic subject is not (L6pez 2009a: 132). Vallduvf (2002: 1253) states that in Catalan thematic elements must appear either as CLLD or CLRD. This information structure based argument receives further support by the statement from Frascarelli & Treed (2006) that the intonation of subjects shows a strict connection with discourse grammar and depends neither on their semantic features, i.e. specifity and definiteness, nor on voice, modality or the verb's argument structure. 1 Already Bolinger (1984: 406) claims that intonation is autonomous from such syntactic aspects and that a theme-rheme distinction might come closer to the basic function of intonation.
Frascarelli & Treed (2006) are more concerned with phonological tones of different kinds of subjects and less with intonational phrasing patterns.
1.
Chapter 6. Left-dislocations and preverbal subjects 185
6.2
The experiment
In this section the specific experiment design of the CLLD vs. S experiment is described (the general outline of the experiment is introduced in Chapter 3 (Section 3.2)). In the experiment a total of360 sentences are used. In the following section I describe the process of creating those sentences and I describe the specific experiment design. In order to test the hypotheses, three binary factors and two different word orders are considered for the target sentences, cf. (1) and (2) respectively. (1)
Three factors for target sentences i. Subject: Branching vs. Non-Branching ii. Subject: Given vs. New iii. Object: Branchingvs. Non-Branching
(2)
Word order for target sentences a. CLLD +SV.. . b. S +CLLDV.. .
Factors (li) and (liii) are necessary in order to determine whether or not branchingness (i.e. length of the constituents) plays a role. Factor (lii) is crucial because the hypotheses depend on the decisive difference between given and non -given subjects. The two different word orders are also of great importance. The word order in (2a), i.e. CLLD+S. is the critical word order for testing the hypotheses. (2a) allows for an ambiguity of the preverbal subject It can either have no left-dislocation (and therefore be part of the focus domain), as in (3), or it can be a left-dislocation (and therefore not be part of the focus domain), as in (4). The focus domain is marked by '[p ... ]p' in (3) and (4). Thus, preverbal subjects are either maximally salient or they are part of the focus domain; their status depends on the context. (3)
Preverbal Subject that is not part of the focus domain
Cotttext (questiott): La teva avia A.gueda ahir ens va donar el numero de telefon de l~sglesia. Ara em vindria de gust trucar al seu germa, el sacerdot. Tu saps que ha fet I' Agueda amb el nllmero? 'Your aunt Agueda gave us the telephone number of the church yesterday. Now I would like to call her brother, the priest. Do you know what Agueda did with the number?'
Target Sentence: [p ]p F1 n:Umeropf Agueda,el1 va posar a l'armari del rebedor. the nwnber the.A. CL.ACC PST pui:.INF to the.cupboard of.the entrancehall ?..gueda put the number on the cupboard of the entrance hall:
186 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
(4)
Preverbal Subject that is part of the focus domain
Context (question): Ahir vaig rebre el nUrn.ero de telefon de lesgl.esia. Ara em vindria de gust trucar al sacerdot, pero no trobo el nUrn.ero. Tu saps que ha passat amb el nUrn.ero? 'I got the telephone number of the church yesterday. Now I would like to call the priest, but I cannot find the number. Do you know what happened to the number?'
Target Sentence: [p ]p E1 m1mero 1, I' Agueda el 1 va posar a l'armari del rebedor. the number the.A. CL.ACC PST put.INF to the.cupboard of.the entrancehall ~gueda put the number on the cupboard of the entrance hall:
All target sentences in the experiment are constructed along the lines indicated in (3) and (4). The ditransitive verbs posar 'put' or deixar 'leave, leave behind' are used. Their accusative object is left-dislocated, while the PP argument remains in the clause.2 Due to the left-dislocated object each target sentence consists of at least one left-dislocation. Only when the subject is not part of the focus domain, as in (3), does the sentence consist of two left-dislocations (i.e. multiple dislocation). Word order (2b ), i.e. S+CLLD, is of importance for comparing different subjects. The unambiguously left-dislocated subjects in (2b) are compared with the subjects in an ambiguous position in (2a). The subject in (2b) must be a real left-dislocation and cannot show any ambiguity, since a focus constituent may never precede a CLLD constituent in Catalan (Villalba 2000: 229, L6pez 2003: 210). According to hypothesis 1 the subject in (2a) should show the same phrasing patterns as the subject in (2b) when the former (i.e. the subject in (2a))
2. Interestingly, the grammatical correctness of a preverbal subject in ditransitive structures differs. While the preverbal realization of the subject is acceptable for verbs like posar 'put' and deixar 'leave, leave behind: it is less acceptable in constructions with verbs like regalar 'give (as a present): as in (i). All sentences must have a preverbal subject. For this reason, the verbs posar 'put' and deixar 'leave, leave behind' were used.
(i) a.
?I;'alfab~,la
the.basil
Melanie la 1 va regalar al seu amic del the M. CLACC PST give.INF to. the her friend of the
d'Espanya. north o£Spain 'Melanie gave the basil to her friend from the north of Spain (as a present): b. I.:altabregal' la1 va regalar Ia Melanie al seu amic del noni d'Espanya. noni
Chapter 6. Left-dislocations and preverbal subjects 187
is contextually triggered to be a left-dislocation. Furthermore, word order (2b) allows also for a comparison between unambiguously left-dislocated subjects and left-dislocated objects. It becomes apparent that the number of right boundaries after the left-dislocated elements is equal. Because of this, one can conclude that there is no difierence - with respect to phrasing - between dislocations with different grammatical functions; a dislocated object phrases exactly as a dislocated subject. Based on (1) and (2) 12 combinations of word order and factors arise. They are given in (5); (where CLLD = OLD). (5)
12 Conditions for the CLLD vs. S experiment l. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.
CLLD+S, with S new, S non-branching, Om non-branching CLLD+S, with S new, S non-branching, Om branching CLLD+S, with S new, S branching, Ow non-branching CLLD+S, with S new, S branching, OLD branching CLLD+S, with S given, S non-branching, OLD non-branching CLLD+S, with S given, S non-branching, OLD branching CLLD+S, with S given, S branching, OLD non-branching CLLD+S, with S given, S branching, Ow branching
9. 10. 11. 12.
S+CLLD, with S given, S non-branching, OLD non-branching S+CLLD, with S given, S non-branching, OLD branching S+CLLD, with S given, S branching, Om non -branching S+CLLD, with S given, S branching, Om branching
For each condition I constructed three different (target) sentences with a corresponding context (along the lines shown in (3) or (4)). This becomes a total of 36 basic sentences (12 conditions x 3 target sentences). I recorded ten speakers, making a total of 360 sentences spoken (10 speakers x 36 basic sentences).
6.3
Results
In this section, the results of the CLLD vs. S experiment are presented. At first the right boundaries of non-branching and branching constituents in general are presented and compared (Figure 1 and Figure 2). Then non-branching and branching subjects are compared (Figure 3). In order to clearly indicate the effect of givenness, Figure 4 presents the phrasing pattern of only non-branching subjects. Figure 1 indicates that new non-branching subjects (column S(new)) are followed less often by a boundary than given constituents (column S(given)
188
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
and LD(given)). The graph can be described by the metaphor of a "belt" that is tightened around the lines exactly where the values for the new non-branching subject are given (column S(new)). This "belt" indicates a reduction in the number of IntP- and ip-boundaries and an increase in the number of unclear boundaries and no boundaries. There are a total of 52 (25 + 27; i.e. 87%) clear boundaries of given subjects, only 40 (18 + 22; i.e. 67%) new subjects, 55 (23 + 32; i.e. 92%) left-dislocated objects. There are 8 (4 + 4; i.e. 13%) unclear or no boundaries of given subjects, 20 (10 + 10; i.e. 33%) new subjects, and 5 (3 + 2; i.e. 8%) left-dislocated objects. 3
_
Boundaries of non-branching constituents
t
,c
§
=
1 ~
35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0
.___
--..::::::----.............
••
__ ......
....
____... ....
_.
..
----~~. ...
--~:-a
S (given)
S (new)
LD (given)
- ...·ip
25 27
....,.•• unclear
4
··•··no boundary
4
18 22 10 10
23 32 3 2
_._IntP
Figure 1. Boundaries of non-branching constituents immediately preceding the main clause. The four lines represent the boundary types. The constituent types are given in the columns
In comparison, there is no such "belt" around the values of the new subjects in Figure 2. The new subject is also situated in the middle of the figure, yet has the quality of branching. While the given branching constituents (S(given) and LD(given)) display the same or similar total number of prosodic boundaries as their non-branching counterparts, new branching subjects do not display the same pattern as their non-branching counterparts. There is a total of 54 (31 + 23;
3· The total in each column is 60 (= 100%). In the data there are 2 x 30 non-branching given subjects (ct: (5),condit:ion 5 & (6); 2 x 30 non-branching new subjects (cf. (S),condition 1 & (2), and 2 x 30 non-branching object dislocations (cf. (5),condition 9 & 11) immediately preceding the main clause.
Chapter 6. Left-dislocations and preverbal subjects 189
i.e. 92%) clear boundaries and only 5 (1 + 4; i.e. 8%) unclear or no boundaries. 4 This displays the pattern of given constituents. Although the total number of clear boundaries is equal between the given branching and non-branching constituents, the branching constituents have a higher number of IntP-boundaries. The given branching subjects have 29 IntP-boundaries (i.e. 48%), while given non-branching subjects have 25 IntPboundaries (i.e. 42%). Given branching left-dislocated objects have 34 of those boundaries (i.e. 57%), while their non-branching counterparts only have 23 (i.e. 38%). 5 Boundaries of branching constituents
lil
,c
~
40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5
0
---
~
·--··-·-·-··---··----..
..........
--
_...
....
··--·--:~~~~::~::;~~~==-~----·
S(given)
S (new)
LD (given)
-+-lntP
29 23
---...---unclear --•·-no boundary
6
31 23 1 4
34
-•-ip
2
19 6
1
Figure 2. Boundaries of branching constituents immediately preceding the main clause. The four lines represent the boundary types. The constituent types are given In the columns
Figure 3 summarizes the results of non-branching and branching subjects (Figure 1 and Figure 2) in one diagram. The columns and the rows of the table are exchanged in Figure 3 (and also in Figure 4): the lines in the graph now represent the different type of subjects and not as in Figure 1 and Figure 2 the different types of boundaries.
4 There are only 59 and not 60 examples of new branching subjects, as one recorded sentence could not be used due to quality problems. 5· The total In each column adds up to 60 (= 100%). In the data there are 2 x 30 branching given subjects (ct: (5), condition 7 & (8); 30 + 29 branching new subjects (cf. (5), condition 3 & (4), and 2 x 30 branching object dislocations (ct: (5), condition 10 & 12) immediately preceding the main clause.
190
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
Figure 3 indicates that that givenness and branchingness lead to a higher number of clear boundaries, while the properties ofbeing new and non-branching reduce this number. By comparing given subjects, branching (thick dashed line) and non-branching (line with two dots), and new branching subjects (thin dashed line) to the new non-branching subject (solid line), it is evident that the solid line is lower in the IntP- and ip-columns, while it is the highest in the unclear and no boundary columns. New non-branching subjects behave differently than the other three types of subjects. In addition, column IntP further indicates that the number of IntP-boundaries is higher when the subject constituents are branching (indicated by the thin and thick dashed lines). Subject boundaries
t .c
~
35 30 25 20 15 10
....
---~-.....
..-- ~'~
'""" '~-
5
0
-+- S (new;non-br.) -•·· S (given;non-branch.)
·-'*···· S (new;branch.) - -•-- S (given;branch.)
.........- .. -
~:--~~
IntP
18 25 31 29
ip 22 27 23 23
unclear
no boundary
10
10
4
4
1
4
6
2
Figure 3. Boundaries of preverbal subjects - The four lines represent the different conditions for the subjects that immediately precede the main clause. The values are given in absolute numbers. The boundary types are given in the columns
Figure 4 indicates that there is no difference between the given nonbranching subjects immediately preceding the main clause (solid line) and the given non-branching subjects immediately preceding another left-dislocation (thick dashed line): both have by and large the same number oflntP- and ip-boundaries (each 52 altogether). Consequently, they do not phrase with preceding material. The new subject preceding the main clause (thin dashed line) is given for comparison. While the number of prosodic breaks adds up to 40 realizations, the two given subjects come to 52 realizations. The range of 52-54 realizations seems to be normal for dislocated constituents (cf. Figure 2). Thus, the percentage of clear boundaries comes to approximately 88% for left-dislocated elements. Branchingness and constituent length do not play a role.
Chapter 6. Left-dislocations and preverbal subjects
Effect of gi.venness 30 25
t
20
~
15
,c
·---.--
-
_..
--~"
'
10 5
0
-+-
given S + main
• -•-- given S + CLLD ••• ,..... newS +main
~
~a-
--
-- -- ..
IntP
ip
unclear
no boundary
25 27 18
27
4 7 10
4 1 10
25
22
Figure 4. Effect of Givenness on non-branching subjects. The three lines represent the different subjects. The subjects either precede the main clause (" +mailf) or they precede a left -dislocation (" +CLLD"). The boundary types are given in the columns
6.4
Discussion and conclusion
Hypotheses 1 and 2 are fulfilled The "belt" in Figure 1 is evidence for hypothesis 1: new non-branching preverbal subjects (i.e. subjects that are part of the focus domain) are more likely to phrase with following material than given constituents (67% vs. 87-92%). Consequently, non-branching given elements (subjects or objects) are more often followed by a prosodic break than non-branching new subjects (87 -92% vs. 67%). As for hypothesis 2, givenness overrides the tendency for (SV) of non-branching subjects. Thus, branchingness and constituent length does not play a role, when the element is dislocated: the percentage of clear boundaries equals 88% (c£ Figure 4). However, branchingness plays an important role when the subject is part of the focus domain (i.e. not left-dislocated). If the new subject is branching, it automatically has a prosodic boundary to its right. Branchingness even increases the probability of an IntP-boundary (Chapter 3, Figure 1). Figure 1 and Figure 2 show that the status of being given and the property ofbeing branching have the same effect: they both introduce boundaries. The validity of hypotheses 1 and 2 clearly supports the introduction of the OT constraint ALIGN-ToP,R,. A less strict version as ALIGN-XP,R is not able to account for the effect of givenness (cf. Chapter 5). The finding that non-dislocated preverbal subjects can phrase with following material contradicts the findings of Frascarelli & Treed (2006) for Italian.
191
191
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
They show that Italian preverbal overt subjects always satisfy some specific discourse requirement, i.e. they are either topic or (narrow) focus constituents. In my data, the subjects are neither topics nor narrowly focused. Frascarelli & Trecci ( 2006) further maintain that the introduction of a preverbal subject is mostly connected with topic continuity, which connected with (narrow) focus information only to a lesser extent. These assumptions contradict the findings of the CLLD vs. S experiment. In Catalan, non -branching preverbal subjects that are not given have the tendency to phrase with following material. As for phrasing, Frascarelli & Trecci (2006) show that the intonational phrase of the broad focus sentence (i.e. the FP in Frascarelli 2000; or the TP as described in Chapter 4) includes the subject only when it is postverbal. They assume that overt subjects do not host the canonical Spec,TP position but a position in the C-domain.6 In my data, preverbal subjects can also be part of the prosodic phrase of the broad focus sentence (when the necessary length conditions are met). I conclude that there are two different structural positions for preverbal subjects: one in TP, the other one in the C-domain. The brief comparison with the findings of Frascarelli & Treed (2006) shows that Italian and Catalan differ. In Chapter 4, further differences between Italian and Catalan are described. Thus, it appears as if there are great structural and prosodic differences between these two closely related Romance languages. Based on the findings of this experiment, it does not seem possible to construct a test for the status of preverbal subjects. This statement is founded on the fact that there are still too many prosodic boundaries after non-branching preverbal subjects that are part of the focus domain. The non -existence of that boundary seems to be optional (recall that the typical grouping in Catalan is (S)(VO), Chapter 3, D' Imperio et al. 2005). Figure 1 indicates the tendencies of the different subjects. In order to judge if a preverbal subject is dislocated or not, the boundary results have to be much clearer than indicated in the figure. This conclusion is in line with Sheehan (2006) - although she refers to pauses as the only relevant intonational criterion (and not additionally to ip-boundaries as I do). Sheehan (2006) concludes her brief look into the field of intonation by concluding that pauses are not a useful heuristic for the assessment of the status of preverbal subjects, since the pause is optional rather than obligatory (Sheehan 2006: 47). 7
6.
Frascarelli & Treed (2006) use the term 'I P' instead of TP.
7· While discussing possible diagnostics, Sheehan (2006: 47) briefly mentions prosodic aspects of CLLD and preverbal subjects. Her basic assumption is that if preverbal subjects in Null Subject Languages (NSLs) are always left-dislocated in an A'-posit:ion, then they should display the same properties as other CLLD elements. On the one hand she cites Raposo, who says that the element doubled by a dit:ic and appearing at the left of the clause forms "a dearly
Chapter 6. Left-dislocations and preverbal subjects 193
Although Sheehan (2006) and I arrive at the same conclusion, I think that an analysis based purely on pauses simply cannot tell the whole story. Speaking from an intonational point of view, one has to acknowledge that 'pauses' are definitely not the only cue for intonational breaks. Whereas pauses typically signal IntPboundaries, they do not signal ip-boundaries. Chapter 5, however, has shown that Catalan CLLD does align with both kinds of intonational boundary tones. Consequently; it does not seem to be a big surprise that left-dislocated elements are not always separated by a pause. Hence, in her approach the following question remains unanswered: are there prosodic cues which distinguish non-left-dislocated preverbal subjects from left-dislocated subjects (and other left-dislocated elements)? The experiment in this chapter shows that there are no such cues- at least no obligatory cues. However, the tendency that non-left-dislocated subjects have fewer boundaries is clearly apparent. Finally, I want to illustrate the manner in which the OT approach introduced in the preceding chapters can account for the results of the CLLD vs. S experiment. The data I presented in this chapter are not new for the present work, as preverbal subjects and dislocations have previously been discussed. Based on this. the theoretical approach established in Chapter 3 and 5 can account for the findings of the CLLD vs. S experiment. In what follows, three OT tables show how the approach can capture the data. The tables refer to sentence (6). The preverbal subject in (6c) is ambiguous. It can either be part of the focus domain, as in (6a), or it can be left-dislocated, as in (6b ). (6)
Sentence with preverbal subject (given and new) a. [p ~ c.
~ E1 nfunero 1, l~gueda el 1 va posar a l'armari the number theA. CL.ACC PST put.INF to the.cupboard ~gueda put the number on the cupboard:
Table 1 corresponds to (6b). Candidate 2, which has a right boundary after the left-dislocated object and the given/left-dislocated subject, proves to be the best
distinct melodic phrase, set off from the rest of the clause by a pause (represented by the comma)" (Raposo 1996: 1). Thls signifies that preverbal subjects should be separated by a pause, if they are left -dislocated. 0 n the other hand, she cites Sola who claims that "any clitic left-dislocated element can be pronounced without any special pause or phonological clue possibly differentiating it from what would be a 'true' non-dislocated subject" (Sola 1992: 268). From these two statements, Sheehan (2006: 47) concludes that "this pause is optional rather than obligatory, and therefore not a useful heuristic for the assessment of the status of preverbal subjects':
194 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
answer, i.e. it wins. In it AuoN-ToP,R and MAx-BIN-END are not violated and MIN-N-PHRASBS is violated only three times. The third candidate fatally violates MIN-N-PHRASBS one time more often than the winning candidate. Furthermore, even when the overlapping constraints in stochastic OT lead to a reverse ranking, candidate 2 remains optimal. In any order of MAx-BIN-END, MIN-N-PHRASBS, and AuoN-XP,Rcandidate 3 fatally violates MIN-N-PHRASBS more often than the winning candidate. Table 1. OT-table for a sentence with a given subject (normal ranking) (Sg =given subject= left-dislocated subject) e
c
d
AUGN-TOP,R MAX-BIN-END MIN-N-PHRASES AuGN-XP,R
CLLDSgVPP (CLLD Sg V PP) ~(CLLD)(Sg)(V
a
*!*
*
PP)
(CLLD)(Sg)(V)(PP) (CLLD)(Sg V PP) (CLLD)(Sg V)(PP)
*
**
*** ****! *!
***
*
*!
***
*
Table 2 and Table 3 correspond to (6a). The results show that two rankings are probable: (CLLD)(Sn)(V PP) and (CLLD)(Sn V PP). The proposed stochastic OT approach can easily account for the findings. While the most common grouping (CLLD)(Sn)(V PP) is realized by means of the 'normal' constraint ranking, the second most common grouping (CLLD)(Sn V PP) is realized by means of a reverse ranking (Table 3). In both tables the decision for the optimal candidate is passed down to MIN-N-PHRASES. Depending on the ranking either candidate 2 or candidate 4 is shown to be optimal- in accordance with the Catalan data. Table 2: OT-table for a sentence with a new subject (normal ranking) (Sn =new subject= not left-dislocated subject)
e
c
d
AuGN-TOP,R MAX-BIN-END MIN-N-PHRASES AUGN-XP,R
CLLDSnVPP (CLLD Sn V PP) ~(CLLD)(Sn)(V
a
*!
*
PP)
(CLLD)(Sn V)(PP)
*
***
(CLLD)(Sn)(V)(PP) (CLLD)(Sn V PP)
*
****! *!
**
*
***
*!
Chapter 6. Left-dislocations and preverbal subjects 195 Table 3. OT-table for a sentence with a new subject (reverse ranking) (Sn = new subject = not left -dislocated subject) e
CLLDSnVPP (CLLD Sn V PP)
c
d
AuGN-TOP,R MIN-N-PHRASES MAX-BIN-END AuGN-XP,R *!
*
(CLLD)(Sn)(V PP)
***!
(CLLD)(Sn)(V)(PP)
***!*
~
a
(CLLD)(Sn V PP)
**
(CLLD)(Sn V)(PP)
***!
*
*
*
* *
The order of the constraints in Table 2 corresponds to the 'normal' ranking (cf. Section 5.5.2). The constraint ALIGN-CP,L (marked by the letter b) is not necessary, since there are no embedded clauses. In Table 2 the second candidate wins. It does not violate the two highest ranked constraints ALIGN-ToP,R and MAxBIN-END Gust like candidate 3 and 5). Candidate 1 and 4 fatally violate some of the two constraints. However, the decision for candidate 2 is not determined at MIN-N-PHRASBS, because there is a further candidate, which violates MIN-NPHRASBS as often as the winning one: candidate 5 (while candidate 3 fatally violates MIN-N-PHRASBs). Thus, the decision is passed down to the lowest ranked constraint ALIGN-XP,R. Candidate 5 fatally violates the alignment constraint, while candidate 2 does not violate the constraint at all. In Table 3 the constraint MIN-N-PHRASES is ranked higher than MAx-BIN-END (this is possible due to overlapping standard deviations). Candidate 4 is evaluated as the winning output. While it does not violate ALIGN-ToP,R (exactly as candidate 2, 3, and 5), it violates the second constraint, namely MIN-N-PHRASBS, less often than candidate 2, 3, and 5. Candidate 1 already fatally violates ALIGN-ToP,R and does not play a role anymore in the evaluation process. In conclusion, the experiment in the chapter shows that there is a significant difference between new non-branching subjects and given subjects. This finding clearly supports the constraint ALIGN-ToP,R, which is introduced in Chapter 5 for left- and right-dislocations. This constraint calls for an obligatory boundary at the right edge of a dislocated constituent. The experiment further shows that the effect of ALIGN-ToP,R is independent ofbranchingness/ constituent length. Branching and non-branching topics have a clear right boundary. Finally, the analysis set up in Chapter 3 and 5 can easily account for the results of the CLLD vs. S experiment. For this reason, no modifications of the theory are necessary.
CHAPTER]
Conclusion and outlook The goal of this monograph is to inquire into the intonational phrasing of difterent sentence forms and into the theoretical grounding of the Prosodic Phrase (i.e. intermediate phrase and Intonational Phrase) of phonological representation. The contributions of the present work concern three main areas: Prosody, Syntax, and the Prosody-Syntax interface. In addition to these areas the present work demonstrates the productivity of the stochastic OT model since the detected variation in intonational grouping can be easily accounted for in this model.
Prosody: The intonational research of the present work offers a closer and detailed look at complex structures of a certain type: object clauses. Furthermore, it compares the intonational grouping ofleft -dislocations and preverbal subjects. Entirely new empirical data is offered - based on four production experiments with a minimum of ten speakers per experiment. Five clearly defined and illustrated cues for intonational boundaries (Chapter 2) allow for a systematically investigation of intonational boundaries in the recorded data. The work is based on the ToBI transcription system for Catalan (Cat_ToBI). Thus, Cat_ToBI is applied to Catalan data which has not, until now, been considered. The research on object clauses is especially important due to the fact that literature on phrasing in Romance of the last decade has not inquired seriously into complex structures. These studies have mainly been concerned with simple SVO structures. Furthermore, the authors who do examine complex structures are mostly concerned with non -restrictive relatives, nominal appositives, parenthetical expressions, or they are concerned with the comparison of right boundaries of root clauses (Downing 1970, Nespor & Vogel1986/2007, Selkirk 2005, Dehe 2009 among others). They are hardly concerned with clauses which are part of the verb's argument structure. Truckenbrodt (2005), though, does inquire into subject and object clauses but his study is based on only one speaker. In the present work the intonational grouping of object clauses is approached from two angles. First, the influence of sentential objects on the phrasing of the matrix subject and object is scrutinized. Second, the grouping of embedded clauses themselves is discussed.
198 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
Catalan is described as a language where eurhythmic constraints play a role and cause a short subject to phrase together with the verb when the object is long (i.e. (SV)(O), Prieto 2005). The present study on object clauses shows that the percentage of (SV) phrasing increases (by about 20%) when the object is sentential (Chapter 3). It further shows that the (SV) grouping is only a root phenomenon. The (SV) grouping does not show up in embedded clauses. If the embedded object clause consists of a short subject and a long object, the embedded subject never phrases with the embedded verb. It is shown (in Chapter 3) that object clauses are mostly separated by an intonational break from the preceding matrix clause. Statistically this is true approximately 80% of the time. However, if the embedded clause has a left-dislocation in its C-domain, the separation of the object clause decreases drastically and shows the reverse image: 80% of the object clauses are not separated by an intonational break between the matrix verb and the complementizer. Embedded leftdislocations phrase with preceding matrix material (Chapter 5). This data offer empirical evidence that Frascarelli's (2000: 63) Topic Prosodic Domain cannot be applied to Catalan.
Syntax: The present work also has a pure syntactic contribution. It gives clear evidence for a clause-internal analysis of Catalan clitic right-dislocation by presenting three tests (Chapter 4). These tests concentrate on syntactic asymmetries between CLLD and CLRD. One test is entirely new in the linguistic literature. This test is based on obviation effects in subjunctive complement clauses. While leftdislocations lead to a disappearance of obviation effects, right-dislocations keep obviation effects. By assuming a clause-internal analysis of CLRD this pattern can be accounted for. The two further tests deal with licensing of negative words (like NPis) and binding properties. It is shown that Catalan behaves differently from Italian and gives evidence against a clause-external analysis of CLRD constituents as in Samek-Lodovici (2006) and Frascarelli (2000).
Syntax-Prosody Interface: The present work shows that constraints of the alignment family have great importance in Catalan. The constraints indicate that the language has a close relation between syntactic constituent types and prosodic constituent types. Thus, the theoretical account for the phrasing pattern strongly fits in the theory of the syntactic grounding of prosodic categories (Selkirk 2005: 31). In the present work, three new syntax-phonology constraints are established for Catalan. They are given in (lb,c,d). The three constraints exist next to Selkirk's (1995b) classical constraint (la). All four syntax-phonology interface constraints call for the edge-alignment of a designated constituent type in syntax to a corresponding designated constituent type in prosodic structure.
Chapter 7. Conclusion and outlook 199 (1)
Interface alignment constraints for Catalan a. AuGN-XP,R (Section 3.4.1)
Align the right edge of a syntactic XP to the right edge of a prosodic phrase b. ALIGN-CP,L
(Section 3.4.3.1)
Align the left edge of a CP to the left edge of a prosodic phrase c. ALIGN-vP,R
(Section 5.5.1)
Align the right edge of vP to the right edge of a prosodic phrase d. ALIGN-ToP,R (Section 5.5.1)
Align the right edge of a topic constituent to the right edge of a prosodic phrase
The relevant prosodic constituent of all constraints is the prosodic phrase. Strictly speaking, the prosodic phrase is not a constituent of its own, but a hypernym for the actual prosodic constituents: the intermediate phrase (ip) and the Intonational Phrase (IntP). Theprosodicdata show, however, that a strong variation in the nature of the prosodic break is present. The consequence of this is that no dear criteria can be established for predicting when an ip- or an IntP-boundary appears. 1 This is the reasoning behind the term prosodic phrase being introduced as a hypernym for the two constituents. The constraints in (1) differ with respect to the relevant syntactic constituent types. In the first constraint, the classical end-based theory constraint of Selkirk (1986, 1995b), the prosodic phrase corresponds to a maximal projection of lexical category. In (1b) the corresponding syntactic constituent is the functional projection CP, while it is the functional projection vP in (1c). Although (1d) is listed among the syntax-phonology interface constraints, the corresponding constituent is mainly an information structural entity: the (syntactic) constituent that counts as the topic.2 (1) dearly indicates that the prosodic phrase is not limited to a single corresponding syntactic constituent. The obligatoriness of certain boundaries calls for different corresponding syntactic XPs.
Theoretical Model: The present work shows that variation exists in the intonational grouping of complex structures. The data are quantified by the number of realizations in each pattern. In order to capture the quantified results a stochastic approach to variation represents the appropriate theoretical framework. For this
For example, subjects aie almost as often separated by IntP-boundary tones as by ip-boundary tones, independently of conditions such as branchingness (cf. Section 3.3.2).
1.
2. It is conceivable that the topic status of a constituent is indicated by a syntactic feature [+T]. The feature can already be part of the constituent before it enters the derivation or it can get part of the constituent during the derivation (c£ L6pez 2003, 2009a). It is only important that the constituent is indicated as being the topic before the phonological representation is established
200
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan reason the findings are modeled in the stochastic Optimality Theory approach as proposed by Boersma & Hayes (2001). The analysis of the data nicely shows the productivity of stochastic OT. The alignment constraints in (1) are argued to have different ranking values. In the theoretical approach to complex SVO structures (i.e. sentences with object clauses) ALIGN-XP,R is the lowest ranked constraint, while ALIGN-CP,L is ranked higher (cf. Section 3.4. 3.4). Both constraints overlap with each other and with MINN-PHRASES. Consequently the ranking order can be the reverse ofthe 'normal' order. There are four main groupings for complex SVO structures. The possible permutations caused by the overlap account for all four groupings (cf. Section 3.4.3.1 and 3.4.3.4). The two further alignment constraints, ALIGN-vP,R and ALIGN-ToP,R, are necessary for structures including dislocations. In the proposed grammar they constitute the highest ranked constraints. They do not overlap with the other constraints (cf. Section 5.5.2). This characterizes the obligatoriness of the boundaries they evoke: the right boundary of dislocations is obligatory as well as the boundary separating the right-dislocation from the preceding clause. Furthermore, the disappearance of the boundary preceding an embedded clause (induced by ALIGNCP,L) is accounted for by means of a low ranked ALIGN-CP,L. Strictly speaking it is not ALIGN-CP,L, which is ranked low, but rather the selection point at the time of evaluation is at the lower end of the constraint's standard deviation. The present work offers several directions for further research. The work is limited to object clauses. This limitation constitutes the first direction. It would be interesting to see in which way subject clauses influence the phrasing. Subject clauses can be integrated in the research in two ways. First, sentences that have only one sentential argument (namely the subject) can be analyzed. Truckenbrodt's (2005) results show that subject clauses (in the prefield) are systematically separated from the following matrix clause by an intonational phrase boundary. How sentential subjects behave in Catalan (and other Romance languages) could also be studied. It is important that these experiments be based on several speakers. Second, sentences with two sentential arguments (the subject and object) should be studied The (SV) grouping in Catalan is possible only when the subject is short. Consequently, sentential subjects should not phrase with the following verb. when the object is long/sentential This idea is currently only a prediction and has yet to be confinned by any systematic study. Furthermore, it would be interesting to inquire more into the object itself. Is it the syntactic status as a sentence that has the described effect on matrix (SV) or is the effect simply induced by the factor of length (1 vs. 3 or more prosodic words)? A next research step might include DP objects of similar length as the sentential objects in the present study and also sentential objects consisting of only one prosodic word. Additionally the studies should include utterances at different rates of speech. The complex SVO experiment concentrated on a normal speech rate. As Prieto
Chapter 7. Conclusion and outlook
(2005) pointed out the (SV) grouping is more probable at a fast speech rate. Thus, the number of (SV) groupings should increase the faster the speech rate is. A second direction concerns the prosodic levels and the corresponding boundary tones. First, in the present study the term prosodic phrase is used as a hypernym for intermediate phrase and intonational phrase. The reason for this is the fact that no clear criteria can be established for predicting when an ip- or an IntP-boundary appears. Further inquiry into this topic is necessary. Future studies will hopefully show if the alignment constraints established in this work can be maintained as such, or if they should refer to either ip or IntP. Second, by attempting to establish criteria to predict the boundaries, possible solutions may arise to account for the weakening effect of boundaries at a rapid rate of speech. In the present work, the pattern is simply covered by the term prosodic phrase. Third, in Chapter 1 clear criteria for ip- and IntP-boundaries are established. Furthermore, two different boundary tones, namely T- and T%, are assumed. Prieto et al. (2009) still assume that there are two prosodic levels, but only one type of boundary tone. However, if there is only one tone how can one tell the difference between the two prosodic levels? Thus, future studies on the nature of the prosodic levels and the nature of the boundary tones are necessary. A third direction concerns the two constraints ALIGN-vP,R and ALIGN-CP,L. They have a clear correspondence with exactly those functional projections taken as phases in the minimalist framework. It would be interesting to do further research into establishing these constraints based on the notion of phase. This is particularly interesting at the present time, as current research has discovered the relevance of syntactic phases for prosodic phonology. It would also be interesting to see how the effect of these alignment constraints could be modeled in the Match Theory (Selkirk 2009a). A fourth direction concerns the consequences of the obviation test for Italian. The test is based on obviation effects in subjunctive complement clauses (Chapter 4). The test constituted one argument for assuming a clause-internal analysis of CLRD for Catalan. However, the Italian data and the Catalan data do not differ with respect to this test If this test proves correct, the Italian pattern cannot be explained by a clause-external analysis as assumed in Samek-Lodovici (2006). Despite this, the two other tests show that a clause-external analysis is an appropriate proposal for Italian. This contradicting evidence should be investigated further. In conclusion, the present work provides some answers with respect to the intonational phrasing of certain complex structures, and contributes to the understanding of the interplay between syntax and prosody. I hope this work opens up new research questions and leads to further research on the phrasing of complex structures.
101
References Aguilar, Lourdes, d.e-la-Mota, Carme & Prieto, Pilar (eds). 2009. Cat_ToBI Training Materials. (26 May 2010). Alexiadou. Artemis. 2006. Left dislocation (including CLLD ). In The Blackwell Companion to Syntax- Vols. I-v; Marti Everaert, Henk van Riemsdijk, Rob Goedemans & Bart Hollebrandse (eds), 668-699. Oxford: Blackwell Alexiadou. Artemis & Anagnostopoulou. Elena. 1998. Parametrizing AGR: Word order, V-movement and EPP-checking. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 16:491-539. Ambar, Manuela 1999. Aspects ofthe syntax offocus in Portuguese. In The Grammar of Focus [Linguistik.Aktuell/Linguistics Today24], Georges Rebuschi & Laurice Thller (eds), 23-53. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Anagnostopoulou. Elena. 1997. Clitic left dislocation and contrastive left dislocation. In Materials on Left Dislocation [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 14], Elena Anagnostopoulou, Henk van Riemdijk & Frans Zwarts (eds ), 151-192. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Anderson, Stephen R 2000. Towards an optimal account of second-position phenomena. In optimality Theory: Syntax, Phonology and Acquisition, Joost Dekkers, Prank van der Leeuw & Jeroen van de Weijer (eds), 302-333. Oxford: OUP. Anttila, Arto. 1997. Deriving variation from grammar: A study of finnish genitives. In Variation, Change and Phonological Theory [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 146], Frans Hinskens, Roeland van Hout & Leo Wetzels (eds), 35-68. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Anttila, Arto. 2002. Variation in phonological theory. In The Handbook of Language Variation and Change, Jack K. Chambers, Peter Trudgill & Nathalie Schilling-Estes (eds), 206-243. Oxford: BlackwelL Anttila, Arto. 2007. Variation and optionality. In The Cambridge Handbook ofPhonology, Paul de Lacy (ed), 519-536. Cambridge: CUP. Archangeli, Diana & Langendoen, Terence D. 1997. Optimality 1hoory: An Oven•iew. Oxford: Blackwell Arvanitl. Amalia, Ladd. D. Robert & Mennen, Ineke. 2000. What is a starred tone? Evidence from Greek. In Papers in Laboratory Phonology, V: Acquisition and the Lexicon, Michael B. Broe & Janet B. Pierrehumbert (eds ), 119-131. Cambridge: CUP. Astruc, Ilu'isa. 2005. The Intonation ofExtra-Sentential Elements in Catalan and English. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Cambridge. Authier, Jean-Marc. 1992. Iterated CPs and embedded topicalization. Linguistic Inquiry 23: 329-336. Baltin, Mark R 1982. A landing site theory of movement rules. Linguistic Inquiry 13: 1-38. Barbosa, Pllar. 1995. Null Subjects. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT. Beckman, Mary. 2006. Tone inventories and tune-text alignments. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Pidgin and Creole Linguistics, 6-7 January 2006, ( 26 May 2010). Beckman, Mary & Pierrehumbert, Janet 1986. Intonational structure in Japanese and English. Phonology Yearbook 3: 255-309.
204
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan Beckman. Mary, Diaz-Campos, Manuel, McGory, Julia & Morgan. TerrelL 2002. Intonation across Spanish, in the tone and break indices framework. Probus 14: 9-36. Beckman. Mary, Hirschberg, Julia & Shattuck-Hufnagel, Stefanle. 2005. The original ToBI system and the evolution of the ToBI framework. In Prosodic Tjpology. Ihe Phonology of Intonation and Phrasing, Sun-AhJun (ed.), 9-54. Oxford: OUP. Belletti, Adriana. 1990. Generalized Verb Movement: Aspects of Verb Synta."t. Torino: Rosenberg &Sellier. Bellett!, Adriana. 2005. Extended doubling and the VP periphery. Probus 17: 1-35. Bellett!, Adriana & Shlonsky, Ur. 1995. The order of verbal complements: A comparative study. Natural Language and LinguisNc Theory 13: 489-526. Benet, Ari.adna. In preparation. E1 fraseig prosodic en la parla espontania del catala i del castella. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Hamburg. Benet, Ariadna, Lle6, Conxita & Cortes, Susana. To appear. Phrase boundary distribution in Catalan: Applying the prosodic hierarchy to spontaneous speech. In Intonational Phrasing in Romance and Germanic: Cross-Linguistic and Bilingual Studies [Hamburg Studies on Multilingualism 10], Conxita Lle6 & Christoph Gabriel (eds). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Boersma, Paul. 1998. Functional Phonology. Ph.D. dissertation, Universiteit van Amsterdam. Boersma, Paul. 1999. Optimality-Theoretic learning in the Praat program. IFA Proceedings 23: 17-35 (=Rutgers Optimality Archive 380). Boersma, Paul & Weenink. David 1992-2010. Praat: Doing phonetics by computer (Version 5.0.06) (Computer program), (10 January 2008). Boersma, Paul & Hayes, Bruce. 2001. Empirical tests of the gradual learning algorithm. Linguistic Inquiry 32: 45-86. Bolinger,Dwight.1984. Intonational signals of subordination. In Proceedings ofthe ThnthAnnual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (Febr. 17-20, 1984), Claudia Brugman & Monica Macaulay (eds), 401-413. BerkeleyCA: BLS, University of California. Bonet, Eulalia. 1984. Aproximaci6 a l'ntonaci6 del Catala central. MA thesis, Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona. Bonet, Eulalia. 1991. Morphology after Syntax: Pronominal Clitics in Romance. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT. (06 June 2010). Bonet, Eulalia. 2002. Clitlcitzaci6. In Gramatica del Catala contemporanl, Joan Sola, Maria-Rosa Iloret, Joan Mascaro & Mamtel Perez Saldanya (eds), 933-989. Barcelona: Editorial Empurtes. Brentar!, Diane & Bosch, Anna. 1990. The mora: Autosegment or syllable constituent. In Papers from the 26th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society, Vol 2: The Parasession on the Syllable in Phonetics and Phonology [CLS 26], Michael Ziolkowski, Manuela Noske & Karen Deaton (eds), 1-16. Chicago IL: CLS. Bresnan, Joan. 1972. On Sentence stress and syntactic transformations. In Contributions to Generative Phonology, Michael Brame (ed), 73-107. Austin TX: University of Texas Press. Bruce, GOsta. 1977. Swedish Word Accents In Sentence Perspective. Lund: Gleerup. Brumme, Jenny. 1997. Praktische Grammatik der katalanischen Sprache. Wilhelmsfeld.: Gottfried Egert Verlag. Cabre, Teresa. 1993. Estructura grammatical i lexico: El mot minim en Catala Ph.D. dissertation, Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona. Cabre, Teresa & Prieto, Pilar. 2004. Prosodic and analogtc effects in lexical glide formation in Catalan. Probus 16: 113-1 SO. Cardinalett!, Anna. 1997. Subjects and clause structure. In The New Comparative Syntax, Liliane Haegeman (ed), 33-63. London: Longman.
References Cardinaletti. Anna 2002. Against optional and null dttics. Right dislocation vs. marginalization. Studia IJnguistlca 56: 29-57. Casielles-Swirez. Eugenia. 2003. Left-Dislocated Structures in Spanish. Hlspania 86(2): 326-338. Cattell. Ray. 1978. On the source of interrogative adverbs. Language 54: 61-77. Cechetto, Carlo. 1999. A comparative analysis ofleft and right dislocation in Romance. Studia Lingulstica 53:40-67. Chafe, Wallace L. 1976. Giveruress, contrastiveness, definiteness, subjects, topics and point of view. In Subject and Topic, Charles N. Li (ed), 27-55. New York NY: Academic Press. Chomsky, Noam. 1971. Deep structure, surface structure and semantic interpretation. In Semantics: An Interdisciplinary Reader in Philosophy, Linguistics and Psychology, Danny D. Steinberg & LeonA. Jakubovits (eds), 183-216. Cambridge: CUP. Chomsky, Noam. 1986. Knowledge ofLanguage: It's Nature, Origin and Use. New York NY: Praeger. Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press. Chomsky, Noam. 2000. Minimalist inquiries: The framework. In Step by Step: Essays on Minimalist Syntax in Honor of Howard Lasnik, Roger Martin, David Michaels & Juan Uriagereka (eds), 89-155. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press. Chomsky, Noam. 2001. Derivation by phase. In .Ken Hale. A Life in Language, Michael Kenstowicz (ed), 1-52. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press. Chomsky, Noam. 2008. On phases. In Foundatlonalissue.s in Linguistlc Theory, Robert Freidin, Carlos P. Otero & Maria Luisa Zubizarreta (eds ), 133-166. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press. Chomsky, Noam & Halle, Morris. 1968. The Sound Pattern ofEngliSh. New York NY: Harper & Row. Cinque, Guglielmo. 1977. The Movement nature ofleft dislocation. Linguistlc Inquiry 8: 397-411. Cinque, Guglielmo. 1990. 'IJpes ofA· -Dependencies. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press. Contreras, Heles. 1991. On the position of subjects. In Perspective.s on Phrase Structure: Heads and Licensing [Syntax and Semantics 25], Susan D. Rothstein (ed), 63-79. San Diego CA: Academic Press. Costa, Joao. 1998. Word Order Variation. A Constraint-based Approach. Ph.D. dissertation, HIL/Leiden University. Costa, Jo!o. 2001. Marked versus unmarked inversion and optimality theory. In Subject Inversion and the Theory of Universal Grammar, Aalke C. Hulk & Jean- Yves Pollock (eds), 91-106. Oxford: OUP. Costa, Joao. 2004. Subject Positions and Interfaces: The Case of European Portuguese. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Costantini. Francesco. 2005a. Subjunctive Obviation: An Interface Perspective. Ph.D. dissertation, Universita Ca' Foscari Venezia. (26 May 2010). Costantini. Francesco. 2005b. On obviation in subjunctive clauses: The state ofthe art. In Annali Di Ca'Foscari XLIV, 97-132. Universita di Venezia. Costantini. Francesco. 2009. Interface Perspectives on Clausal Complementation. The Case of Subjunctive Obviation. Venice: Libreria Editrice Cafoscarina. Cowie, Anthony. 1989. Oxford Advanced Learners Dictlonnary. Oxford: OUP. Danes, Frantisek. 1970. 0 ne instance of the Prague School methodology: Functional analysis of utterance and text. In Method and Theory in Linguistics, Paul Garvin (ed), 132-146. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. De Cat, Cecile. 2002. French Dislocation. Ph.D. dissertation. University of York, UK. (Published in 2007 as French Dislocation. Interpretation, Syntax, Acquisition. Oxford: OUP). De Cat, Cecile. 2007. French dislocation without movement Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 25(3): 485-534.
205
206
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan Dehe, Nicole. 2009. Clausal parentheticals, intonational phrasing, and prosodic theory. Journal ofLinguistics 45(3): 569-615. de Lacy, Paul. 2003. Constraint universality and prosodic phrasing in Maori. In Papers In optimality Theory II [UMO P 26], Angela Carpenter, Andries Coetzee & Paul de Lacy (eds ), 59-79. Amherst MA: GLSA. Delattre, Pierre. 1965. Comparing the Phonetic Features ofEngliSh, French, German and spanish. Heidelberg: Julius Groos. D'Imperio, Marlapaola. 2001. Focus and tonal structure in Neapolitan Italian. Speech Communication 33(4): 339-356. D'Imperio, Mariapaola. 2002. Italian intonation: An overview and some questions. Probus 14( 1): 37-69. D'Imperio, Marlapaola, Elordieta, Gorka, Frota, S6nia, Prieto, Pilar & Vlg8rio, Marina 2005. Intonational phrasing in Romance: The role of syntactic and prosodic structure. In Prosodie.s: With special Reference to Iberian Language.s, S6nla Frota, Marina Vlg8rio & Marla Jo!l.o Freitas (eds), 59-97. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Downing, Bruce. 1970. Syntactic Structure and Phonological Phrasing in English. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Texas, Austin. Elordieta, Gorka, Frota, S6nia, Prieto, Pilar & Vig<\rio, Marina 2003. Effects of constituent weight and syntactic branching on intonational phrasing in Ibero-Romance. In Proceedings ofthe 15th International Congress ofPlwnetlc Sciences, Maria-Josep Sole, Daniel Recasens & Joaquin Romero (eds), 487-490. Barcelona Elordieta, Gorka, Frota, S6nla & Vig (6 June 2010). Erteschik-Shir, Noml. 1977. On the Nature of Island Constraints. Bloomington IN: Indiana University Linguistics Club. Erteschick-Shir, Nomi & Lappin, Shalom. 1979. Dominance and the functional explanation of island phenomena. Theoretical Linguistics 6: 41-86. Estebas-Vllaplana, Eva 2000. The Use and Realisation of Accentual Focus in Central Catalan with a Comparison to English. Ph.D. dissertation, University College London. [Published in 2009, Mtinchen: Lincom Europe] Estebas-Vllaplana, Eva 2003a. Catalan pre-nuclear accents: Evidence for word edge tones. In Proceedings of the 15th International Congress of Phonetic Science, Marla Josep Sole, Daniel Recasens & Joaquin Romero (eds), 1779-1782. Barcelona: Causal Productions. Estebas-Vllaplana, Eva 2003b. Phonetic and phonological properties of the final pitch accent in Catalan declaratives. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Prosodic Interfaces, Amina Mettouchi & Gaiille Ferre (eds), 35-40. Nantes: Universite de Nantes. Face, Timothy. 2001. Intonational Marking of Contrastive Focus in Madrid Spanish. Ph.D. dissertation, Ohio State University. Face, Timothy. 2002. Intonational Marking of Contrastive Focus in Madrid SpaniSh. Munich: Line om. Farkas, Donka F. 1992. 0 n obviation. In Lexical Matters, Ivan A. Sag & Anna Szabolcsi, 85-109. Stanford CA: CSLI. Featherston, Samuel 2004. Bridge verbs and V2 verbs. Zeitschrift for Sprachwissenschaft 23(2): 181-209.
References 207 Feldhausen, Ingo. 2006a Prosodic phrasing in Catalan dislocation structures. Ms, University of Potsdam. Feldhausen, Ingo. 2006b. Prosodic phrasing in Catalan dislocation structures. Talk given at Going Romance XX, Dec. 7-8, 2006, Amsterdam. (6 June 2010). Feldhaus en, Ingo. Gabriel, Christoph& Pe8k0Vl\ Andrea 2010. Prosodtcphrasing in Argentinean Spanish: Buenos Aires and NeuqueiL Speech Prosody 2010, Chicago, IL, 11-14 May 2010, (29 May 2010). Fermindez Soriano, Olga 1993. Los pronombres atonos en la teorfa gramatical Repaso y balance. In Los pronombres atonos, Olga Ferml.ndez Soriano (ed), 13-62. Madrid: Taurus Universitaria. Fery, Caroline. 1993. German Intonational Patterns. Thbingen: Niemeyer. Fery, Caroline. 2004. Phonologie des Deutschen - Eine optimalitiitstheoretische Einfiihrung [Linguistics in Potsdam 7]. (6 June 2010). Fery, Caroline. 2007. The prosody oftopicalizatioiL In On Information Structure, Meaning and Form [Linguistlk Aktuell/Linguistics Today 100] Kerstin Schwabe & Susanne Winkler (eds), 69-86. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Fery, Caroline. 2010. Recursion in prosodic structure. Ms, J. W. Goethe-Universitiit, Frankfurt. (6 June 2010). Frascarell!, Mara 2000. The Syntax-Phonology Interface in Focus and Topic Constructions in Italian. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Frascarelli, Mara. 2004. Dislocation, ditic resumption and minimality: A comparative analysis of left and right topic constructions in Italim In Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2002 [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 256], Reineke Bok-Bennema, Bart Hollebrandse, Brigitte Kampers-Manhe & Petra Sleeman (eds), 99-118. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Frascarelli, Mara & Trecci, Alessandra 2006. Subjects in a pro-drop language. Syntactic roles, discourse categories and the interpretation of pro. In La comunicazione parlata. Atti del convegno internazionale (23-25 febbraio 2006), Massimo Pettorino, Antonella Giannini, Marianna Vallone & Renata Savy (eds). Napoli, Liguori Editore (CD-Rom). Frascarelli, Mara & Hinterh0111, Roland. 2007. Types of topics in German and Italim In On Information Structure, Meaning and Form [Linguistlk Aktuell!Linguistics Today 100], Kerstin Schwabe & Susanne Winkler (eds), 87-116. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Freidin, Robert 1986. Fundamental issues in the theory of binding. In Studies In the Acquisition ofAnaphora, Barbara Lust (ed.), 151-181. Dordrecht: ReideL Frey, Werner. 2004. A medial topic position for Germm Linguistische Berichte 198: 153-190. Frota, S6nia 2000. Prosody and Focus in European Portuguese. New York NY: Garland. Frota, S6nia, D'Imperto. Mariapaola, Elordieta, Gorka, Prieto, Pilar & Vlgarto, Marina 2007. The phonetics and phonology of intonational phrasing in Romance. In Segmental and Prosodic Issues in Romance Phonology, Pilar Prieto, Joan Mascar6 & Maria-Josep Sole (eds ), 131-153. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Gabriel, Christoph. 2007. Fokus im Spannungsfeld von Phonologie und Syntax. Frankfurt: Vervuert. Gabriel, Christoph, Feldhausen, Ingo & Pesk.ova, Andrea To appear. Prosodic phrasing in portefio Spanish. In Intonational Phrasing in Romance and Germanic: Cross-Linguistic and Bilingual Studies [Hamburg Studies on Multilingualism 10], Conxita Lle6 & Christoph Gabriel (eds). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
208
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan Ghini, Mlrco. 1993. q>- Formation in Italian: A new proposal. Thronto Working Papers in Linguistics 12: 41-79. Giorgi, Alessandra. 1987. The notion of complete functional complex: Some evidence from Italian Linguistic Inquiry 18: 511-518. Goodall, Grant 2001. The EPP in Spanish. In Objects and Other Subjects, William Davies & Sranley Dubinsky (eds ), 193-223. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Goldsmith, John A. 1976. Autosegmental Phonology. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT. (Published in 1979: New York NY: Garland Press). (6 June 2010). Grice, Martine, Ladd, Robert D. & Arvaniti, Amalia 2000. On the place of phrase accents in intonational phonology. Phonology 17: 143-185. Grice, Martine, Baumann Stefan & Benzmi.iller, Ralf 2005. German intonation in autosegmentalmetrical phonology. In Prosodic 'I}pology. The Phonology of Intonation and Phrasing, Sun-Ah Jun (ed), 55-83. Oxford: OUP. Grice, Martine & Baumann, Stefim. 2007. An introduction to intonation- Functions and models. In Non-Native Prosody. Phonetic Description and Teaching Practice [Trends in Linguistics. Studies and Monographs 186], Jiirgen Trouvain & Ulrike Gut (eds), 25-52. Berlin: Walter deGruyter. Grohmann, Kleanthes. 2003. Prolific Domains: On the Anti-Locality of MDving Dependencies [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 66]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Gussenhoven, Carlos. 1983. Stress shift and the nucleus. Linguistics 21: 303-339. Gussenhoven, Carlos. 1992. Intonational phrasing and the prosodic hierarchy. In Phonologica 1988. Proceedings of the 6th International Phonology Meeting, Wolfgang U. Dressler, Hans C. Luschiitzky, Oskar E. Pfeiffer & John R. Rennison (eds), 89-100. Cambridge: CUP. Gussenhoven, Carlos. 2004. The Phonology of Tone and Intonation. Cambridge: CUP. Guti.errez-Bravo, Rodrigo. 2007. Prominence scales and unmarked word order in Spanish. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 25(2): 235-271. Gutierrez- Bravo, Rodrigo. 2008. Topicalizationand preverbal subjects in Spanish wh-interrogatives. In Selected Proceedings of the lOth Hispanic Linguistics Symposium, Joyce Bruhn de Garavito & Elena Valenzuela (eds), 225-236. Somerville MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project Hale, Kenneth & Selkirk, Elisabeth. 1987. Government and tonal phrasing in Papago. Phonology Yearbook 4: 151-183. Hall, Tracey Alan 2000. Phonologle. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Hayes, Bruce & Lahirl. Aditi. 1991. Bengali Intonational Phonology. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory9: 47-96. Hern.anz. M. Lllllsa. 2002. Lbraci6. In Gramatica del Catala contemporani, Joan Sola, MariaRosa Lloret, Joan Mascar6 & Manuel Perez Saldanya (eds), 993-1073. Barcelona: Editorial EmpUries. Hestvlk, Arild 1992. LF-Movement of pronouns and antisubject orientation Linguistic Inquiry 23:617-624. Hornstein, Norbert, Nunes, Jairo & Grohmann, Kleanthes. 2005. Understanding Minimalism. Cambridge: CUP. Hocket, Christopher F. 1958. A Course in MDdern Linguistics. New York NY: Macmillan Horn, Laurence. 1989. A Natural History of Negation. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press. Hualde, Jose Ignacio. 2002. Intonation in Spanish and the other Ibero-Romance languages: Overview and status Quaestionis. In Romance Phonology and Variation. Selected Papers
References
from the 30th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages, Caroline Wiltshire & Joaqutm Campos (eds), 101-116. Amsterdam: John Benjamlns. Hualde, Jose Ignacio. 2003. E1 modelo metrico y autosegmental. In Teorfas de Ia entonacl6n, Pilar Prieto (ed.), 155-184. Barcelona: Ariel Lingilistica. Hulk, Aafke C. & Pollock, Jean- Yves. 2001. Subject positions in Romance and the theory of universal grammar. In Subject Inversion In Romance and the Theory ofUntversal Grammar, Aa1ke C. Hulk&Jean Yves Pollock (eds), 3-19. Oxford: OUP. Ishihara, Shinichiro. 2004. Prosody by phase. In Interdisciplinary Studies on Information Structure, 1: Working Papers of SFB632, Shinichiro Ishihara, Manuela Schmitz & Anne Schwarz (eds), 77-119. Potsdam: UniversitiitsverlagPotsdam. Ishihara, Shinichiro. 2007a. Major phrase, focus intonation, multiple spell-out (MaP, FI, MSO). The Linguistic Review24: 137-167. Ishihara, Shinichiro. 2007b. Japanese downstep revisited. Ms, Universitiit Potsdam. It6, Junko & Mester, Armin. 1997. Correspondence and compositionality: The Ga-Gyo variation in Japanese phonology. In Derivations and Constraints in Phonology, Iggy Roca (ed), 419-462. Oxford: Clarendon Press. It6, Junko & Mester, Armin. To appear. Recursive prosodic phrasing in Japanese. In Prosody Matters: Essays in Honor of Elisabeth Selkirk, Toni Borowsky, Shigeto Kawahara, Takahito Shinya & Mariko Sugahara (eds ). London: Equinox. Jackendoff, Ray. 1972. Semantic Interpretation in Generative Grammar. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press. Jun. Sun-Ah. 1993. The Phonetics and Phonology of Korean. Ph.D. dissertation, Ohio State University. Jun. Sun-Ah. 2000. K-ToBI (Korean ToBI) labeling conventions. Version 3.1. Ms, Department of Linguistics, UCLA (6 June 2010). Jun. Sun-Ah. 2003. The effect of phrase length and speech rate on prosodic phrasing. In Proceedings of the 15th International Congress of Phonetic Science, Maria Josep Sole, Daniel Recasens & Joaquin Romero (eds ), 483-486. Barcelona: Causal Productions. (6 June 2010). Jun. Sun-Ah. 2005. Prosodic Typology. The Phonology of Intonation and Phrasing. Oxford: OUP. Jun. Sun-Ah. in press. Prosodic TJplogy II. The Phonology of Intonation and Phrasing. Oxford: OUP. Jun. Sun-Ah & Fougeron, Cecile. 2000. A phonological model of French intonation In Intonation: Ana(Ysis, Modeling and Technology, Antonis Botinis (ed.), 209-242. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Kager, Rene. 1999. Optimality Theory: A Textbook. Oxford: OUP. Kanerva, Jonni 1990. Focusing on phonological phrases in ChicMwa. In The Phonology-Syntax Connection, Sharon Inkelas & Draga Zec (eds), 145-161. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press. Kato, Mary & Raposo. Eduardo. 2006. Topicalization in European and Brazilian Portuguese. In Romance Linguistics 2006. Selected papers from the 36th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL)[Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 287], NeY.' Brunswick, March-April 2006, Jose Camacho, Nydia Flores-Ferrin, Liliana Sanchez, Vivlane Deprez & Marfa Jose Cabrera (eds), 205-219. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Kayne, Richard. 1994. The Antisymmetry ofSyntax. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press. Kempchlnsky, Paula. 1987. The subjunctive disjoint reference effect In Studies in Romance Languages, Carol Neidle & Rafue1 A Nufiez Cedefio (eds ), 123-140. Dordrecht: Foris.
209
:no Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan Kempchinsky, Paula. 2009. What can the subjunctive disjoint reference effect tell us about the subjunctiveflnLingua 119(12): 1788-1810. Kiparsky, Paul & Kiparsky, Carll970. Fact. In Progress in Linguistics, Manfred Bierwisch & Karl Heidolph (eds), 143-173. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Kisseberth, Charles W. & Abasheikh, Mohammad Imam. 1974. Vowel length in Chi- Mwi:nt- A case study of the role of grammar in phonology. In CLS 10: Parasesslon on Natural Phonology, Michael LaGaly, Anthony Bruck & Robert Fox (eds), 193-209. Chicago IL: Chicago Linguistk Sodety. Kratzer, Angellka & Selkirk, Elisabeth. 2007. Phase theory and prosodic spellout: The case of verbs. The Linguistic Review 24: 93-135. Krtlka, Manfred. 2007. Basic notions of information structure. In 1he Notions of Information Structure [Interdisciplinary Studies on Information Structure, Vol 6. Working Papers of the SFB 632], Caroline Fery, Gisbert Fanselow & Manfred Krtlka (eds), 13-55. Potsdam: Universitiitsverlag Potsdam. Kuchenbrandt, Imme, Kupisch, Tanja & Rinke, Esther. 2005. Pronominal objects in Romance: Comparing French, Italian, Portuguese, Romanian and Spanish. Arbeiten zur MehrspracbigkeitNr. 67, Untversitiit Hamburg. Kiigler, Frank. 2007. 1he Intonational Phonology of Swabian and Upper Saxon. Thbingen: Niemeyer. Ladd, Robert D. 1996. Intonational Phonology. Cambridge: CUP. Ladd, Robert D. 2008. Intonational Phonology, 2nd edn. Cambridge: CUP. Lambrecht, Knud. 1981. Thpic, Antitopic, and Verb Agreement in Non-Standard French [Pragmatics & Beyond II: 6]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Lambrecht, Knud. 1994. Information Structure and Sentence Form: Topic, Focus, and the Mental Repre.sentatlon of Discourse Referents [Cambridge Studies in Linguistics 71]. Cambridge: CUP. Lasnik, Howard & Saito, Mamoru. 1992. Move a. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press. Lebeaux, David. 1988. Language Acquisition and the Form of the Grammar. Ph. D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst (Published in 2000 as Language Acquisition and the Form of the Grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins). Leben, William Ronald. 1973. Suprasegmental Phonology. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT. (6 June 2010). Leben, William Ronald. 197 5. The tones in English intonation. Linguistic Inquiry 2: 69-107. Legate, Julie Anne. 2003. Some interface properties of the phase. Linguistic Inquiry 34(3): 506-516. Liberman, Mark. & Prince, Alan. 1977. On stress and linguistic rhythm. Linguistic Inquiry 8: 249-336. L6pez, Luis. 2002. Toward a grammar without ThpP or FocP. Georgetown Working Papers in Linguistics 2: 181-209. L6pez, Luis. 2003. Steps for a well-adjusted dislocation. Studia Linguistica 57(3): 193-231. L6pez, Luis. 2007. Locality and the Architecture of Syntactic Dependencies. London: PalgraveMacMillan. L6pez, Luis. 2009a. A Deri1'atlonal Syntax for Information Structure. Oxford: OUP. L6pez, Luis. 2009b. Ranking the linear correspondence axiom. Linguistic Inquiry 40(2): 239-176. Lujan, Marta. 1999. A unified approach to control and obviation. In Grammatical Ana(Yses in Basque and Romance Linguistics [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 187], Jon Franco, Alazne Landa & Juan Martin (eds ), 105-130. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
References Mayol, Laia 2006. On pronouns in Catalan and game theory. In Ambiguity In Anaphora Workshap Proceedings, ESSLLI 2006, Malaga, Spain, 7-11 August 2006, Ron Artstein & Massimo Poesto (eds), 73-82. (6 June 2010). McCarthy, John. 2002. A Thematic Guide to Optimality Theory. Cambridge: CUP. McCarthy, John. 2008. Doing optimality Theory. Applying Theory to Data. Oxford: Blackwell McCarthy, John & Prince, Alan. 1993. Generalized alignment. In Yearbook ofMmphology 1993, Geert Booij & Jaap van Marie (eds ), 79-153. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Medina Murillo, Ana A. 2005. Alargamiento final en el Espa.tlol Signos LingiUsticos 1: 43-59. (19 June 2010). Melchor, Vicent de & Branchadell, Albert 2002. El Catalan. Una lengua de Europa para compartir. Bellaterra: Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona, Servei de Publicacions. Mendoza-Denton, Norma. 1999. Minutes of first Spanish tones and break and indices workshop (Sp-ToBI). (6 June 2010). Miiller, Gereon. 1995. A-bar Syntax. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Miiller, Gereon & Sternefeld. Wolfgang. 1993. Improper movement and unambiguous binding. Linguisticlnquiry 24(3): 461-507. Nespor, Marina & Vogel, Irene. 1986/2007. Prosodic Plwnology. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter (1986: Dordrecht: Foris). Nibert, Holly. 2000. Phonetic and Phonological Evidence for Intermediate Phrasing in Spanish Intonation. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Ordo.tlez, Francisco. 1997. Word Order and Clause Structure in Spanish and other Romance Languages. Ph.D. dissertation, CUNY. Ordo.tlez, Francisco & Trevi.fl.o, Esthela. 1999. Left dislocated subjects and the pro-drop parameter: A case study of Spanish. Lingua 107 (1-2): 39-68. van Oosten, Jeanne. 1986. The Nature of Subjects, Topics, and Agents. Bloomington IN: Indiana University Linguistics Club. Paul, Hermann. 1880. Prinzipien der Sprachgeschichte. Leipzig. Plerrehumbert, Janet 1980. The Phonology and Phonetics of English Intonation. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT. (6 June 2010). Plerrehumbert, Janet 2001. Stochastic phonology. Glot International 5(6): 195-207. Plerrehumbert, Janet & Beckman, Mary. 1988. Japanese Tone Structure. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press. Pires, Acrisio. 2007. The subject, it is here! The varying structural positions of preverbal subjects. DELTA: DocumentafltO de Estudos em Lingiifstica Te6rica e Aplicada [online], vol23, 113-146. (12 June 2010). Postal, Paul. 1991. An apparent French extraction anomaly. Ms, IBM Research Center. Prieto, Pilar. 1995. Aproximad6 als contorns tonals del catala central. Caplletra 19: 161-186. Prieto, Pilar. 1997. Prosodic manifestation of syntactic structure in Catalan. In Issues in the Plwnology and MDrphology of the Ma}or Iberian Languages, Fernando Martinez-Gil & Alfonso Morales-Front (eds), 179-199. Washington DC: Georgetown University Press. Prieto, Pilar. 1999. Patrons dl\ssodaci6 de l'Estructura Tonal en Catala. Catalan Working Papers in Linguistics 7:207-218. Prieto, Pilar. 2002a. Entonad6. In Gramatica del Catala Contemporani,J oanSola, Maria-Rosa Lloret, Joan Mascaro & Manuel Perez Sald.anya (eds), 393-462 Barcelona: Editorial EmpUries.
111
212
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan Prieto, Pilar. 2002b. Text-tune association patterns in Catalan: An argument for a hierarchical structure oftunes. Probus 14: 173-204. Prieto, Pilar (ed). 2003. Teorfas de la entonaci6n. Barcelona: Ariel Lingi.ifstica. Prieto, Pilar. 2005. Syntactic and eurhythmic constraints on phrasing decisions in Catalan. Studia IJnguistlca 59(2-3): 194-222. Prieto, Pilar. 2006a. Phonological phrasing in Spanish. In Optimality-Theoretic Advances In Spanish Phonology [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 99], Sonia Colina & Fernando Martinez-Gil (eds ), 39-60. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Prieto, Pilar. 2006b. Word edge tones in Catalan. Italian Journal of Linguistics/Ri'Vista di IJnguistica 18.1: 39-71. (Special issue: Tonal Alignment). Prieto, Pilar. 2008. Prosodic effects on phrasing: Clash avoidance in Catalan. Talk given at Workshop on the Prosody-Syntax Interface 2, ZAS Berlin, 13-14 June 2008. Prieto, Pilar. In press. The intonational phonology of Catalan. In Prosodic Iypology II. Sun-Ah Jun (ed). Oxford: OUP. Prieto, Pilar, D'Imperio, Mariapaola & Gili Fivela, Barbara. 2005. Pitch accent alignment in Romance: Primary and secondary associations with metrical structure. Language and Speech 48.4: 359-397. (Special Issue: Intonation in Language Varieties). Prieto, Pilar, Aguilar, Lourdes, Mascar6, Ignasi, Torres-Tam.arit, Francese & Vanrell, Maria del Mar. 2009. I: etiquetatge prosOdic Cat_ToBI. Estudios de Fonetica Experimental XVIII: 287-309. Prieto, Pilar & Roseano, Paolo. 2010. Transcription of Intonation of the Spanish Language. Munich: Lincom. Prince, Alan & Smolensky, Paul. 1993/2004. Optimality Theory: Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar [Rutgers University Center for Cognitive Science Thchnical Report 2]. (12 June 2010). (Published in 2004: Oxford: mackwell). Quer, Josep. 2001. Interpreting mood Probus 13: 81-111. Raposo, Eduardo. 1986. On the null object in European Portuguese. In Studies in Romance Linguistics, Oswaldo Jaeggli & Carmen Silva-Corvalan (eds), 373-390. Dordrecht: Forts. Raposo, Eduardo. 1996. Towards a unification of topic constructions. Ms, University of California at Santa Barbara. Recasens, DanieL 1993. Fonetica I Fonologia. Barcelona: Encidopedia Catalana. Reinhart, Tanya. 1981. Pragmatics and linguistics: An analysis of sentence topics. Philosophica 27:53-94. Reinhart, Tanya. 1995. Interface strategies [OTS Working Papers]. Utrecht: Utrecht University. Reyelt, Matthias, Grice, Martine, Benzmiiller, Ralf, Mayer, Jorg & Batliner, Anton. 1996. Prosodische Etikettierung des Deutschen mit ToBI. In Natural Language and Speech Technology. Results of the third KONVENS conference, Bielefeld, November 1996, Dafydd Gibbon (ed), 144-155. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. (12 June 2010). Reynolds, William & Nagy, Naomi 1994. Phonological variation in Faetar: An optimality account Chicago Linguistic Society (Variation and Linguistic Theory) 30(2): 277-292. Rigau, Gemma & Mascar6, Joan. 2002. The grammar of ditics. Catalan Journal of Linguistics 1:9-15. Rizzi, Luigi. 1997. The fine structure of the left periphery. In Elements of Grammar. Handbook of Generative Syntax, Liliane M. Haegeman (ed), 281-337. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Roca, Iggy (ed). 1997. Derivations and Constraints in Phonology. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Rochemont, Michael. 1978. A Theory of Stylistic Rules in English. New York NY: Garland
References 213 Rochemont, Michael. 1989. Topic island and the subjacency parameter. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 34: 145-170. Rooth, Mats. 1992. A theory of focus interpretation. Natural Language Semantics 1: 75-116. Rossell6, Joana 2000. A minimalist approach to the null subject parameter. Catalan Working Papers in Linguistics 8: 97-128. Rusk.o, Milan, Sabo, R6bert & Drur, Martin. 2007. Sk-ToBI scheme for phonological prosody annotation in Slovak. In Text, speech and Dialogue [Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence Vol. 4629], Vadav MatollSek & Pavel Mautner (eels), 334-341. Berlin: Springer. Sandalo, Filomena & Truckenbrodt, Hubert. 2002. Some notes on phonological phrasing in Brazilian Portuguese. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 42: 285-310. Samek-Lodovici, Vieri. 2004. When right dislocation meets the left-periphery. A unified analysis ofltalian non-final focus. Ms, University College London. (Published as Samek-Lodovici 2006). Samek-Lodovici, Vier!. 2005. Prosody-syntax interaction in the expression of focus. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 23: 687-755. Samek-Lodovici, Vieri. 2006. When right dislocation meets the left-periphery. A unified analysis ofltalian non-final focus. Lingua 116: 836-873. Schlosser, Rainer. 2005. Die romanischen Sprachen. Miinchen: C.H. Beck. Schwarzschild, Roger. 1999. Givenness, avoidF and other constraints on the placement of accent. Natural LanguageSemantics7(2): 141-177. Selkirk. Elisabeth. 1984. Phonology and Syntax. The Relation between Sound and Structure. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press. Selkirk. Elisabeth. 1986. On derived domains in sentence phonology. Phonology 3: 371-405. Selkirk. Elisabeth. 1995a. Sentence prosody: Intonation, stress, and phrasing. In The Handbook ofPhonological1heory, John Goldsmith (ed), 550-569. Cambridge MA: Blackwell. Selkirk. Elisabeth. 1995b. The prosodic structure of function words. In Signal to Syntax: Bootstrapping from Speech to Grammar in Early Acquisition, James L. Morgan & Katherine Demuth (eels), 187-214. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Selkirk. Elisabeth. 2000. The interaction of constraints on prosodic phrasing. In Prosody: Theory and Experiment, Merle Horne (ed), 231-261. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Selkirk. Elisabeth. 2005. Comments on intonational phrasing. In Prosodies: With Special Reference to Iberian Languages, S6nia Frota, Marina Vig!l.rio & Maria Jo!l.o Freitas (eels), 11-58. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Selkirk. Elisabeth. 2009a. The syntax-phonology interface. Ms, University of Massachusetts Amherst. (To appear in The Handbook of Phonological Theory, 2nd edn, John Goldsmith, Jason Riggle & Alan Yu (eels). Oxford: IDackwell). Selkirk. Elisabeth. 2009b. On clause and intonational phrase in Japanese: The syntactic grounding of prosodic constituent structure. Gengo Kenkyu 136: 35-74. Selkirk. Elisabeth & Shen, Thng. 1990. Prosodic domains in Shanghai Chinese. In The PhonologySyntax Connection, Sharon Inkelas & Draga Zec (eels), 313-337. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press. Selkirk. Elisabeth & Tateishi, Koich!. 1991. Syntax and downstep in Japanese. In Interdisciplinary Approaches to Language: Essays in Honor of S.- Y. Kuroda, Carol Georgopolous & Roberta Ishihara (eels), 519-543. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Sheehan, Michelle. 2006. The EPP and Null Subjects in Romance. Ph.D. dissertation, Cambridge, UK.
214 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan Silverman, Kim, Beckman. Mary, Pitrelli, John, Ostendorf; Mart, Wightman, Colin, Price, Patti, Pierrehwnbert, Janet & Hirschberg, Julia 1992. ToBI: A standard for labeling English prosody. In Proceedings of the 1992 International Conference on spoken Language Processing, 867-870. Bani( Canada (6 June 2010). Sola, Jaume. 1992. Agreement and Subjects. Ph.D. dissertation, Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona Sosa, Juan Manuel. 2003. La Notaci6n Tonal del Espa.tlol en el Modelo SP-ToBI. In Teor{as de la entonaci6n, Pilar Prieto (ed..), 185-208. Barcelona: Ariel Lingillstica. Stalnaker, Robert 1974. Pragmatic presuppositions. In Semantics and Philosophy, Milton K. Munitz & Peter K. Unger, 197-214. New York NY: New York University Press. Su.tler, Margarita. 2002. The lexical preverbal subject in a Romance null subject language: Where art thou? In A Romance Perspective on language Knowledge and Use, Luis L6pez, Rafael Nu.tlez-Cede.tlo & Richard Cameron (eds), 341-359. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Su.tler, Margarita. 2006. Left dislocations with ditics and epithets. Probus 18: 127-158. Truckenbrodt, Hubert 1995. Phonological Phrases: Their Relation to Syntax, Focus, and Prominence. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT. Truckenbrodt, Hubert 1999. On the relation between syntactic phrases and phonological phrases. Linguisticlnquiry 30: 219-255. Truckenbrodt, Hubert 2002. Variation in P-phrasing in Bengali. In Linguistic Variation Yearbook 2, Pierre Pica (ed..), 259-303. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Truckenbrodt, Hubert. 2005. A short report on intonation phrase boundaries in German. Linguistische Berichte 203: 273-296. Truckenbrodt, Hubert 2007. The syntax-phonology interface. In The Cambridge Handbook of Phonology, Paul de Lacy (ed..), 435-456. Cambridge: CUP. Vallduvi, Enric. 1993. The Informational Component. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania. (6 June 2010). Vallduvi, Enric. 2002. r Oraci6 com a unitat informativa In Gramatica del Catala contemporani, Joan Sola, Maria-Rosa Lloret, Joan Mascaro & Manuel Perez Saldanya (eds), 1221-1279. Barcelona: Editorial Empuries. Venditti, Jennifer J. 2005. The J_ToBI model of Japanese intonation In Prosodic Typology. 1he Phonology of Intonation and Phrasing, Sun-Ah Jun (ed), 172-200. Oxford: 0 UP. Venditti, Jennifer J., Maekawa, Kikuo & Beckman. Mary E. 2008. Prominence marking in the Japanese intonation system. In The Oxford Handbook of Japanese Linguistics, Shigeru Miyagawa & Mamoru Saito (eds), 456-512. Oxford: OUP. Vig.1.rio, Marina. 2003. 1he Prosodic Word in European Portuguese. Berlin: Walter de Gruyte.t: Villalba, Xavier. 1996. Sobre la dislocaci6 a la dreta. Uengua & Literatura 7: 209-234. Villalba, Xavier. 1999a. Symmetry and antisymmetry in Syntax. Syntaxis 2: 1-25. Villalba, Xavier. 1999b. Nihil est in LF quod prius non fuerit in SS. Catalan Working Papers In Linguistics 7: 239-252. Villalba, Xavier. 2000. The Syntax of Sentence Periphery. Ph.D. dissertation, Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona. (6 June 20 10). [Published in 2009 as: 1he Syntax and Semantics of Dislocations In Catalan: A Story on Asymmetric Syntax at the Peripheries of Sentence. Koln: Lambert Academic Publishing.]. Villalba, Xavie.t: 2004. Expressing information in syntax: Catalan dislocation structures. Talk given at the University of Potsdam, December 2004.
References 215 Watanabe, A. 1993. Larsonian CP recW'Sion. factive complements, and selection. Proceedings of the North East Linguistic Society 23: 523-537. Wheeler, Max W. 2004. Catalan stress is iambic. Paper delivered at the 12th Manchester Phonology Meeting, May 20-22, 2004. Wheeler, Max W. 2005. The Phonology of Catalan. Oxford: 0 UP. Wheeler, Max W., Yates, Alan & Dols, Nicolau. 1999. Catalan: A Comprehensive Grammar. London: Routledge. Zec, Draga & lnkelas, Sharon. 1990. Prosodically constrained syntax. In The Plwnology-Syntax Connection, Sharon Inkelas & Draga Zec (eds), 365- 378. Chkago IL: University of Chicago Press. Zubizarreta, Maria Luisa. 1998. Prosody, Focus, and Word Order. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press. Zwicky, Arnold M. 1977. On ditks. Bloomington IN: Indiana University Linguistics Club. (6 June 2010).
Appendices
Each experiment has one appendix: A: B: C: D:
Simple SVO experiment Complex SVO experiment CLLD & CLRD experiment CLLD vs. S experiment
The four appendices (A, B, C, and D) are all structured as follows:
1. Data 2. Results The numbers of the target sentences in the data sections refer to the number of the original recordings. The numbers for this reason are not from the normal order beginning from 1, 2, 3, ... ton. The results are presented in a table which presents the sentence as well as the result of each speaker. The duration is given in seconds. The duration refers to the length of the whole word of the column (even though I used the length of the preboundary syllable in Chapter 3). The following notations for boundary tones are used: H-3 L- 3 !H-3 H%4 H% (P)4 LH%4 L!H%4 LH% (P)4
?
(continuation rise, break index 3) Oow boundary tone, BI 3) (sustained pitch, BI 3) (continuation rise plus audible pause, BI 4) (continuation rise plus visible pause, BI 4) (complex boundary tone, BI 4) (heigth of high boundary tone is lower than preceding pitch accent, BI 4) (complex boundary tone plus audible pause, BI 4) (unclear if there is a boundary or not)
218
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
Appendix A- Simple SVO Experiment (i.e. experiment 1) A-1. Data (12 Sentences)
Context 1: El Pedro noes troba be? Em sembla que esta molt furi6s. Que ha passat?
Ta.rget Sentences: 21. I: Angela va comptar les errades. 22. r Angela va comptar les errades de les frases. 23. ravia Angela va comptar les errades. 24. ravia Angela va comptar les errades de les frases.
Context2: No et trobes be? Em sembla que estas de mal humor. Que ha passat?
Ta.rget Sentences: 29. r Aguila roba el ratoli. 30. r Aguila roba el ratoli del meu germa. 31. La meva gran aguila robe\ el ratoH. 3 2. La meva gran aguila robe\ el ratolf del meu germa.
Context 3: No m'agrada que tota la familia estigui sota arrest domiciliari. Ames, em sembla que la mare esta especialment nerviosa. Que ha passat?
Target Sentences: 37. I: Amelia se n'ha anat a Malaga. 38. I: Amelia se n'ha anat ala ciutat de Malaga. 39. La teva tia Amelia se n'ha anat a Malaga. 40. La teva tia Amelia se n'ha anat a la ciutat de Malaga.
Appendices
A-2. Results Condition: shortS I short 0
~ AT r
CB CP DS GM GV IS MM MO
~ AT eaker
CB CP DS GM GV IS MM MO RS
RS
0.4689 04852 05452 06271 04443 05552 04150 04563
I I I I I
I I I I I
I I I I I I
? L- 3 !H- 3 LH%4 ? H-3 ? L- 3
I I I I
I
!H- 3
0.4968 0.4505 0.4954 0.5063 0.5199 0.4943 0.4422 0.3874 0.4061 0.5161
I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I
I I
I I I
I I
I
0.7383 0.8337 0.8320 0.7850 0.8751 0.8238 0.7272 0.7605 0.7243 0.8463
I I I I I
I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I
I
s
v
0
I.:ilgu!la
roba
el ratoli
0.4579
0.3930 0.4045 0.5313
~ AT IS MM MO
0
les errades
0.4094 0.5843 0.4754 0.4574 0.5055 0.4978
r
GV
v vacomptar
04396 0,4723
RS
CB CP DS GM
s I.: .Angela
I I I I I I I I I
I I
I I I
I I I I I I I
H-3 H-3
0.2666
H%4 H-3 H-3 H-3 L- 3
0.2257 0.3502 0.2736 0.3135 0.2903 0.2602
H-3 H-3 H-3
0.2429 0.2173 0.3358
' I
I I I I I I I
' I
I I I I I I I I I I
0.5348 0.6316 0.5386 0.5539 0.5996 0.5705 0.4961 0.5196 0.6288 0.5985
I
I I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I
I I
I I
s
v
0
I.: Amelia
se n'haanat
a Malaga
0.4680 0.5276 0.6638 0.4278 0.5412 0.4922 0.3930 0.4303 0.5122 0.5856
I I
H- 3
I I
LH%4 I H%4 I I H- 3 I I L!H%4 I I H- 3 I I H- 3 I I H- 3 : (4?) H- 3 I
I I
I
H- 3
0.4680 0.4897 0.6068 0.4573 0.5215 0.4922 0.4482 0.4473 0.4487 0.7081
I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I
0.4941 0.5313 0.5477 0.5554 0.5669 0.6282 0.4827 0.5256 0.4840 0.6012
I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I
219
220
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
Condition: shortS /long 0
~ er
s
v
0
I: Angela
vacomptar
les errades de les frases
I I
I I
AT
0.3882
CB
0.3920
CP
0.5425
? ?
I I
I I
H-3
DS
0.5917
: LH% (P)4
GM GV
0.4922
I
0.4519
IS
0.3769
MM MO
0.3827 0.4593
RS
0.6042
~ eakei
AT CB CP DS
GM GV IS
MM MO RS
~ er
AT CB CP DS
GM GV IS
MM MO RS
I
H-3
I I
?
I I
0.5289
0.4016 0.4978 0.5810 0.5226 0.5350
?
I
I I I I
? ? ?
I I I I
0.5682
I I
I I
I I
0.4514
I I
I I
I I
0.4622
I I
?
H-3
I I I
0.5729
?
s
v
I: aguila
robit
0.4030 0.4108 0.5206 0.3980 0.4109 0.4286 0.4053 0.3998 0.4710 0.5358
I
I I I
H-3 H-3
I I I
?
I I I
I I
I I I I
H-3 L!H%4 !H-3 L!H%4
I
?
I I
H-3
I I
?
I I I I I I I I
I I
I I I
I I I I I I
s
v se Ifhaanat
I I
I I
H- 3 : LH% (P) 4 I
I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I
I
H- 3 H- 3 H- 3 !H- 3
? L!H%4 L!H%4 H- 3
0.5276 0.6049 0.5355 0.4593 0.5005 0.5588 0.4631 0.3905 0.4890 0.7454
I
H- 3
?
I
I I
I I
H- 3
?
I I I I I I
I
I
I I I I I I I I I I
I I
0.8383 0.8178 0.9568 0.8335 0.9070 0.8261 0.7419 0.8058 0.8802 0.8797
del meu germ~ I
I 0.4740 I I 0.4319 I I 0.4459 I I 0.4004 I I 0.4902 0.5982H- 3 : I I 0.4375 I I 0.3810 I I 0.4616 I I 0.4410 I
0.7281 0.7213 0.8194 0.6851 0.7563 0.7748 0.6639 0.7034 0.7466 0.7871
0
I
I I
I I I
ala ciutat
I I I
I
elratolf
I:AmeJ.ia 0.4498 0.5126 0.4802 0.5181 0.4836 0.4797 0.4075 0.4627 0.6390 0.5628
I I
0 I I
0.2862 0.2825 0.2591 0.2892 0.2895 0.2873 0.2456 0.2282 0.3109 0.3082
I I
0.5964 0.5202 0.6081 0.5871 0.6028 0.7488 0.5428 0.4846 0.5652 0.6418
?
0.6100 0.5101 0.5707 0.4922 0.5895 0.5358 0.5388 0.4604 0.4986 0.6316
de Malaga
'I
.I I I I
I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I
I
0.5064 0.5485 0.6184 0.4734 0.5197 0.6327 0.4743 0.5485 0.5349 0.6047
Appendices 221
Condition: long S I short 0
~ AT r
s
v
I:aviaAngela
vacomptar
0.7967
CB
0.6643
CP
0.8754
DS
0.7018
GM
0.8170
GV
0.6762
IS
0.6400
MM
0.7188
I
H%4
I I I
LH%4
0.4078
H%4
0.6114
?
0.4333
I I I
I I
H-3
I I I
H- 3
I I
I
0.5936
I
L- 3
I
I
I
0.7937
I
I I
0.7823
I I I
I I I
0.7540
I I
I I
0.6895
I
0.4072
I I
0.8323
I
0.4590
I I I
0.9274
I I
0.4538
I
0.6455
I I I
0.5019
0 les errades
I
0.8390
I I
I I
MO
0.9736
: H% (P) 4
0.4667
I
0.8074
I
RS
0.8848
I I I
0.5069
I I I
0.8398
I I I
~ r
H-3
s
v
La meva gran aguila
roba
AT
1.0410
CB
0.9760
I I I I I
H-3
0.2937
H-3
0.2435
CP
1.3183
I
H% (P) 4
0.3590
DS
1.2055
: LH%(P)4
0.3497
GM
I I
1.0388
GV
1.0315
IS
0.8598
MM
I I I I I I
0.7930
MO
0.6977 + 0. 5667:
RS
1.1797
~ er
AT CB
0.3603
H%4
0.2805
H%4
0.2846
L- 3
0.2684
I I I
0.9370 1.3225 1.0590
GM
1.2610
GV
1.2595 0.8666
MM
0.8873
MO
1.0771 1.1066
I I I I
H- 3 H- 3
0.5289 0.5827
LH%4
0.5172
: L!H%(P)4
0.4350
I I I I I I I I I I I I I
H%4
0.5033
H%(P)4
0.5700
I I
0.5926
I I
0.5519
I
0.5973
I I
0.5894
I I I
0.9001
H-3
0.5776
I
0.5113
I I
0.5764
I
0.5166 H%4
I I
0 a Malaga 0.5037
I I
I I I
. I I
0.6483
I
I
I I
0.5692
I I I
0.5138
I I
0.5312
I I
H%4
0.4059
I I
0.5323
I I
0.4774
I I
0.6147
I I
? ?
I I
0.6116
I I
v
I I
I
0.5643
I I
se rfha anat
1.0352
I
0.6094
I I
0.2409
I I
0.5681
I I
s
DS
RS
L!H%4 H-3
I I
0.3385
I I
0.4887
La teva tia Amelia
CP
IS
H%4
I I
0 el ratoli
0.7413
I I I I
' ' I
I
I
' I I I I I I I I I I I
222
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
Condition: long S /long_Q
~ er
s
v
I.:avia Angela
vacomptar
''
AT CB CP DS GM GV IS MM MO
0.7349 0.7882 0.9549 0.8775 0.9240 0.7162 0.7981 0.7584 0.9878
!H- 3 L- 3 ' 'I LH%4 :L!H%(P)4 :L!H%(P)4
L- 3 LH%4
0.4704 0.4057 0.5546 0.3904 0.4585 0.4725 0.5065 0.4394 0.5299
RS
0.8838
H-3
0.5226
~ k
AT CB CP
I I
LH%4 : (4?) H-3
'I I
'I 'I
I I
I I I I
'I I
'I 'I
v I I
1.0823 0.9918
I I
'
I
I
0.8416
el ratolf
delmeu germA
0.4634
0.6549
0.5155
0.6808
H- 3
0.2572 I'
0.4093
0.7826
0.4259 0.4874 0.4397 0.4640 0.3828 0.5477 0.4757
0.6936 0.7186 0.7348 0.7082 0.7254 0.7523 0.7851
I
0.2525 I I 0.2750 I I 0.2890 I I 0.3511 I I 0.1929 I 0.2919 '' 0.3293 I' '
s
v se n1laanat
'I H-3 1.0525 :L!H% (p) 4 0.9389 I' 0.9945 H-3 ' 1.0502 ' LH%4 0.6861 +0.6551: LH%4 I I LH%4 1.1524 H%4 L!H%4 I I H-3 I H-3 I' I I
0.6571
0
La teva Amelia
I I
0.8732 0.9678 0.8390 0.8541 0.8343 0.8607 0.7333 0.8336 0.7490
0.2634 ' I 0.2493 I
'
1.0830 1.1334 1.1870 1.2722
0.6057 0.5390 0.6186 0.6239 0.6413 0.7072 ? 0.6155 0.5507 0.5692
H%4 H-3
0.6109 + 0.5116 : L!H%4 I' H-3 1.1533
~
''
roba
I
r
''
s
I 1.1408 LH%4 : H% (P)4 1.0998 I I 1.0854 H%4 0.6237 + 0.4396 : H%4 : H% (P)4 1.0794
RS
'I
''
La meva gran aguila
0.9623
DS GM GV IS MM MO
AT CB CP DS GM GV IS MM MO RS
I
0 les errades de les frases
0.4898 0.5436 0.4942 0.4820 0.5378 0.5715 0.4797 0.4121 0.5252 0.7020
0 I I
ala ciutat ?
I
' '
I
'' I
'
' I
I
' ' I
' I
I
'
'
H-3
0.6480 0.4973 0.5251 0.5088 0.5896 0.5527 0.5732 0.4916 0.5158 0.6128
de Malaga
' I
I I
'I
'' I
' I I I I I I
'' I
''
0.4989 0.5899 0.6208 0.5147 0.5585 0.5935 0.5279 0.5652 0.5221 0.6516
Appendices 123
Appendix B - Complex SVO Experiment (i.e. experiment 2) B-1. Data ( 12 Sentences)
Context 1: El Pedro noes troba be? Em sembla que esta molt furi6s. Que ha passat?
Ta.rget Sentences: 25. La Silvia no va mencionar que 1' Angela havia comptat les errades. 26. La Silvia nova mencionar que 1' Angela havia comptat les errades de les frases. 27. La Silvia nova mencionar que 1' avia Angela havia comptat les errades. 28. La Silvia no va mencionar que 1' avia Angela havia comptat les errades de les frases.
Context2: No et trobes be? Em sembla que estas de mal humor. Que ha passat?
Target Sentences: 33. La Barbara 34. La Barbara 35. La Barbara 36. La Barbara
suposa que 1' aguila robe\ el ratoH. suposa que 1' aguila robe\ el ratoH del meu germa. suposa que la meva aguila robe\ el ratolf. suposa que la meva aguila robe\ el ratoli del meu germa.
Context 3: No m'agrada que tota la familia estigui sota arrest domiciliari. A mes, em sembla que la mare esta especialment nerviosa. Que ha passat?
Target Sentences: 41. El pare va dir que 1' Amelia se n'ha anat a Malaga. 42. El pare va dir que 1' Amelia s se n'ha anat ala ciutat de Malaga. 43. El pare va dir que la teva tia Amelia se n'ha anat a Malaga. 44. El pare va dir que la teva tia Amelia se n'ha anat ala ciutat de Malaga.
224 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
B-2. Results Condition: shortS I short 0 (in the embedded clause)
"' AT CB CP DS GM GV IS MM MO RS
""' AT CB CP DS GM GV IS MM MO RS
s
v
LaSfivla
nova mendonar
0.5702 LH%4 0.6689 L!H%4 0.6453 L!H%4 0.5656 0.5989 L- 3 0.4542 0.4342 0.5843 L!H%4 0.7527 LH%4 0.5485
0.8649 H-3 0.7720 0.8689 H%4 0.8506 H%4 0.9003 L%(P)4 0.8217 L-3 0.7782 H%4 0.7171 0.7951 H- 3 1.0021 H%4
s
v suposa
0.4140 0.5698 L!H%4 0.5033
? 0.4717
? 0.4501
? 0.5342 H-3 0.5499 H-3
0.0880 0.0895
s
v
I' Angela
havia comptat
0 les errades
0.5004 H%4 0.4572
0.5779
0.7501
0.5524
0.8597
0.6240 L!H%4 0.7297 LH%(P)4 0.4580
0.7650
0.8205
0.7815
0.8161
0.5441
0.8651
0.4993
0.8517
0.4576
0.5277
0.5919
0.8424
0.6182
0.7343
0.6807
0.8446
?
La Barbara 0.5123 H-3 0.4823 H-3 0.4589
COMP que
0.4882 H-3 0.4799 H-3 0.7283 LH%4 0.7016 H% (P) 4 0.6789 L!H% (P) 4 0.6668 LH%4 0.5176 H- 3 0.4972 H-3 0.7009 H%4 0.5437 H-3
0.0810 0.0950 0.0861 0.0901 0.0701 0.0987 0.0697 0.0849
COMP que 0.0667 0.0679 0.0682 0.0746 0.0887 0.0962 0.0892 0.0856 0.0968 0.0844
0.4646 ? 0.0668 L- 3 0.5236 L!H%4 0.6058 LH%4 0.4874
s
v
0
I' aguila
roba
e1 ratolf
0.4725 H-3 0.3757 ? 0.3657 !H- 3 0.3201
0.2816
0.5713
0.2373
0.5190
0.2238
0.6387
0.3076 ? 0.2961
0.6743
0.2853
0.6027
0.2451
0.4918
0.2286
0.5957
0.2163
0.5862
0.2593
0.5999
0.5015 (4?) !H- 3 0.4584 H-3 0.3876 H-3 0.3697 H-3 0.3870 H-3 0.4780 !H- 3
0.6046
Appendices 115
"' AT CB CP DS GM
GV IS MM MO RS
s
v
COMP
El pare
vadir
que
0.3899
0.3742 H%4 0.3409 L!H%(P)4
0.0759
0.3740
0.3269 !H- 3
0.0618
0.3476
0.3702 L-3 0.3907 !H-L%4 0.3544 L-3 0.2800
0.0680
0.3963
0.3706 0.3706 0.3544 0.3132 L- 3 0.3742 0.4870
s
0.0833 0.0760 0.0669 0.0870
0.3245 H- 3 0.3419 !H- 3
0.0785
0.4318
0.4632
0.5776
0.5996
0.5507
0.6008
0.4911 L!H%4 0.5229 LH%4
0.4282
0.4911
0.4970
0.5602
0.4417 L!H%4 0.4064 H- 3
0.5345
0.5682
? 0.4411
0.5526
0.4152
0.5743
0.5095
0.4750
0.6096
0.6354
0.4052 H- 3 0.6491 H%4 0.4935 H- 3
0.1129
0
se n'ha anat a Malaga
0.4684 H-3 0.4633 H- 3 0.6538 LH%4
0.0641
0.3456
v
l' Amelia
Condition: shortS /long 0 (in the embedded clause)
s
v
La Sfl.via
nova mencionar
AT
0.7607 H%(P)4
0.9259
CB
0.6839 L!H%(P)4
0.8029 !H- 3 0.8885 H- 3 0.8186 L- 3 0.8981 H% (P) 4
0.0532
0.8577 H%4 0.7499 H% (P) 4
0.0858
0.6824
0.0788
"" CP DS GM
GV IS MM MO RS
0.6728 H-3 0.7344 L-3 0.5579 L-3 0.5462
? 0.4265
?
COMP que 0.0901
?
0.5140 L-3 0.7348 LH%4 0.5874
0.7772 !H- 3 0.8589
?
?
0.0822 0.0842 0.0787
0.0860
? 0.0699 0.0672
s
v
0
r Angela
havia comptat
les errades
de les frases
0.5305 LH%4 0.5365
0.6756
0.6356
0.8208
0.6740
0.5947
0.9119
0.6111 LH%4 0.5239 L- 3 0.4614 H-3 0.5376 LH%4 0.4467 L-3 0.4568 H-3 0.6696 H%4 0.5531 (Agueda) H- 3
0.8268
0.5803
0.9193
0.5309
0.6478
0.8841
0.7550
0.6554
0.8704
0.5954
0.6997
0.8616
0.6873
0.5125
0.7490
0.4749
0.5148
0.8460
0.7415
0.5323
0.7536
0.7544
0.6270
0.8714
226 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
s
v
La Barbara
suposa
COMP que
AT
0.5388 H- 3
0.5236
CB
0.5971 L!H%4
CP
s
v
ragu!la
roba
el ratoli
0.0759
0.5113 H%4
0.2830
0.4968
0.7917
0.5732 H- 3
0.0648
0.3787 H-3
0.2593
0.4537
0.7180
0.5736 LH%4
0.5783 H- 3
0.0829
0.5722 H%4
0.2764
0.4592
0.8608
DS
0.5757 LH%4
0.5248
0.0901
0.5797 LH%4
0.3721
0.4896
0.8342
GM
0.4818 H- 3
0.6163 H% (P) 4
0.0672
0.3847 H-3
0.2643
0.5462
0.7657
GV
0.5071 H- 3
0.5782 L- 3
0.0728
0.4126 LH%4
0.2583
0.5111
0.8356
0.4815
0.5084
0.0875
0.4848 (4?) H- 3
0.3232
0.4175
0.6835
0.0704
0.3378
0.2057
0.3878
0.7662
" IS MM MO RS
"' AT CB CP DS GM
GV IS MM MO
RS
?
?
0 delmeu germa
?
0.5527 L!H%4
0.4585
0.4960
0.6153 H- 3
0.0932
0.5332 L!H%4
0.3567
0.4783
0.7999
0.5591 H- 3
0.0885
0.5309 H-3
0.2816
0.4753
0.7957
COMP que
s
v
? 0.5752
?
?
s
v
Elpare
vadir
0.3883
0.4045 H%4 0.3104 L-3 0.2578
0.3384 0.3379 0.6111 LH% (P)4
?
0.0913 0.0683 0.0697
0.3386 !H- 3 0.4897 H% (P) 4
0.0701
0.0776
0.3830
0.4362 !H%4 0.2656
0.3130
0.2498
0.0878
0.3809 0.3464
0.0780
0.0679
? 0.3297 0.4733
0.3847 H- 3 0.3090
0.0926 0.0894
0
I Amelia se n'haanat alactutat 0.5305 H-3 0.4502 H-3 0.6305 LH%4 0.6345 LH%4 0.4969 H- 3 0.4750 H-3 0.4633 H-3 0.4755 H-3 0.5914 LH%4 0.4970 H-3
de Malaga
0.5270 H%4 0.5526
0.6034
0.4840
0.5495
0.5340
0.5957
0.5643
0.5783
0.4418
0.5777
0.5313
0.5365
0.6076
0.5731
0.5415 H-3 0.5204 (4?) !H- 3
0.6650
0.6228
0.5279
0.4602
0.4130
0.4950
0.5733
0.6320 H% (P) 4
0.5816
0.5535
0.5996 H-3
0.6627
0.6360
?
?
Appendices 227
Condition: longS I short 0 (in the embedded clause)
"' AT CB CP DS GM GV IS MM MO RS
"' AT CB CP DS GM GV IS MM MO RS
s
v
La Sflvl.a
nova mencionar
0.5349 H- 3 0.5899 L!H%4 0.4854
0.9051 H-3 0.7973 H-3 0.9023 H%(P)4 0.9811 L!H%4 0.9441 LH% (P) 4 0.7988 !H- 3 0.7972 H-3 0.8150 L!H%4 0.8021 L!H%4 0.9036 !H- 3
? 0.5932
? 0.5564
? 0.4750 0.4132
? 0.5307 L-3 0.5108 0.6452 H-3
s
v
favia Angela
havl.a comptat
0 les errades
0.7449 H-3 0.6431
0.6600
0.6312
0.4960
0.7973
0.9688 LH% (P) 4 0.8039 LH%4 0.8242 H%(P)4
0.7247
0.8421
0.6864
0.8259
0.6496
0.8665
0.0820
0.7717 LH% (p) 4
0.5786
0.8592
0.0603
0.7536
0.5323
0.7655
0.5383
0.9024
0.5886
0.6385
0.7757
0.7980
COMP que 0.0770 0.0529 0.0827 0.0813 0.0775
? 0.0950
? 0.0718 0.0788
s
v
La Barbara
suposa
COMP que
0.5527 H-3 0.4667
0.5056
0.0597
0.5592 L!H%4 0.5878 !H%4 0.6006 !H- 3 0.5980 H% (P) 4
0.0736
0.5521
0.0619
0.4259 0.4571 0.4989
? 0.5489 LH%4 0.4706
? 0.4910 H-3 0.7282 LH%4 0.5387 H-3
0.0704 0.0534 0.0578
? 0.5042 H-3 0.4506 H-3 0.6653 LH%4 0.5623 H-3
0.7006
0.0672 0.0963 0.0887 0.0819
0.8435 LH% (P) 4 0.8096 H- 3
s
v
la meva aguila
roba
0 e1 ratolf
0.7207 H% (P) 4 0.6932 H-3 0.8623 H% (P) 4 0.7674 LH%4 0.7385 H-3 0.8532 H!H%4 0.6107 H-3 0.7209 H-3 0.9425 H-3 0.7571 H-3
0.3203
0.4993
0.2364
0.5728
0.4083
0.5455
0.3537
0.5272
0.2742
0.6046
0.2269
0.5999
0.2465
0.5210
0.2362
0.5966
0.2403
0.5729
0.2720
0.6452
228 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
"' AT CB CP DS GM GV IS MM MO RS
s
v
Elpare
vadir
0.4265
0.3467 H-3 0.3111 L%4 0.3685 H-3 0.3072 !H- 3 0.4321 !H% (P) 4
0.3445 0.3685 0.3255 0.3666 0.3435 0.4066 0.3244 0.3929
0.3812 !H-3 0.3260 !H- 3 0.2760 L- 3 0.3251
COMP que 0.0641 0.0803 0.0751 0.0730 0.1332 0.0687 0.0769 0.0640 0.0788
? 0.4484
0.2999 !H- 3
0.0830
s
v
la teva tia Amelia se n'haanat 1.1061 H%4 0.9767 H- 3 1.0918 LH%4 0.9917 LH%4 1.2258 LH%4 1.0716 LH%4 0.6447 + Q.6008 L-1/H-3 0.8950 H- 3 1.2358 LH%4 1.0567 H- 3
0 a Malaga
0.4990
0.5738
0.6704
0.5051
? 0.5083
0.5049
0.4411
0.4381
0.5003
0.5634
0.5564
0.5907
0.6227 H- 3 0.4039
0.5458 0.5407
0.5019
0.5435
0.7289
0.5610
Condition: longS /long 0 (in the embedded clause)
~ AT CB CP DS GM GV IS MM MO RS
s
v
La Silvia
nova mencionar
0.5105 H-3 0.3894
? 0.5676
? 0.5030
COMP que
0.5318
0.5571
0.7525
0.5706 (hacomptat
0.5013
0.8357
0.9634 LH%4
0.7030
0.6509
0.8280
0.8183 (4?) L- 3
0.0797
0.8377 LH%4 0.7646 L!H%4 0.7446 L!H%4 0.7714 H- 3 0.6783 H- 3 0.8377 LH% (P) 4
0.7072
0.7372
0.7907
0.7009
0.6228
0.7929
0.5856
0.6286
0.7589
0.6426
0.5038
0.6944
0.5667
0.4731
0.8108
0.6320
0.5358
0.7235
0.8612 H- 3
0.6121
0.5961
0.8435
0.0963
0.8697 H-3
0.0915
0.0806 0.0603
0.0962
0.7309 H%4 0.6905 H- 3
de
0.0677
0.0664
0.7871 !H-3 0.7377 H%4
?
les frases
0
0.0945
0.3978
0.5419
les errades
0.8514 H-3 0.8270 H-!H%4 0.9117 !H-H% (P) 4
0.1540
?
v havla comptat
Angela
0.5317 0.9524 H- 3 L!H% (P) 4 0.4790 0.8917 !HL%4 0.4356 0.7624 (4?) H- 3 ?
0.4121
s l'avia
Appendices 229
""AT CB CP
DS GM GV
IS MM MO
RS
" AT CB
CP
DS GM GV
IS MM MO
RS
s
v
La Barbara
suposa
s
v
lameva aguila
roba.
el ratolf
0.4478
0.6123 H%4
0.0631
0.6602
0.4439 H%4
0.4960
0.6959
0.5252 H-3
0.5286 H-3
0.0582
0.6478 H-3
0.2456
0.4536
0.6241
0.5229
0.5913 H-3
0.0603
0.8286 (4?)H- 3
0.3741
0.4505
0.8407
0.4610
0.0822
0.8900 LH% (P)4
0.4519 H- 3
0.5614
0.7485
0.5747 H-3
0.1414
0.8027 (4?) H- 3
0.3101
0.5428
0.7480
0.6029 L-3
0.0431
0.7564 H-3
0.2985
0.4988
0.7074
0.4607
0.5013 L-3
0.0711
0.6802 H% (P) 4
0.2081
0.4267
0.6435
0.4400
0.4810
0.0671
0.8912 !H%4
0.2055
0.3949
0.7197
0.4422
0.5510 H-3
0.0656
0.8760 H-3
0.5060 H- 3
0.6051
0.7897
0.6066 H- 3
0.6066 H-3
0.1131
0.8511
0.4844 H- 3
0.4889
0.7650
? 0.5979 L!H%4 0.5200
! 0.5356
?
COMP que
?
?
?
0 delmeu germa
?
s
v
COMP
s
v
Elpare
vadir
que
la teva tia Amelia
se n'ha anat
ala ciutat
de Malaga
0.4174
0.3567 H-3
0.0835
1.0283 LH%4
0.4895
0.5654
0.4569
0.5497 LH%4 0.3449
0.3590
0.0645
0.4881
0.5406
0.5648
0.3896 H-3
0.0649
0.9400 H-3 1.0511 LH%4
0.5392
0.5646
0.6168
0.4172
0.4318 H%4
0.0918
0.9759 L!H%4
0.4504
0.5026
0.4860
0.4266
0.4162 L!H% (P)4
0.0929
1.1569 L!H%4
0.4877
0.5596
0.5430
0.3557
0.3721 !H- 3
0.0777
1.1898 L!H%4
0.5520
0.5315
0.6011
0.3663
0.3114
0.0513
1.0184 H-3
0.4296
0.5521
0.5238
!
0
?
0.3622
0.2957
0.0628
1.0756 L!H%4
0.4546
0.4932
0.5788
0.3822
0.3219 H-3
0.0980
1.2338 L!H%4
0.5271
0.4707
0.5029
0.4129
0.3461
0.0917
1.0426 H-3
0.6506
0.6093
0.5375
?
?
230
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
Appendix C- CLLD & CLRD Experiment (i.e. experiment 3)
C-1. Data 1.
local CLLD with one w
a.
Que vas fer amb les taules? (What did you do with the tables? (cf. L6pez 2002: 8)) Les taules, les vaig portar al pis. (based on L6pez 2003: 195) the tables CL.ACC PAST.lSG bring to-the flat 'The tables, I brought to the flat'
d.
On van comprar elllibre? (Where did you buy the book?) E1 llibre, el vam comprar a the book him PAST-lPL buy in 'The book, we bought in Barcelona:
2.
Barcelona. Barcelona
(Villalba 2004: 3)
local CLLD with two w Que va passar ambles taules que vaig comprar a Barcelona? (What happened to the tables I bought in Barcelona?) Les taules de Barcelona, les vaig The tables from Barcelona CL.Acc PAST.lso bring 'The tables from Barcelona, I brought to the flat'
d.
portar al pis. to-the flat
On vas comprar elllibre de Chomsky? (Where did you buy Chomsky's book?) E1 llibre de Chomsky, el vam comprar The book of Chomsky him PAST-2PL buy a in
(based on Villalba 2004: 3)
Barcelona. Barcelona
'The book by Chomsky, we bought in Barcelona:
3.
local CLLD with more than two w
a.
Que va passar amb els ve'ins Catalans de r altre co stat de r Ebre? (What happened to the Catalan neighbours from the other side of the Ebre?) Als ve'ins catalans To-the neighbours catalan robar 1' aigua. steal the-water
de f altre costat de f Ebre, els volen ofthe other side of the Ebre, cL-DAT want-they (based on Prieto 2005: 20)
'They want to steal the water from the Catalan neighbours from the other side of (the river) Ebre:
c.
A qui li vas donar 1' ampolla de vi rosat de Fran~j:a? (Whom did you give the bottle of rose wine from France?)
Appendices Campolla de vi rosat de Fran'Yll, 1' hi The bottle of rose wine from France, cL.Acc-cL.DAT donar a give to
vaig PAST.lSG
(based on Prieto 2005: 14)
la Maria. the Maria
'I gave the bottle of rose wine from France to Maria:
7.
iterative CLLD
a.
Quan va parlar delllibre amb el Pere? (When did (s)he talk about the book with Pere?) Amb en Perep del llibre2, ~'hi 1 va parlar ahir. (Villalba 2004: 3) with the Pere of-the book of.it+Loc PAST-3 talk yesterday '(S)he talked with Pere about the book:
b.
Es barata la cervesa a Barcelona? (Is beer cheap in Barcelona?) La cervesal' a Barcelon~, la1 ~ venen molt cara. (Villalba 2004: 4). the beer at Barcelona the Loc sell-3PL very e:xpensive-PEM.SG 'They sell beer very expensive at Barcelona:
8.
CLLD in embedded contexts
a.
On va portar les taules? (Where did (s)he bring the tables?) La Maria va dir que les taules les The Maria PAST.3SG say that the tables CL.ACC PAST.lSG 'Mary said that the tables, (s)he brought to the flat'
b.
va
portar al pis. flat
bring to-the
Qui va parlar ahir delllibre? (Who talked about the book yesterday?) Sembla que, del llibre, en va parlar ahir la Maria. seems that of-the book of.it PAST-3 talk yesterday the Maria (Villalba 2004: 4) 'It seems that the book, Maria talked about yesterday:
9.
non-local CLLD with one w
a.
Dbn han sortit les taules? (Where do the tables here come from?) Les The
taules ~ Maria tables the Maria
va PAST.3SG
dir ~ el Joel les va say that the Joel CL.ACC PAST.3SG
portar de casa. bring from home 'The tables, Maria said that Joel brought from home'
231
232 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
e.
On va comprar elllibre? (Where did (s)he buy the book?) Fl llibre, .!.!\ nena va dir ~ el va cornprar a Barcelona. the book the girl PAST3SG say that CL.ACC PAST-3SG buy in Barcelona (based on Villalba 2004: 3) 'The girl said that the book (s)he bought in Barcelona:
10. non-local CLLD with two w c.
Que va passar amb les taules que vaig comprar a Barcelona? (What happened to the tables I bought in Barcelona?) Les taules de Barcelona, en fud. va dir ~ les The tables from Barcelona the Joel PAST.3sG say that CL.ACC
va PAST.3SG
portar al pis. bring to-the flat 'Joel said that the tables from Barcelona, (s)he brought to the flat'
d.
On va comprar elllibre de Chomsky? (Where did (s)he buy Chomsky's book?) El llibre de Chomsky, en fu.d va dir ~ the book of Chomsky the Joel PAST.3sG say that elva comprar a Barcelona CL.Acc PAST.3sG buy in Barcelona.
(based on Villalba 2004: 3)
'Joel said that the book by Chomsky, (s)he bought in Barcelona:
11. non-local CLLD with more than 2 w a.
Que va passar amb els vems catalans de I' altre co stat de I' Ebre? (What happened to the Catalan neighbours from the other side of the Ebre?)
m
A1s ve'ins catalans de 1' altre costat de 1' Ebre, Be a va To-the neighbours catalan ofthe other side ofthe Fhre the Bea PAST.3sG dir ~ els say that cL-DAT
volen robar 1' aigua. want-they steal the-water
(based on Prieto 2005: 20)
'Bea said that they want to steal the water from the Catalan neighbours from the other side of (the river) Ebre:
A qui li vas donar I' ampolla de vi rosat de Fran~a? (Whom did he give the bottle of rose wine from France?) L' ampolla de vi rosat de Fran~, en Enric va dir ~ The bottle of rose wine from Francia the Enric PAsr.3sG say that
1' hi
va donar a la Maria. CL.ACC-CL.DAT PAST.3sG give to the Maria 'Enric said that the bottle of rose wine from France he gave to Maria: (based on Prieto 2005: 14)
Appendices 233 12. ( CL)LD out of CLLD a.
Sap la Joana alguna historia del seu avi? (Does Joana know any story from her grandfather?) [a Del seu avi] h. Maria diu ~ [~ les histories t(a)] la Joana of-the her grandfather Maria say.3so that the stories the Joana les coneix totes t(~). CL.ACC know.3SG all 'Maria says that Joana knows all ofher grandfather's stories' (based on L6pez 2003: 196: 6)
b.
Qui va comprar 1' ampolla de vi rosat de Borde us? (Who did buy the bottle of rose wine from Bordeaux?) [a De Bordeus] la Maria diu que [~ l'ampolla de vi rosatt(a)]la From Bordeaux the Maria say.3so that the bottle of rose wine va comprar el Joel. CL.ACC PAST.3SG buy the Joel 'Mary says that the bottle of rose wine from Bordeaux Joel bought:
c.
Qui va comprar elllibre de Chomsky? (Who bought the book by Chomsky?) [a De Chomsky] la Maria diu que [~ elllibre t(a)] el Joel of Chomsky the Mary PAST .3so say that the book the Joel el va comprar. CL.ACC PAST .3SG buy 'Mary said that the book by Chomsky, Joel bought:
d.
On va veure la nena elllibre de la Maria? (Where did the girl see the book by Mary?) [a De la Maria] la nena va dir que [p elllibre t(a)] ofthe Mary the girl PAST.3so say that the book
l'ha vist a la biblioteca. CL.ACC PAST.3SG seen in the library 'The girl said that the book by Mary, (s)he has seen in the library: 13. (CL)LD out of CLRD a.
Coneix la Joana alguna histOria del seu avi? (Does Joana know any story from her grandfather?) La Maria diu ~ [o. del seu avi] la Joana The Maria say.3so that of-the her grandfather the Joana les coneix totes t(~), [~ les histories t(a)]. CL.Acc know.3so all, the stories 'Maria says that Joana knows all ofher grandfather's stories' (based on L6pez 2003: 196: 6)
234 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
b.
Qui va comprar 1' ampolla de vi rosat de Bordeus? (Who did buy the bottle of rose wine from Bordeaux?) [o.De Bordeus] @. Maria diu .qy&. la From Bordeaux the Maria say.3so that CL.Acc
va comprar PAST.3so buy
Joel, [~ rampolla de vi rosatt(a)]. the Joel, the bottle of rose wine 'Mary says that the bottle of rose wine from Bordeaux Joel bought: el
14. local CLRD with one w a.
Que vas fer ambles taules? (What did you do with the tables? (cf. L6pez 2002: 8)) Les vaig portar a1 pis, les taules. (based on L6pez 2003: 195) CL.ACC PAST.lSG bring to-the flat, the 'The tables, I brought to the flat'
e.
tables
On vas comprar elllibre? (Where did you buy the book?) El vam comprar a Barcelona, el llibre. him PAST-2PL buy in Barcelona the book We bought it in Barcelona, the book:
(Villalba 2004)
15. local CLRD with two w (same sentences as for local CLLD) c.
Que va passar amb les taules que vaig comprar a Barcelona? (What happened to the tables I bought in Barcelona?) Les vaig portar a1 pis, les taules de Barcelona. CL.ACC PAST.l SG bring to-the flat, the tables from Barcelona 'The tables from Barcelona, I brought to the flat'
d.
On vas comprar elllibre de Chomsky? (Where did you buy Chomsky's book?) El vam comprar a CL.ACC PAST.2PL buy in
Barcelona, el llibre de Cllomsk.y. Barcelona, the book of Cllomsky. (based on Villalba 2004: 3)
'The book by Cllomsky, we bought in Barcelona:
16. local CLRD with more than two w a.
Que va passar amb els vems catalans de r altre co stat de 1' Ebre? (What happened to the Catalan neighbours from the other side of the Ebre?) Els cL-DAT
volen robar 1' aigua, als ve'ins catalans de want-they steal the-water, to-the neighbours catalan of
Appendices 235
1' altre co stat de the
(based on Prieto 2005: 20)
l'Ebre. other side of the Ebre
'They want to steal the water from the Catalan neighbours from the other side of (the river) Ebre:
c.
A qui li vas donar 1' ampolla de vi rosat de Fran'i=a? (Whom did you give the bottle of rose wine from France?) Chi vaig donar a la Maria, l'ampolla de CL.ACC-CL.DAT PAST.lSG give
to the Maria, the
rosat de Francia. rose wine from Francia
vi bottle of
(based on Prieto 2005: 14)
'I gave the bottle of rose wine from France to Maria:
20. iterative CLRD (Villalba 2004: 17). a.
Quan va parlar delllibre amb el Pere? (When did (s)he talk about the book with Pere?) N 2'hi1 va parlar ahir, amb el Perel' delllibre2 (based on Villalba 2004: 3) of.it-wc PAST-3 talk yesterday with the Pere of-the book '(S)he talked with Pere about the book:
b.
Es la cervesa cara a Barcelona? (Is beer cheep in Barcelona?) La1 ~ venen molt cara, la cervesal' a them Loc sell-3PL very e:xpensive-FEM.PL the beers at (based on Villalba 2004: 3) Barcelona2 • Barcelona 'They sell beers very expensive at Barcelona:
22. CLLD and CLRD at the same time b.
Quan va parlar delllibre amb en Pere? (When did (s)he talk about the book with Pere?) Amb en Perel' ~'hi 1 va parl.ar ahir, delllib~. (based on Villalba 2004: 3) with the Pere of.it+Loc PAST-3 talk yesterday of-the book '(S)he talked with Pere about the book:
c.
Es la cervesa cara a Barcelona? (Is beer cheep in Barcelona?) La the
cervesal' la 1 beers them
a at
Barcelona2• Barcelona
h~
venen
molt cara,
we sell-3PL very expensive-FEM.PL
'They sell beers very expensive at Barcelona:
(based on Villalba 2004: 3)
236 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
C-2. Results
~ r
CLLD Les taules
cl
v
pp
les
vaigportar
alpis
lsi
0.6732 LH%4
0.1689
O.S134
0.5427
2pi
0.6S92 LH%4
0.14S7
0.4SS7
0.4799
3an
0.7378 H% (P) 4
0.1789
o.sooo
0.4633
4ne
O.S167 H-3
0.1801
0.4443
0.4737
Sea
O.S608 H%4
0.1S17
O.S126
0.427S
6cl
0.7S4S H% (P) 4
0.1846
0.6716
0.6234
7an
0.7619 LH%
0.1709
0.4909
0.566S
llsi
O.S779 H-3
0.1183
0.4926
0.5333
12xa
0.4963 !H- 3
0.1624
0.42S9
0.5143
0.3663
0.1088
0.3S83
0.4287
0.4721 H-3
0.1301
O.S042
0.4614
0.4179
0.1S87
0.4426
0.4197
MM
??
RPJ YH
??
~ r
lsi 2pi 3an 4ne Sea 6cl
CLLD Elllibre
cl
v
pp
el
vamcomprar
a Barcelona
0.4670 H-3 0.4647 H-3 0.5717 H%(P)4
0.0628
O.S199
0.0829
0.4734
O.S94S (a la Rambla) 0.6698
0.1143
O.S488
0.6708
O.S388 H-3 0.4762 H%(P)4
0.0476
O.S614
0.6417
0.0797
O.S128
0.5840
O.SS86 H%(P)4
0.1902
0.61S1
0.7917
?
Appendices 137
~ r
7an llsi 12xa
MM RPJ YH
~ lsi 2pi 3an 4ne Sea 6cl 7an llsi 12xa
MM RPJ YH
CLLD Elllibre
d
v
el
vamcomprar
pp a Barcelona
0.5166 LH% (P) 4
0.1180
0.4743
0.6524
0.4991 H-3 0.5245 LH% (P) 4
0.1448
0.6432
0.6981
0.0961
0.4727
0.5764
0.0383
0.3916
0.6215
0.0437
0.4138
0.6762
0.0470
0.4695
0.6212
0.2633
?? 0.3415
? 0.3251 H-3
LD
d
v
de Barcelona
les
vaigportar
pp alpis
0.4897
0.6792 !H- 3
0.1807
0.5801
0.5830
0.4078
0.5641 H- 3
0.1612
0.4616
0.4738
0.4254
0.8622 H%4
0.1542
0.4854
0.4568
0.4612
0.6339 H- 3
0.1340
0.4458
0.5076
0.4447
0.6874 H% (P) 4
0.1817
0.4989
0.4202
0.5083
0.8338 H% (P) 4
0.1661
0.6212
0.6577
0.4945
0.6923 H% (P) 4
0.1774
0.5004
0.5788
0.4415
0.7443 L!H- 3
0.1060 aa)
0.4920
0.4466
0.4380
0.6290 H% !P) 4
0.1509
0.4720
0.4793
0.3885
0.5347 H- 3
0.1531
0.4091
0.4913
0.4148
0.5707 H- 3
0.1383
0.4802
0.4802
0.4181
0.6219 H-3
0.1359
0.4495
0.4547
CL Les taules
?
238 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
""' lsi
2pi
3an 4ne Sea 6cl 7an !lsi 12xa
MM RPJ YH
CL Elllibre
LD de Chomsky
d
v
el
vamcomprar
pp a Barcelona
0.3888
O.S438 H- 3 O.S832 H- 3
0.1194
0.490S
O.S972
0.0779
0.4173
0.7190
0.3097
0.7138 H%4
0.1003
O.S604
0.7167
0.3643
0.6493 H- 3
0.0871
0.4883
0.6441
0.3826
O.S983 H% (P) 4
0.0924
0.4904
0.6239
0.3674
0.7949 H% (P) 4
0.1269
0.6262
0.7899
0.3643
0.6717 H% (P) 4
0.102S
0.4810
0.6688
0.3774
0.6298 L- 3
0.0612
0.4717
0.6604
0.3874
0.6220 H% (P) 4
0.10S9
0.3922
0.5774
0.3434
0.4180 (H?) 3
0.0533
0.3668
0.6463
0.3419
O.S781 H-3
0.0861
0.4723
0.7724
0.3066
O.S141 H- 3
0.0920
O.S094
0.6344
0.3670
~ r
CLLD
Als veins catalans de 1' altre
cl els
v
DO
volenrobar
l'aigua
costat de l'Ebre
lsi
!H%(P)4
2pi
H- 3
3an
H% (P) 4
O.S344
4ne
LH% (P) 4
0.4SS7
Sea
H% (P) 4
0.4S30
6cl
LH% (P) 4
O.S627
H% (P) 4
0.4909
7an llsi
?
12xa
H% (P) 4
MM RPJ
H- 3
YH
(4?) H- 3
0.4602
0.3788
Appendices 239
~
CL I:ampolla devirosat
c1 1'
LD de Fran~
lsi
H-3
2pi
!H- 3
3an
(4?) H- 3
4ne
(file missing)
Sea
H-3
6d
H% (P) 4
7an
H% (P) 4
llsi
L-3
12xa
H% (P) 4
MM
H-3
RPJ
H-3
YH
H-3
~
CLLD delllibre,
lsi
H-3
H% (P) 4
2pi
?
H-3
3an
H% (P) 4
H%4
4ne
H-3
Sea
H% (P) 4
H% (P) 4
6d
H% (P) 4
H%
7an
LH%(P) 4
LH%(P)4
llsi
H-3
H-3
12xa
H% (P) 4
H% (P) 4
MM
YH
pp ala Maria
-
CLLD AmbelPere
RPJ
v hi vaig donar
H-3 H%4
? H-3
d n,'hi
v vaparlar
Adv ahir
0.2941 (d lemrthenl.nQ:) 0.278S 0.4893
0.3311
0.4162
0.3121
0.3526
0.2S1S
240 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
~ Lacervesa. CLLD
lsi
CLLD a Barcelona,
?
H% (P) 4
?
H% (P) 4
H% (P) 4
H% (P) 4
H-3
H- 3
H-3
H% (P) 4
6cl
H% (P) 4
H% (P) 4
7an
H% (P) 4
H% (P) 4
L- 3
(3?) LH%4
H% (P) 4
H-3
4ne 5ca
llsi 12xa MM RPJ
(sust. pi) H- 3
s
v
La Marla
vadir
COMP que
CLLD les taules 1
?
H- 3
?
H- 3
3an
?
H- 3
4ne
?
H- 3
H% (P) 4
H- 3
H- 3
H- 3
6cl
LH% (P) 4
LH%4
7an
LH% (P) 4
H- 3
llsi
?
LH%4
H- 3
MM RPJ YH
d les 1
v vaportar
pp alpis
0.4712
5ca
12xa
Adv molt cara
H-3
lsi
2pi
v venen
H%4
YH
"'
cl
hi,
i.'hi" 0.1104
2pi 3an
d la
H- 3 ~
?
?
H-3
?
Appendices 241
~
v
COMP
Sembla
que
CLLD delllibre 1
v
cl en1
vaparlar
Adv ahir
s laMaria
lsi H- 3 2pi H-3 3an (lg) L% (P) 4
(4?) H- 3
(length)L-3
LH%4
4ne 5ca H% (P) 4 0.6023
6cl LH% (P) 4 7an
0.1974
0.5698
(lg) L% (P) 4 LH% (P) 4
llsi (length)L-3
!H- 3
12xa
0.4575 LH% (P) 4
MM H- 3 RPJ H- 3 YH
~ lsi 2pi 3an 4ne
0.1574 (length)L- 3
CLLD Les taules 1
!H- 3
s
v
COMP
s
cl
v
Ia Maria
vadir
que
el]oel
les 1
va
pp decasa
portar LH%4
H- 3
H-3
H- 3
LH%4
H- 3
LH%4
H- 3
5ca
H-3
(4?) H- 3
6cl
LH% (P) 4
H-3
7an
LH% (P) 4
H- 3 0.6200
H-3
H- 3
?
H- 3
242 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
"' llsi
12xa
MM RPJ YH
"' lsi
2pi
3an 4ne 5ca
6d 7an llsi 12xa MM RPJ YH
CLLD Les taules 1
s
v
laMaria
vadir
COMP que
s
d
v
elJoel
les 1
va
pp decasa
portar L!H%4
!H- 3
H- 3
LH% (P) 4 H-3
?
H-3
i'
?
H-3
CLLD Elllibre 1
H% (P) 4
s
v
v
vadir
COMP que
d
lanena
ell
va comprar
3
aelllrth+
+lelllrth)
H- 3 H% (P) 4
H% (4) P
H- 3 H% (P) 4
?
LH% (P) 4
?
LH% (P) 4 H- 3
L-3
LH% (P) 4
H%(P)4
H- 3 H- 3 H- 3
0.5037
(4?) H- 3
pp a Barcelona
Appendices 243
~ lsi 2pi 3an 4ne
CLLD Les taules de Barcelona1
s
v
el Joel
vadlr
LH% (P) 4
H- 3
H- 3
H-3
H% (P) 4
H% (P) 4
H- 3 H% (P) 4
6d
LH% (P) 4
H-3
7an
H% (P) 4
H-3
12xa MM
"' lsi
2pi
3an 4ne
v
pp
va portar
al pis
H-3
(JW:h) !H- 3
?
H% (P) 4
H% (P) 4
0.4618
?
RPJ YH
d les 1
?
Sea
llsi
COMP que
H- 3 !H- 3
H- 3
CLLD Elllibre de Chomsky1
s
v
el Joel
vadir
H% (P) 4
H-3
H- 3
H-3
H% (P) 4 H- 3
Sea
H% (P) 4
6d
LH%4
H-3 H-3
COMP que
c1 el1
v
pp
va comprar
a Barcelona
244 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
":.:: 7an llsi 12xa MM RPJ YH
" lsi
CLLD Elllibre de Chomsky1
s
v
el]oel
vadir
H% (P) 4
H-3
H- 3
?
H% (P) 4
H% (P) 4
4ne 5ca 6cl
7an llsi
v
pp
va comprar
a Barcelona
H-3
H- 3
?
CLLD A1s veins cat. de f altre c. de f Ebre 1
s
v
laBea
vadir
H% (P) 4
H- 3 H- 3
H- 3
H% (P) 4
H- 3 H- 3
H- 3 H% (P) 4
LH% (P) 4
H% (P) 4
?
H- 3
H% (P) 4
?
?
H- 3
H- 3
12xa
H% (P) 4
!H-3
MM
H% (P) 4
RPJ
H- 3
YH
c1 el 1
H- 3
2pi
3an
COMP que
H- 3
?
H- 3
COMP que
c1 els.1
v DO volenrobar falgua
Appendices 145
"' lsi
2pi
3an 4ne 5ca 6cl
7an llsi 12xa MM RPJ YH
"' lsi
2pi
3an 4ne Sea 6cl
7an
CLLD ramp. de vi rosat de Fr.,
s
v
l'Enric
vadir
H- 3
?
H- 3
!
H- 3
?
H- 3
H-3
COMP que
cl 1'1
v
pp ala Maria
hiva donar
H- 3 LH% (P) 4
H-3
H% (P) 4
H-3
L- 3
L- 3
H% (P) 4
H-3
H-3
H- 3 H- 3 H- 3 CLLD Del seu avi[ 1,
H-3
s
v
laMaria diu
COMP CLLD s que les histories 1 laJoana
H- 3
H- 3
H-3
H- 3
H%(P) 4
H%
L-3
LH%4
H- 3
H- 3
cl les 1
v coneix
Q totes
?!
H-3
Q.6011 H%(P)4
L- 3
H% (P) 4
H%(P)4
L- 3
H% (P)4
0.5834
246 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
"' llsi
12xa
CLLD Delseu avi[ll
s
YH
~ lsi 2pi 3an 4ne 5ca
6cl 7an llsi 12xa
?
L- 3
H-3
?
H- 3
?
H- 3
?
H- 3
?
YH
cl les 1
v coneix
Q totes
0.4942 H% (P)4
H- 3
CLLD De Bordeus
s
v
laMaria
diu
COMP que
CLLD fampolla devirosat1
H-3
H-3
H% (P) 4
H% (P) 4
H% (P) 4
H% (P) 4
?
H-3 H-3
H-3
H-3 H-3
H% (P) 4
L- 3
H% (P) 4
H% (P) 4
L- 3
H% (P) 4
LH%4
LH%4
missinQ:
MM RPJ
COMP CLLD s que les histories 1 la.Joana
L- 3
MM RPJ
v
laMaria diu
L- 3 H-3 H-3
H-3
? !H% (P) 4
cl la 1
v
s
va
elJoel
comprar
Appendices 247
"
s
v
La Maria
diu
COMP que
lsi
2pi
3an 4ne 5ca
H% (P)4
L- 3
H% (P)4
H% (P)4
L- 3
H-3
L- 3
!
H-3
?
H% (P)4
L%4
H% (P)4
L%4
H-3
L%4
H% (P)4
H% (P)4
L%4
?
?
L- 3
!H- 3
H-3
?
H% (P)4
L%4
YH
~ lsi 2pi 3an 4ne Sea 6cl
7an
CLLD DeB. 1
Q CLLD totes les hist. 1
coneix
?
!lsi
RPJ
v
d les 1
L%4
7an
MM
s la]oana
H% (P)4
6cl
12xa
CLLD dels. a
s
v
laMarta
diu
COMP que
H-3
c1 la1
L- 3
v
s
vacompr.
e1 Joel
CLLD l'a de vi .t:,
H% (P)4
H%(P)4
L%4
H% (P)4
H-3
L%4
H% (P)4
?
L% (P) 4
H- 3
L%4
?
L- 3
LH% (P) 4
L% (P) 4
H% (P)4
L% (P) 4
1.3725 1.1884
248 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
"" llsi
12xa
CLLD DeB. 1
s
v
laMaria
diu
COMP que
d la 1
v
s
CLLD
vacompr.
elJoel
l'a de vi r..1
LH%4
HL%4
H% (P)4
L% (p) 4
MM
L%4
RPJ
H-3
YH
L%4
?
H- 3
L%4
CLRD
~ r
lsi
cl
v
Les
vaigportar
pp al pis L- 3
2pi
L- 3
3an
L%(P)4
4ne
(4!) L- 3
Sea
L- 3
6cl
L%(P)4
7an
L%(P)4
llsi
L- 3
12xa
L%4
MM
L- 3
RPJ
L%(P) 4
YH
L- 3
CLRD les taules
Appendices 249
~ r
c1
v
El
vamcomprar
pp a Barcelona
lsi
L-3
2pi
L- 3
3an
L- 3
4ne
L-3
Sea
L- 3
6cl
H% {P) 4
L% {P) 4
7an
L% (P) 4
llsi
L-3
12xa
(4?) L- 3
MM
L-3
RPJ
L-3
YH
~ lsi 2pi
3an 4ne Sea 6cl
CLRD elllibre
L- 3
cl
v
Les
vaigportar
pp alpis
L- 3 L%4 L% (P) 4 HL%4 L- 3 L% (P) 4
CL les taules
RD de Barcelona
250
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
~
cl Les
v
pp
vaigportar
alpis
7an
?
RPJ
L- 3
YH
3an 4ne 5ca
6cl 7an
llsi 12xa
MM RPJ YH
RD de Chomsky
HL% (P) 4
MM
2pi
CL elllibre
L%4
12xa
lsi
RD de Barcelona
L% (P) 4
llsi
~
CL les taules
L- 3
cl El
v vamcomprar
pp a Barcelona
L- 3 (4?) L- 3 L% (P) 4 L- 3 L- 3 L% (P) 4 L%!P)4 L-3 L%4 L- 3
? L- 3
Appendices
~ r
c1 Els
v volen robar
lsi
DO l'aigua
L%(P) 4
2pi
L%4
3an
L%(P) 4
4ne
HL%4
Sea
L- 3
6cl
L%(P) 4
7an
L%(P) 4
llsi
L- 3
12xa
L% (P) 4
MM
L- 3
RPJ
L- 3
YH
(4?) L- 3
~ lsi 2pi
d
r:
v
pp
hi vaig donar
ala Maria L- 3 HL% (P) 4
3an
L!H% (P)4
4ne
(4?) L- 3
Sea
6d
CLRD als veins catalans de l' altre costat de l'Ebre
L- 3 L% (P) 4
CL RD l'ampolla de Fran~ de vi rosat
251
251
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
~
c1
r:
v hi vaig donar
7an
L- 3
RPJ
L- 3
YH
3an 4ne 5ca 6cl 7an llsi 12xa MM RPJ
YH
de Fran~
L%4
MM
2pi
RD
L- 3
12xa
lsi
CL l'ampolla devirosat
L% (P) 4
llsi
~
pp ala Maria
L- 3
cl
v
N2'hil
vaparlar
Adv ahir
CLRD ambe1Pere 1
L- 3 L%4 L% (P) 4 L- 3
i' L% (P) 4
L% (P)4
L% (P) 4
L% (P)4
L- 3
i'
L%4 L- 3 L- 3 L- 3
CLRD delllibre2
Appendices 253
~
cl+cl La1 hi2
v venen
lsi
Adv molt cara
L-3
3an
L% (P) 4
4ne
L-3
Sea
L- 3
6cl
L%4
L% (P) 4
L% (P) 4
L% (P) 4
0.6642
7an llsi
L-3
12xa
L%4
MM
L- 3
RPJ
L- 3
YH
lsi
L- 3
CLLD AmbelPere,
c1
v
n1'h~
vaparlar
Adv ahir
H- 3
L- 3
H- 3
L- 3
H% (P) 4
L- 3
H- 3
L- 3
Sea
H% (P) 4
L- 3
6cl
H% (P) 4
7an
H% (P) 4
L% (P) 4 0.3244 L% (P) 4
2pi 3an 4ne
CLRD a Barcelona2
L- 3
2pi
~
CLRD
1a cervesa1
H% (P) 4
CLRD delllibre,
0.5647
254 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
~ llsi 12xa
MM RPJ YH
~ lsi 2pi 3an
CLLD AmbelPere.
6cl 7an
H- 3
L% (P) 4
?
L- 3
H- 3
L- 3
H- 3
L- 3
CLLD Lacervesal
YH
d+d
v
Adv
lal~
venen
molt cara
L- 3
L- 3
H- 3
L- 3
H% (P) 4
L- 3
'
L- 3
H% (P) 4
L- 3
LH% (P) 4
(4?) L- 3
LH% (P) 4
L% (P) 4
'
?
LH%4
L- 3
'
L- 3
H- 3
L- 3
CLRD delll!bre2
CLRD a Barcelo~
0.6534
MM RPJ
Adv ahir
'
llsi 12xa
v vaparlar
LH%4
4ne 5ca
d n;hl,_
?
Appendices 255
Appendix D - CLLD vs. S Experiment (i.e. experiment 4) D-1. Data 01. CLLD + S, with S given, S non-branching, 0 non-branching a.
Context:
Ja fa un temps que no trobo algunes de les meves herbes aromatiques que hi ha normalment al rebost de I' amiga de la Barbara. Saps per casualitat que ha passat amb la meva almbrega?
Target Sentence:
r almbrega, la Barbara, lava posar a I' hivernacle fa un mes. b.
Context:
La teva avia Agueda ahir ens va donar el mimero de telHon de I' esglesia. Ara em vindria de gust trucar al seu germa, el sacerdot. Tu saps que ha fet I' Agueda amb elnumero?
Target Sentence: El ntimero, 1' Agueda, elva posar a I' armari del rebedor.
c.
Context:
Es estrany. No se on s6n els meus aparells de mesura. Ara estic buscant la meva millor brUixola, la que vaig posar a I' armari de la teva tia Angela. Tu saps que ha passat amb la brUixola?
Target Sentence: La brllixola, 1' Angela se lava deixar a la barca. 02. CLLD + S, with S given, S non-branching, 0 branching a.
Context:
Ja ta un temps que no trobo algunes de les meves herbes aromatiques de I' Africa que hi ha normalment al rebost de I' amiga de la Barbara. Saps per casualitat que ha passat amb la meva alfabrega d.' Algeria?
Ta.rget Sentence:
r almbrega d' Algeria, la Barbara, lava posar a 1' hivernacle faun mes. b.
Context:
La teva avia Agueda ahir ens va donar el ntimero de telHon de I' esglesia. Ara em vindria de gust trucar al seu germa, el sacerdot. Tu saps que ha tet I' Agueda amb el numero?
Target Sentence: El ntimero de I' esglesia, I' Agueda, elva posar a I' armari del rebedor.
256 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
c.
Context:
Es estrany. No se on s6n els meus aparells de mesura. Ara estic buscant la meva millor brUi.xola, la que vaig posar a 1' armari de la teva tia Angela. Tu saps que ha passat amb la brUi.xola?
Target Sentence: La mill or bruixola, 1' Angela, se lava deixar ala barca. 03. CLLD + S, with S given, S branching, 0 non-branching
a.
Context:
Ja fa un temps que no trobo algunes de les meves herbes aromatiques que hi ha normalment al rebost de 1' amiga de la Barbara. Saps per casualitat que ha passat amb la meva altabrega?
Target Sentence:
r almbrega, 1' amiga de la Barbara, lava posar a 1' hivernacle faun mes. b.
Context:
La teva avia Agueda ahir ens va donar el numero de telefon de 1' esglesia. Ara em vindria de gust trucar al seu germa, el sacerdot. Tu saps que ha fet 1' Agueda amb el numero?
Target Sentence: El numero, 1' avia A.gueda, elva posar a 1' armari del rebedor. c.
Context:
Es estrany. No se on s6n els meus aparells de mesura. Ara estic buscant la meva millor brUi.xola, la que vaig posar a 1' armari de la teva tia Angela. Tu saps que ha passat amb la brUi.xola?
Target Sentence: La brUi.xola, la teva tia Angela, se lava deixar a la barca. 04. CLLD + S, with S given, S branching, 0 branching
a.
Context:
Ja faun temps que no trobo algunes de les meves herbes aromatiques de f Africa que hi ha normalment al rebost de 1' amiga de la Barbara. Saps per casualitat que ha passat amb la meva altabrega d.' Algeria?
Appendices 257
Target Sentence: [ almbrega d' Algeria, I.: amiga de la Barbara, lava posar a 1' hivernacle faun mes.
b. Context: La teva avia Agueda ahir ens va donar el numero de telefon de 1' esglesia. Ara em vindria de gust trucar al seu germa, el sacerdot. Tu saps que ha tet r Agueda amb el numero?
Target Sentence: El n\lmero de f esglesia, f avia Agueda, elva posar a f armari del rebedor.
c. Context: Es estrany. No se on s6n els meus aparells de mesura. Ara estic buscant la meva millor brUixola, la que vaig posar a 1' armari de la teva tia Angela. Tu saps que ha passat amb la brUixola?
Ta.rget Sentence: La miTior bruixola, la teva tia Angela, se la va deixar a la barca. 05. CLLD + S, with S new, S non-branching, 0 non-branching
Context: Ja fa un temps que no trobo algunes de les meves herbes aromatiques que hi ha normalment al rebost. Saps per casualitat que ha passat amb la meva alfabrega?
a.
Ta.rget Sentence: [ altabrega, la Barbara lava posar a 1' hivernade fa un mes.
b. Context: Ahir vaig rebre el numero de telHon de r esglesia. Ara em vindria de gust trucar al sacerdot, pero no trobo el numero. Tu saps que ha passat amb el numero?
Target Sentence: El n\lmero, 1' Agueda elva posar a 1' armari del rebedor. c. Context: Es estrany. No se on s6n els meus aparells de mesura. Ara no trobo la meva millor bruixola, encara que ningU. ha endre~at els meus armaris. Tu saps que ha passat amb la bruixola?
Target Sentence: La brwxola, 1' Angela se lava deixar a la barca.
258 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan 06. CLLD + S, with S new, S non-branching, 0 branching
a.
Context:
Ja faun temps que no trobo algunes de les meves herbes aromatiques de f Africa que hi ha normalment al rebost. Saps per casualitat que ha passat amb la meva altabrega d' Algeria?
Target Sentence: I: altabrega d' Algeria, la Barbara lava posar a fhivernacle faun mes. b.
Context:
Ahir vaig rebre el numero de telHon de f esglesia. Ara em vindria de gust trucar al sacerdot, pero no trobo el numero. Tu saps que ha passat amb el numero?
Target Sentence: El numero de f esglesia, f Agueda elva posar a 1' armari del rebedor.
c.
Context:
Es estrany. No se on s6n els meus aparells de mesura. Ara no trobo la meva millor bruixola, encara que ningU. ha endre\=at els meus armaris. Tu saps que ha passat amb la bruixola?
Target Sentence: La millor bruixola, 1' Angela se la va deixar a la barca. 07. CLLD + S, with S new, S branching, 0 non-branching
a.
Context:
Ja fa un temps que no trobo algunes de les meves herbes aromatiques que hi ha normalment al rebost. Saps per casualitat que ha passat amb la meva altabrega?
Target Sentence: I: almbrega, 1' amiga de la Barbara lava posar a l'hivernacle faun mes. b.
Context:
Ahir vaig rebre el numero de telHon de f esglesia. Ara em vindria de gust trucar al sacerdot, pero no trobo el numero. Tu saps que ha passat amb el numero?
Target Sentence: El nu.mero, 1' avia Agueda elva posar a 1' armari del rebedor.
c.
Context:
Es estrany. No se on s6n els meus aparells de mesura. Ara no trobo la meva millor bruixola, encara que ningU. ha endre\=at els meus armaris. Tu saps que ha passat amb la bruixola?
Target Sentence: La brUixola, la teva tia Angela se lava deixar a la barca.
Appendices 159
08. CLLD + S, with S new, S branching, 0 branching
a.
ta
Context:
Ja un temps que no trobo algunes de les meves herbes aromatiques de f Africa que hi ha normalment al rebost. Saps per casualitat que ha passat amb la meva altabrega d' Algeria?
Target Sentence:
r altabrega d' Algeria, f amiga de la Barbara lava posar a 1' hivernacle faun mes. b.
Context:
Ahir vaig rebre el numero de telHon de f esglesia. Ara em vindria de gust trucar al sacerdot, pero no trobo el numero. Tu saps que ha passat amb el numero?
Target Sentence: El nlJ.mero de f esglesia, f avia Agueda elva posar a 1' armari del rebedor.
c.
Context:
Es estrany. No se on s6n els meus aparells de mesura. Ara no trobo la meva millor bruixola, encara que ningO. ha endre~at els meus armaris. Tu saps que ha passat amb la bruixola?
Target Sentence: La millor bruixola, la teva tia Angela se lava deixar a la barca. 09. S + CLLD, with S given, S non-branching, 0 non-branching a.
Context:
Ja fa un temps que no trobo algunes de les meves herbes aromatiques que hi ha normalment al rebost de 1' amiga de la Barbara. Saps per casualitat que ha passat amb la meva altabrega?
Target Sentence: La Barbara, 1' alfabrega, lava posar a 1' hivernacle fa un mes.
b.
Context:
La teva avia Agueda ahir ens va donar el numero de telefon de 1' esglesia. Ara em vindria de gust trucar al seu germa, el sacerdot. Tu saps que ha fet f Agueda amb el numero?
Target Sentence:
r A.gueda, el numero, elva posar a 1' armari del rebedor. c.
Context:
Es estrany. No se on s6n els meus aparells de mesura. Ara no trobo la meva millor bruixola, la que vaig posar a 1' armari de la teva tia Angela. Tu saps que ha passat amb la brllixola?
26o Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
Target Sentence: L' Angela, la bniixola, se lava deixar a la barca. 10. S + CLID, with S given, S non-branching, Obranching
a.
Context:
Ja ta un temps que no trobo algunes de les meves herbes aromatiques de r Africa que hi ha normalment al rebost de f amiga de la Barbara. Saps per casualitat que ha passat amb la meva alfabrega d.' Algeria?
Target Sentence: La Barbara, 1' alfabrega d' Algeria, lava posar a 1' hivernacle fa un mes. b.
Context:
La teva avia Agueda ahir ens va donar el nu.mero de telefon de 1' esglesia. Ara em vindria de gust trucar al seu germa, el sacerdot. Tu saps que ha fet f Agueda amb el numero?
Target Sentence:
r: Agueda, el numero de 1' esglesia, elva posar a 1' armari del rebedor. c.
Context:
Es estrany. No se on s6n els meus aparells de mesura. Ara no trobo la meva millor bruixola, la que vaig posar a 1' armari de la teva tia Angela. Tu saps que ha passat amb la bniixola?
Target Sentence: L' Angela, la millor bruixola, se lava deixar a la barca. 11. S + CLID, with S given, S branching, 0 non-branching
a.
Context:
Ja fa un temps que no trobo algunes de les meves herbes aromatiques que hi ha normalment al rebost de 1' amiga de la Barbara. Saps per casualitat que ha passat amb la meva almbrega?
Target Sentence:
r: amiga de la Barbara, 1' alfabrega, lava posar a 1' hivernacle faun mes. b.
Context:
La teva avia A.gueda ahir ens va donar el nUmero de telefon de 1' esglesia. Ara em vindria de gust trucar al seu germa, el sacerdot. Tu saps que ha tet f Agueda amb el numero?
Appendices
Target Sentence: :L avia Agueda, el numero, elva posar a f armari del rebedor.
c.
Context:
Es estrany. No se on s6n els meus aparells de mesura. Ara no trobo la meva millor bruixola, la que vaig posar a 1' armari de la teva tia Angela. Tu saps que ha passat amb la brUixola?
Target Sentence: La teva tia Angela, la bruixola, se lava deixar ala barca. 12. S + CLID, with S given, S branching, 0 branching a.
Context:
Ja faun temps que no trobo algunes de les meves herbes aromatiques de r Africa que hi ha normalment al rebost de f amiga de la Barbara. Saps per casualitat ha passat amb la meva alfabrega d' Algeria?
que
Target Sentence: r amiga de la Barbara, 1' alfabrega d' Algeria, lava posar a f hivernacle fa un mes.
b.
Context:
La teva avia Agueda ahir ens va donar el ntimero de telefon de 1' esglesia. Ara em vindria de gust trucar al seu germa, el sacerdot. Tu saps que ha fet f Agueda amb el numero?
Target Sentence: ravia Algueda, el numero de 1' esglesia, elva posar a 1' armari del rebedor.
c.
Context:
Es estrany. No se on s6n els meus aparells de mesura. Ara no trobo la meva millor bruixola, la que vaig posar a 1' armari de la teva tia Angela. Tu saps que ha passat amb la brUixola?
Target Sentence: La teva tia Angela, la millor brUixola, se la va deixar a la seva barca.
261
262
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
D-2. Results
~
CLLD
:r alfabrega1
SG !a Barbara
H%4
H%4
L!H% (P) 4
H-3
LH%4
LH%4
c1
v
la1
vaposar
pp a l'hivernade
H%4
H-3
r
AT CB CP
LL%4
? fel=0.049
DS GM GV IS
MM MO RS
~ eakEi
AT CB
CP DS
Adv
fa unmes
H%4 L!H% (P) 4
H%4
H-3
H-3
H-3
H%4
H-3
fno l~t syll'
L!H%4 (contrast?)
H-3
LH% (P)4
L!H%4 [.ra]=0.084
LH%4
H-3
CLLD Elnumero 1
SG 1' A.gueda
(4?) H- 3
H- 3
LH% (P) 4
H-3
LH% (P) 4
H-3
LH%4
H%4
~
? [e]
0.059
?
c1
v
e11
vaposar
pp afarmari H- 3 [.ri = 0.113]
? [.ri = 0.081] ~
[.ri = 0.078] L!H%4
pp delrebedor
Appendices 263
~ p
GM GV IS
MM MO RS
~ e
AT CB CP DS
GM GV IS
MM MO RS
CLLD Elnt1mero 1
l'Agtieda
LH%4
H-3
LH%4
L%4
H-3
H% (P)4
LH%4 r.ro=0.160]
H- 3
LH% (P) 4
LH%4
(4?) H- 3
H-3
cl el1
SG
pp afarmari
pp delrebedor
H%4
? .sar= 0.166
CLLD La brtllxol~
r.Angela
H-3
H-3
L!H%(P)4
H-3
LH%4
H% (P) 4
LH%4
LH%4
!H% (P) 4
H-3
LH%4
LH%4
L% (P) 4
v vaposar
SG
?
r.Ia = 0.0941
LH%4
H-3
LH% (P) 4
H-3
H-3
H-3
se +d
v
sel~
vadeixar
pp ala barca
264 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
"
CL LD
SG
1' alfilbrega d i\lgeria1 la Barbara
' '
v
d la1
vaposar
pp a l'htvernacle
H%4
H% {P) 4
Adv faunmes
I
AT
H- 3
H-3
L- 3
LH%4
lLH%(P)4
LH%4
I
.. ' .. . ' . ..' ' . ' I I
CB CP DS
LH%(P)4
H%4
H%4
{.de =·0.167) 3 (.de = 0.239)
?
I
GM
:LH% (p) 4
GV
I I
LH%4
L- 3
I I
IS
H-3
I
MM
lLH% (P) 4
MO
ltH%(P)4
H% {P) 4
L!H%4
I
RS
"'
H-3
' I I I
H-3
? (.de= 0.182)
H-3
CL LD Elnumero de 1' esglesia1
SG
r .A.gueda
H%4
? r.da = 0.1141
LH%(P) 4
H%4
LH%4
LH%4
L-3
LH%4
GM
LH% (P) 4
H- 3
GV
LH% (P) 4
LH%4
AT CB CP DS
IS
MM MO RS
LH%4 r.ro=0.092l
LH%4
? r.da = 0.0781
(4?) H- 3
H- 3
H- 3
H- 3
d ell
v vaposar
pp pp al'armari delrebedor
? [.ri = 0.135]
Appendices 265
~
S]
AT CB CP
DS GM GV
IS
MM MO RS
~
CLLD La mlllor bruixola 1
1' Angela
H%4
3 [.la = 0.135]
LH% (P) 4
r.Ia = 0.1091
LH%4
LH%4
L%4
LH% CP) 4
H%4
H-3
LH% (P) 4
LH%4
H%4
H- 3
H-3
H-3
LH%4
LH%4
H-3
H- 3
CLLD
r al:tabregal
r
AT CB CP
DS
GM GV
IS
MM MO RS
SG
1' amiga de la la Barbara
LH% (P) 4 [.R;a = 0.166] LH% (P) 4 r.~~:a = 0.1821
v
se + c1 sela 1
SG
pp ala barca
vadeixar
(4?) H- 3
c1
v
la1
va
pp Adv a l'hivernacle faunmes
posar
[.ra = 0.105] ~
r.ra = ·0.1221
LH%4
LH%4
LH%4
LH% (P) 4
LH% (P) 4
H%4
LH%4
LH%4
H%4
H- 3
LH%4
L-3
LH% (P) 4
LH%4
H- 3 [.ga = 0.234]
H- 3 [.ra = 0.129]
L%4
H%4 H-3 H%4
H- 3
? [.sar = 0.212]
266 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
~ er
AT
CLLD SG Elnumero1 1' Avia .Agued.a H%4
c1 ell
'
LH%4
LH% (P) 4
DS
LH% (P) 4
LH% (P) 4
GM
LH% (P) 4
H-3
GV
LH% (P) 4
LH% (P) 4
IS
H%(P)4
H-3
MM
LH% (P) 4
H-3
MO
LH% (P) 4
L-3
L!H%4
H-3
RS
~
CLLD La bru!xola1
SG la teva tla Angela
AT
H-3
H-3
CB
L- 3
H-3
LH%4
LH%4
L- 3
L- 3
LH% (P) 4
H%4
LH%4
LH%4
er
GM GV IS
. [la= 0.103]
MM MO RS
pp
H-3
CP
DS
pp
al'armari delrebedor
LH% (P) 4 .ro = 0.158] [.da = ·0.137]
CB
CP
v vaposar
H- 3
LH%4
LH% (P) 4
LH%4
H% (P)4
H%(P)4
H-3
se + c1 se la1
v
pp
va delxar
alabarca
Appendices 267
~ AT CB CP
DS
GM GV
IS
MM MO RS
"' AT
CL
L' alfilbrega
LD cfAJ.geria1
SG l'amigade laBarbara
i' l.ra = 0.130] i' L!H% (P) 4 [.ra = 0.137] LH%4
L-3
LH% (P)4
LH% (P)4
H% (P) 4
i' r.de = 0.2121
L!H%4
L!H%4
H- 3
H-3
H-3
[.de= 0.1511
?
LH% (P)4
H- 3
LH%4
LH%4
LH%4
[.ra = 0.100]
?
!H- 3
LH%4
LH% (P) 4
DS
L!H% (P) 4
LH% (P) 4
GM
H% (P) 4
H%4
GV
LH% (P) 4
LH% (P) 4
H%4 LH%4
H%4 i' [.da = 0.083]
L- 3
LH% (P) 4
H-3
H- 3
MM MO
RS
H- 3
pp pp CL LD d v S~ El nllrn.ero de l' esglesia1 l' avia Agueda ell vaposar al'armari delrebedor
LH%4
IS
H- 3 [.de = 0.235]
LH%4
H% (P) 4
CP
pp v Adv vaposar a l' hivernacle fa unmes
LH%4
H-3
CB
d la1
268 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
~ r
AT CB CP
CLLD SG La millor brUixola1 la teva tia Angela H%4
H-3
H%4
H-3
LH%4
LH% (P)4
L-3
LH%4
H% (P)4
(H%?)4 f.la = 0.2361
LH%4
LH%4
H%4
H-3
L!H%4
H-3
LH%4
LH% (P)4
(4?) H- 3
H-3
DS
GM GV IS
MM MO RS
se +d sela1
v vadeixar
pp ala barca
H%4
SNEW
~ eakei
AT CB CP DS
GM GV IS
MM MO RS
CLLD ~r 'alfabrega laBarbara H-3
H-3
LH%4
H-3
LH% (P) 4
LH%4
LH%4
? LH% (P) 4 I [.ra = 0.088] ? H%4 I r.ra = o.o991 ? H%4 I r.ra = o.1131 LH% (P) 4
H%4
LH%4
LH%4
H%4
H- 3
d la1
v vaposar
pp a fhivernade
? f.de = 0.1631
H%4 H-3 [.de= 0.210] H-3
Adv fu unmes
Appendices 269
~
~
CLLD Elnumero 1
r Agueda
H%(P) 4
H% (P) 4
LH%4
H- 3
LH%4
H- 3
L% (P) 4
L- 3
H%(P) 4
H- 3
L- 3
LH%(P) 4
H-3
H% (P) 4
MM
H%(P) 4
r.da = 0.0991
MO
LH% (P) 4
H%4
H%4
[.da = 0.143]
AT CB CP DS GM GV IS
~ CP DS GM GV IS
MM MO RS
pp pp al'armari delrebedor
?
r
CB
v vaposar
?
RS
AT
d el 1
CLLD La br1lixola1
f~ela
L!H% (P) 4
H-3
L!H%4
H- 3
LH%4
LH%4
LH%(P)4
LH%4
H% (P) 4
H-3
LH%(P)4
H-3
H%4 [.la = 0.1971 LH%(P)4 [.la = 0.173]
[la= 0.095]
LH%(P)4 [.la = 0.242]
LH%4 [la = 0.118]
LH%4
LH%4
[1a= 0.096]
se + d se la1
v vadeixar (4?) H- 3
pp ala barca
270
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
"'
CL
r al:tabrega
AT CB
CP
I
£.1(cl=0.1271
DS
LD d.' Algeria,
~ Ia Barbara
H%(P)4 < :r.ria=0.140
[.ra = 0.104]
H%4
IS
H%4
MO
H-3
H- 3
H-3
H- 3
RS
CL LD Elrn1mero de l' esglesta,
AT
GM GV
IS
LH%4
l'~eda
H- 3
H-3
L-3
r.da = o.o921
H% (P)4
d el1
v
L-3
H% (P) 4
H%(P)4
? r.da = o.1261
LH% (P) 4
LH%4
L% (P) 4
H-3
[.da = 0.071]
MO
H-3
H-3
H-3
H%4
L-3
LH%4
[.da = 0.097]
pp
pp
vaposar afarmari delrebedor
LH% (P) 4 [.da = 0.096]
MM
RS
? [.de= 0179] ? f.cle = 0.1881 ? [.de= 0.183]
[.ra = 0.088]
L!H%4
DS
< r.cle =·0.1761
LH%4 < [.ra = 0.099]
MM
CP
pp Adv a fhivernacle faunmes
H% (P)4 [.sar = 0.246]
LH%(P)4 H- 3 LH% (P) 4 [.ra = 0.155] ? ? :r.ria=0.198 r.ra = 0.1321
GV
CB
vaposar
L-3
GM
"'
v
c1 la1
Appendices
~ r
AT CB CP
DS
GM GV IS
MM MO RS
~
!'Angela
H% (P)4
H-3
LH% (P) 4
H-3
LH% (P) 4
LH%4
L-3 H%4 [.la = 0.167]
H-3 H-3 [.la = 0.105]
LH%4
LH%4
H%4 f.la = 0.1441 LH%4 [.la = 0.154]
H-3 f.la = 0.1121 ? [.la = 0.090]
LH%4
H-3
H-3
LH%4
CLLD
se + d sela1
~
CLLD La millor brUixola1
~
d
v
la.
va posar
v vadeixar
pp a l'hivernacle
r: alfabrega1
1' amiga de la la Barbara
H-3
H-3
H-3
LH% (P) 4
f.ra= 0.123]
H-3
LH% (P) 4 LH% (P) 4 r.Qa = o.2621
LH% (P)4 r.ra = 0.1121
GM
H% (P)4
H-3
H%4 r.cle = 0.2141 ? [.de = 0.196]
GV
LH% (P) 4
LH%4
H-3
IS
H% (P)4 LH%4
H-3 ? r.ra = 0.0901
LH% (P) 4
LH% (P)4
LH%4
H%(P)
r
AT CB CP
DS
MM MO RS
"
? [.de = 0.197]
pp ala barca
Adv faunmes
271
272
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
~ r
AT
CLLD El n11mero 1 1' av:la H- 3
CB
LH%4
CP DS
GM GV
IS
~eda
v vaposar
H-3
LH%4
LH% (P)4
L- 3
L-3
LH% (P) 4
(4?) H- 3
LH%4
LH%4
H% (P) 4 H- 3
LH%4
(4?) H- 3
MO
LH%4
LH% (P)4
H- 3
H-3
~
CLLD La brllixola1
SN la teva tia Angela
H-3
H- 3
L- 3
H-3 f.la = 0.1281
LH%4
LH%4
DS
LH% (P)4
LH%(P) 4
GM
H% (P) 4
H-3
!H%4
LH%(P) 4
L-3
H-3
MM
LH%4
LH%4
MO
LH%4
LH%4
LH%4
H-3
ake
AT CB CP
GV
IS
pp
[.da = 0.131]
H% (P) 4
RS
pp
al'armari delrebedor
H% (P) 4
MM
RS
d el 1
se+ d sela1
v
pp
vadelxar
alabarca
H%4
(4?) H- 3
H-3
Appendices 173
"'
CL
r a.lfabrega
AT
LD ~ d'Algeria 1 l' amiga de la Barbara
v
d la1
vaposar
pp •.<\dv al'hivernacle fa unmes
LH%4
LH%4
LH%4
H-3
(4?) H- 3
LH%4
LH% (P)4
H% (P) 4
L- 3
LH%4
(4?) H- 3
LH% (P)4
LH% (P)4
H-3
LH%4
LH%4
H-3
H%4
H%4
MM
LH%4
H-3
MO
LH% (P)4
LH% (P)4
LH% (P)4
H-3
CB
CP DS GM GV
IS
RS
~ AT
L- 3
CL LD SN El mlmero de r esglesial l' avia A.gueda LH%4
LH% (P) 4
CB
LH% (P) 4
CP
LH% (P) 4
LH% (P) 4
LH%4
LH% (P) 4
GM
LH% (P) 4
H-3
GV
H% (P)4
H% (P) 4
LH% (P) 4
LH%4
L!H%(P)4
H%4
H-3
LH% (P) 4
H% (P)4
H-3
DS
IS
MM MO RS
H%4
H-3
H-3
H-3
d ell
v
pp
pp
vaposar al'armari del rebedor
274 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
~ eakei
AT
CLLD ~ La mlllor brulxola1 la teva tia Angela H% (P) 4
H-3
H- 3
r.ta = 0.1291
CB CP
LH%4
H%4
H- 3
LH%4
H- 3
H- 3
H- 3
H-3
LH%4
LH% (P) 4
H- 3
H-3
IS
MM MO RS
pp alabarca
LH%4 (wrongly uttered)
H% {P) 4
GV
v vadelxar
H-3
DS GM
se+d sela1
Reverse Order: S + CLLD a.ke ~
AT CB CP DS GM GV IS
MM MO RS
SG
CLLD
La Barbara l' alfilbrega1
d la1
v vaposar
pp al'hivernacle
H-3
H- 3
H- 3
L!H% (P) 4
H-3
L% (P) 4
LH%4
H-3
L- 3
LH% {P) 4
H% (P) 4
H-3
H-3
LH%4
LH% (P) 4
H-3
H-3
H-3
H-3
LH%(P)4
H-3
LH%4
LH% (P) 4
LH%(P)4
H-3
Adv faunmes
Appendices 275
~ r
AT CB CP DS
GM GV IS
SG l'Agtieda
CLLD el nu.mero 1
LH%(P)4
H%4
LH%(P)4
H- 3
H- 3
H- 3
LH%(P)4
LH%4
H% (P) 4
H% (P) 4
H-3
MM
LH%(P)4
? r.ro= 0.093
MO
LH%(P)4
~ eake!
AT CB CP DS GM GV
LH%(P)4
MO RS
pp pp al'armari del rebedor
H-3 [.ri = 0.132]
H-3
SG I' Angela
CLLD la brulxola 1
H%4
H- 3
LH%4
H-3
LH%4
LH%4
LH%4
LH%4
H%4
H- 3
LH%4
LH%(P)4
IS
MM
v vaposar
LH%(P)4 .da = 0.140 [.ro= 0.102 H-3
RS
c1 el1
H%4 LH%4
H-3
LH% (P) 4
LH%4
LH%4
H- 3
se + c1 sela1
v vadelxar
pp ala barca
276
Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
"'
CL SG La Barbara l'altabrega
LD d.' Algerta1
d la1
v vaposar
pp Adv a l'hi.vernacle faunmes
AT
H% (P) 4
H-3
? [.de= 0.202]
CB
LH% (P) 4
LH%(P)4
L%4
LH% (P) 4
L!H% (P) 4
LH%4
LH%(P)4
GM
LH% (P) 4
GV
LH%
LH%4 ? Lria = 0.2131
IS
H% (P) 4
H-3
MM
LH% (P) 4
H-3
MO
LH% (P) 4
LH%4 ? [.ria= 0.193]
CP DS
RS
"'
LH% (P) 4
SG rAgueda
CL elnu.mero
LD
de 1' esglesia,
AT
H-3
? : [.sia= 0175]
CB
L!H%(P)4
H%4
CP
H%(P)4
LH%(P) 4
LH%4
LH%4
H%(P)4 r.da = o.2o21
H%4
LH%4
LH%(P) 4
H-3
H-3
L!H%4
L!H%4 ? : r.si.a = 0.1821 ? , [.sia = 0.207]
DS
GM GV IS
MM MO RS
L!H%(P)4 H-3 [.da 0.209]
H-3 H-3 (4?) H- 3
r.cle = 0.1941
!H% (P) 4
[.de= 0.188]
d ell
v vaposar H- 3
[.sar = 0.218]
pp
pp
al'armari delrebedor
Appendices 277
~ r
AT CB
I: Angela
CLLD la millor bruixola1
H%(P)4
H-3
L!H%(P)4
H- 3
LH%4
LH% (P) 4
H-3 H%4
H- 3 H%4 [.la = 0.173]
LH%4
LH%4
SG
CP DS GM GV
IS
v
se+ d sela1
vadeixar
H%4
MM MO RS
~ r
LH%4
H- 3
L!H%4
LH%4
LH%4
H-3
SG
r: amiga de la
CLLD 1' altabreg~
c1 la1
v
pp a l'hivernade
vaposar
laBarbara
AT
? il.de = 0.190]
H-3
H- 3
L!H% (P) 4
H- 3
LH% (P) 4
LH%4
L- 3
L% (P)4
L!H%4
H- 3
H-3
LH%4 H%(P)4 = 0.1241
LH%4 H- 3 .~~:a= 0.118
H-3
MM
L!H%4
H- 3
MO
LH% (P) 4
LH%4
H-3
H- 3
CB CP DS
GM GV IS
RS
pp ala barca
r.ra
i
H-3 f.de = 01751
Adv fa unmes
278 Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
~ r
AT
CLLD SG ravia .Agueda el n11mero 1 H% (P) 4
H- 3
L!H%4
H- 3
LH% (P)4
LH% (P) 4
L- 3
L!H%4
GM
H% (P) 4
H- 3
GV
LH% (P)4
L- 3
H%4
H- 3
L- 3
? [.ro = 0.110]
H% (P) 4
H- 3
CB CP DS
IS
MM MO RS
d
v
el1
vaposar
pp afarmari
pp delrebedor
se + c1 sela1
v va delxar
pp alabarca
LH%4
~
SG La teva tia Angela
CLLD la brllixola1
H-3
H- 3
LH%(P)4
LH%4
LH%4
LH%4
LH%4
LH% (P) 4
H%4
H- 3
LH%4
LH%4
H%4
H- 3
MM
LH%4
LH%4
MO
LH%(P)4
LH%4
H-3
H-3
r
AT CB CP DS
GM GV IS
RS
Appendices 279
"
CL LD SG ramlgadela 1' al:tabrega d' Algeri.a1 Barbara
AT CB
H% (P) 4
H- 3
L!H% (P) 4
H%4
LH%(P)4
LH%4
LH%4
LH%4
H% (P) 4
H%4
LH%(P)4
LH% (P) 4
CP
DS
GM GV
IS
MO RS
AT
L!H%4
H-3
LH%4
LH%4
H-3
H-3
SG
r
CL
avta Agueda elnumero
LD de f esglesia1 H-3
L!H%4
LH% (P) 4
CP
H% (P) 4
H-3
DS
LH%4
LH% (P) 4
GM
H% (P) 4
H% (P)4
H% (P) 4
LH% (P) 4
H%4
H-3
GV
IS
H% (P) 4
H%4 f.de = 0.2541
H- 3 r.de = 0.2611
L-3
H% (P) 4
CB
pp v Adv vaposar a l'hivernacle faun mes
H%4
MM
"
d la1
MM
H- 3
MO
LH% (P) 4
L!H%4
RS
H% (P) 4
H-3
[.r0=0.135}
L!H%4
c1 el1
v
pp
pp
vaposar
~l'armarl
delrebedor
H%4
28o Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan
~ r
pp CLLD se+ cl v SG La teva tia Angela la millor bruixola1 se la1 vadeix:ar ala barca
AT
H% (P) 4
H-3
CB
LH% (P) 4
LH% (P) 4
CP
LH%4
LH% {P) 4
DS
L!H% (P) 4
L!H%4
GM
H% (P) 4
H%4
H- 3
GV
LH% (P) 4
LH%4
H% (P) 4
IS
H% (P) 4
[la= 0.106]
MM
L- 3
H-3
MO
LH% !P) 4
LH%4
RS
H-3
H- 3
?
H% (P) 4
Index
*I-PHRASE 101 *P-PHRASE 101-102 "STRUC 101
A accent bitonal 37-39, 47-48, 59,83 early rising 38, 39, 56 falling 39 high39 late rising 38, 39 low 39 monotonal 39 nuclear 38, 39, 40 n.22, 43, 59> 150 phrase/phrasal 29, 40, 43> 55 pitch 27, 28-29, 31· 32, 33> 35, 37, CH. 2.2.1, 41, 43> ¢, 47> 48. 58-59> 69, 78, 82, 83, 87, 89, 150-151, 160, 163 prenuclear 38, 39, 40, 46-48, 51 n.28, 59> 150 rising, with delayed peak 39. 47> 49· See also delayed peak sentence 10, 11 n.15, 24> 166 n.16 argument accusative 7, 104-105, 157> 186 dative 104-105 adjunct 8, 103-104 See also asymmetry: complement -adjunct nominal 138-139 Aguilar, Lourdes 21, 27, 32, 37-38, 40-44, 55, 58-59 Ale:xiadou, Artemis 8, u-13, 19,130
ALIGN-CP,L 3, 23, 95, 97> 112-119, 124-126, 171-172, 177-178, 180-181, 199-201 ALrGN-ToP(Ic),R 3, 25, 149> 174-175> 177-182, 183 184> 191, 194-195. 199-200 ALIGN-vP,R 3, 25, 174-176,177, 179-182, 199-201 ALIGN-XP,L 97, 99, 101 ALIGN-XP,R 22-23, 95-100, 102, 104-ll9, 122-126, 174-175, 177-182, 191, 194-195. 199-200 all-new. See focus antireconstruction effect 24> 131,137 association 28, 31, 35, 38 Astruc, Llui'sa 37, 40, 42, 51, 54> 56, 58, 92, 96, 150, 153, 162, 1]2, 173 asymmetry between CLI.D and CLRD CH. 41.2 complement-adjunct (argument-adjunct) 131, 136-139 autosegmental-metrical (AM) model cH. 2.1.1
B base-generation 14> 19, 130, 148. See also CLLD Beckman, Mary 27, 29, 31. 32, 33, 34> 36, 40. 55 binding 21, 24> 131, 136, 139-140, 143 extension of, domain 145-147 -theoretical approach to obviation 145. See also obviation
Boersma, Paul 21, 23, 95, 112, 120, 121, 123, 124 Bonet, Eulilia 7, 8, 39. 40,150 boundary 2-3, 35, 43, 64> 66, 68, 74-78, 81, 83, 85, 87, 91, 93-94> 115, 160, 162, 169-17), 174-176, 184> 199-201. See also tone: boundary cue cH. 2.3> 58-59, So, 94 intermediate phrase 36, 42, 57> 59. 74-78, 91, 159. 162, 188-191, 199 intonational phrase 36, 57> 59> 74-78, 91, 92, 152, 159. 162, 188-191, 199 obligatory, insertion (OBI) 92 (obligatory) left, of CLLD 153, 17J., 182 (obligatory) right, of CLLD 25, 149, 151, 153-154> 164-166, 1]1, 174> 178, 180, 184> 193, 195. 200. See also ALIGN-ToP(Ic).R placement cH. 3-41, 104-106 prosodic (phrase) 2, 25, 45. 50, 115, us, 149> 160, 175-176, 191-192 strength 36. See also break index branching dislocations cH. 5 object 2, 22, 63, 73, 94> 99-100, 107, 125 subject 6), 7J, 84, 94> CH. 6 branchingness 25, 62, 64> 86, 99-100, 162, 183-185, 190-191, 195 Brazilian Portuguese (BP) 18, 21,100
282 Index break, prosodic/intonational ~22,45. 46.54·56,58,76, 87, 91, 92 n.16, 113, 16:t, 165, 170-1~ 190, 191, 193. 198-199 break index 27, 33. 35-37, 43. 49, 52. 54> 56, 78. 87. See also Tone and Break Indices
c case feature 145-147 Cat_ToBI cH. 2.2, 44> 50, 55-56, 58-59 C-domain 127-130, 146, 179, 19l. See also left periphery Cecchetto. Carlo 24. 127-129, 130, 131, 137. 139-140 clause-external analysis 130, 133-135. 137-138, 143. 145. 147, 198, 201. See also CLRD: clause external clause-internal analysis 24-25, 127, 131-1)2, 134> 137-140, 145, 147, 148, 166 n.16, 198,201. clitic. See also reswnptive clitic accusative 155 locative 7 partitive 8 clitic left-dislocation (CLLD) CH. 1.1.2, 158 n.10 and preverbal subjects CH. 1.1.4, CH. 6 base-generation of 14. 19, 130,148 branching and non- branching 149, 152-154· 158, 160-167,171, 1]2, 173-175, 179. 181, 183, 187-192 embedded 1, 2, 25, 140-142. 145· 153. 155-156, 159. 160-16:t, 166, 169-1]2, 174> 177-178, 198 iterative/muhiple 156, 164-165, 17Q-171 LD extracted from embedded CLLD (LD out of CLLD) 25, 155, 170, 177-178 left boundary of, constituents 153. 171, 182
local 155-156,161-164. 169-170, 177 non-local 156, 166, 169-170 obviation and 141-147 prosodic phrasing of cH. 5 ditic right-dislocation (CLRD) CH.1.1.2, CH. 4> CH.5 base-generation of 130 clause-external 130. See also clause-external analysis clause-internal 129, 131, 139, 147. See also clause-internal analysis deaccented/unaccented ~ 150, 168, 170, 174 iterative/muhiple 159 n.~ 170 LD extracted from embedded CLRD (LD out ofCLRD) 170,171,180 local 156, 170 non-local 156 complement. See also object clause -adjunct asymmetry 131, 136-139 nominal 138-139 obviative clausal 145-146. See also obviation consonant, sonorant 68 constraint See *I-PHRASE; *P-PHRASE; *Smuc; ALIGN-CP,L; AliGN-ToP(Ic),R; AuGN-vP,R.; ALIGN-XPJ.; AuGN-XP,R; MAx-BIN; MAx-BIN-END; MIN-N-PHRASEs; WRAP-XP alignment 35, 96-98, 101, 105, 111, 113, 175, 195. 198-201. overlapping, -s 113. 123-125, 177-179. 194 See also optimality theory: stoChastic hierarchy 23, 102, 104. 105, 109, 117, 118, 120, 124· 126, 176-177 reverse order of, -s 23. 110, m-u6. See also ranking: reverse; optimality theory: stoChastic
underlying form of, -s 95, 1~ 116-117, 123See also optimality theory: stoChastic context question 69, 70, 71, 74> 157, 159. See also sentence: target continuation rise 21, 27, 33. 42, 43. 44> CH. l.J-2., 50, 55, 57, 59. 64> 75-78, 81, 8J, 150, 153. 16~ 170 continuous ranking scale 121-123, 126. See also optimality theory: stoChastic Costantini, Francesco 132, 140-141, 144-145 CP structure double 145-146 simple 145-146 D D'hnperio, Mariapaola 22, 28, 38. 61-65, 71. 73. 77. 84-85, 94· 99. 111, 112, 119, 125, 184 dative experiencer 14 argwnent 104-105 de Lacy, Paul 23. 97-99, 101, 113-114 deaccentuation 1L See also CLRD: deaccented delayed peak 38-39, 49, 77-78,82-83,88,89,160. See also accent disambiguation, subjects present for 14, 17-18 dislocation structures 170. See also CLLD; CLRD double object constructions 104-105 Downing, Bruce 33, 61, 65, 66 n.4 92, 113 E
edge-based mapping/ theory 34-35, 96, 172 Elordieta, Gorka 21, 33. 43, 58, 62-64, 99, 110, 112 Ertesdbick-Shir, Nomi 142 Estebas-Vilaplana, Eva 39, 45-47.51.54-55.56 European Portuguese (EP) 16, 18, 32, 39. 44> 50, 62-63
Index 2.83
F Farkas, Donka 140, 142. 155 fast speech. See speech rate Fery, Caroline 29, 30, 101, 110 focus 2, 39, 41, 59, 64. 71, 74> 128-129 all-new 9-10, 15-16, 22, 55, 62, 65,104 domain 2, 9-12, 14 15, 175, 183-186, 191-193 focus phrase (FocP), internal J, 24 25, 129,176 Frascarelli, Mara 7 n.8, 12, 25, 42, 96, 101, 130, 149, 151-151 171-172, 175, 182, 183-184> 191-192,198 French 4> 7 n.5, 8 n.9, 18, 150 Frota, S6nla 21, 33. 43-45, 50, 54 56-58, 62, 64, 75, 77.94
G Ghini, Mirco 99-100, 105 glvenness 9,11-12,25,184 187, 190-191 Gradual Learning Algorithm (GLA) 121, 123-125 Greek 19-20 grouping, intonational/ prosodic 1-3, 30, 33-34, 35, 57-58, 62, CH. 3·3-3. 100, 103-104> 1o6, CH. 3-4·3. 197-201 (S)(V)(qS)(VO) 22-23. 85-88, 90-91, 94· 114-n7, n9, 125 (S)(VO) 2, 22, 63, 71, 80-81, 83-85, 94> 107, 109-112, 125-126,153 (S)(VqS)(VO) 22-23, 85-87, 89-91, 93. 114-117, 119, 125 (SV)(O) 2-3.21-22, 25, 61, 63, 65, 77. 80-81, 83-85, 94> 107-108, no-1n, 126,153 (SV)(qS)(VO) 22-21 85-88, 90-91, 93-94. 114-n7, n9, 125-126 (SVqS)(VO) 22-23. 85, 87-89, 9Q-91, 93. n4-117, n9, 125
and CllD 149, 153. 170-171, 174> 177-181,194 matrix (SV) 21, 70, 94> 154 Gussenhoven, Carlos 11 n.15, 23, 28-31. 35-36, 55. 89, 97, 113-n4 156
I information structure/ packaging CJL Ll.J, 15, 62,71,128,157,184 interface categories 34 See also intermediate phrase; intonational phrase intermediate phrase (lp) 21, 27, 29-31, 32-33. 36, 40, 42-43. 48 n.27, 56-59, 77, 99,150,173,199,201 intonational phrase (IntP) 21, 23, 27, 29-31. 33-37. 40. 42-44, 48 n.27, 52, 54-59, 65, 66, 74-78, 87, 91-9J, 97, 99 ll.20, 101, 11J, 128 n.1, 15o--152, 158 n.10, 159, 162, 165-167, 169, 172-173. 175. 188-192, 193. 197· 199-201 islandhood 14 16 Italian (ITAL) 4 7 n.8, 8 n.9, 18, 24> 44> 50, 62-6), 130-135, 137-141, 143-145, 147· 151-152, 172,182,183, 191-192,198, 201 K Kempchinsky. Paula 140, 142 Krifka, Manfred 9-12, 16 L Ladd, Robert D. 27-29, 33 n.u, )6, JS, 40, 55, 58,150 Lambrecht, Knud 10, 150 language, compressing 41 Lebeaux, David 136-137 left-dislocation. See ditic left-dislocation left periphery 128, 142. 145 order in Catalan for elements in the 8 L6pez, Luis 7 n.6, u n.17, 13-16, 20-21,25, 128-129,
130 n.7, 140, 147-148, 149, 155, 177, 184, 186, 199 n.2 Lujan, Marta 140,145-146
M match theory 34 n.16, 96D.17,201 MAx-BIN 100-101,102,103 MAx-BIN-END 22-23,95,102, 104-112, n4-119, 124-126, 177-181, 194-195 MIN-N-PHRASES 22-23, 95-96, 102-104> 106-108, no-ns, 122-126, 177-181, 194-195 mirror hypothesis 128-129, 131 n.s, 136, 147 movement A-movement 15 A-bar-movement 17 CLLD as a result of 14 n.21, 129, 148, 179 LF- 145,147 remnant 1 24 129-130, 147· 176 tonal/pitch 38-39, 41, 82-81 89, 150, 160-161
N negative words (n-words) 24 131-135, 147 Nespor, Marina 30-32, 33-34. 35. 42. 61, 62, 66, 92, 96, 99-100, 101, 118, 152 ll.5 normal speech. See speech rate: normal 0 object clause (sentential object/complement) 1-2, 21-22,61-62, 65-66, 71. 84> 86, 91-91 94-95. 102, no, 113, 124> 126' 142 D.11 146, 155, 172, 177, 197-198, 200 obviation 25, 132, 140, 198, 201. See also subjunctive: disjoint reference; binding: extension of, domain and CLLD 141-142, 144 145-147 and CLRD 143-144 147 disappearance of, effects 25, 132, 198
284 Index optimality theory (OT) 3. 21, 23, 25, 26, 61, 95-97· 100, 107,174-179,193-195 optionality in 120 stochastic 112-113, CH. J.4J.3, 124-125, 126, 149> 177
p pause 33.44-45,46,56,59.70, 92, 158 n.10, 167 n.16, 173, 192-193 audible pause 54, 57, 75, 78, 8J, 87 visible pause 54> 57, 75, 87 phase 96 n.17, us, 175-176, 201 phonological phrase (p-phrase) 30-31, 33. 35, 64-65, 92 n.16, 97-112, 113, 172 phrasing, intonational/ prosodic 1, 13. 24-25, 27, 34-35. 43-44> 62-65, 67, 95, 100, 113. 120 n.26, 126,127,149,160,170, 174. 175, 176, 184 See also grouping, intonational/ prosodic matrix (SV) 21, 94. 154 Pierrehumbert, Janet 27-29, 32 n.11, 33. 34> 35, 36, 55, 58,120 pitch reset 45 n.25 pre boundary lengthening 21, 27, 41, 43, 44> 45, CH. 2.J.1, 57. 59. 78-80 preplanning 173 Prieto, Pilar 21-23. 25-26, 27-29, 32 n.11, 33. 36 n.19, CH. 2.2, 43, 44> 46-48, 55-59. 61, 62-65, 68, 71> 77> 79 n.u, 84-85, 94. 95-96, 99. 102-113, 117, 125,126, 149. 150, 153. 154> 162, 175, 182, 185, 198, 200-201 proparoxytonic word 47-49, 68, 102n.21 prosodic binarlty 101, 103-104
See also MAx- BIN;
106,107, 112-n3, n6, 117-118, 149-150, 153. 170, 172-177, 182,183, 192, 197> 199,201 as a hypernym 27, 58, 65, 77>94 weakening of 172 prosodic word 7 n.5, 11 n.15, 21, 23, 28, 30-32, 34> 40. 49. 57. 58, 6-t. 68, 71, 73. 99-108, 117-119, 154> 159-161, 168-169, 200
Q quantifier phrase (QP) 18-19 question/answer pairs 3, 8, 9· See also focus; context question
R ranking. See also OT: stochastic normal 23. 112, 122-123 value 121-125,181 reverse 23, 95, 105, 110, 112, 122-123, 126, 194-195 rapid speech. See speech rate: fast reconstruction 24> 131, 1)6-137, 140 recursivity 118 relation-based mapping 34-35.172 restructuring of non-branching topics/ dislocations 152-154. 172-173 of phonological phrase 99 reset See pitch reset resumptive clitic 6-8, 18 rheme 15-16, 184 See also information structure right-dislocation. See clitic right-dislocation Rizzi, Luigi 12, 128-129, 146 root clause 33. 61, 66 n.4, 71, 92, 94> 151 root phenomenon 61, 198
MAX-BIN-END
prosodic grouping. See grouping prosodic phrase (PrP) 2-3, 21-23,25,58,86,95,10),
s Samek-Lodovici, Vieri (SL) 24> 127, 129 n.4, 130, 131, 132-139. 141, 147· 198, 201
scope, wide 19-20 selection point 114, 121-123. 125, 126, 177, 200. See also optimality theory: stochastic Selkirk, Elisabeth 10, 30, 33-35, 45 n.25, 48 n.27, 61, 62, 64, 96-97. 98, 100, 175. 197. 198-199· 201 sentence all-focus 15-16. See also focus: all-new stress 11, 12, 22 target 22, 64-65, 67-74. 157-158, 185-187 sentential complement See object clause sentential object. See object clause Sheehan, Michelle 13-16, 18-21, 192-193 Spanish (SP) 4> 6 n.-f, 7 n.5&9, 15, 16, 18-20, 28, 29 D.3, 30, 34> J6 n.19, 38, 39, 44> 50, 51, 58' 62-63, 112, 145.150 speech scripted 156 spontaneous 44> 50 speech rate 62, 96, 99, 101, 108,152 fast 85, 107, 111, 149. 153-154, 156-157> 159-162, 165-167, 171-172, 201 normal 64, 69, 81, 84> 100, 102, 107, ll1, 153· 156-157· 159-162, 165-167, 170-171, 200 split-topic hypothesis 140, 147. See also internal Topic Phrase starredness 38 stress 7 n.5, 31-32, 47-48, 68, 77, 78 n.12, 10-f, 176. See also syllable clash 33 n.14 sentence 11-12, 22, 104 phrasal 11 n.15 strict layer hypothesis (SLH) 30-31 D.7. 57> 118 strong pronoun 32 subject branching cH.6. See also branching: subject
Index 2.85
embedded 17, 22-23. 61, 87-89, 91, 93. 95, 115-116, 140, 141 n.12, 198 matrix 1, 21-23, 61, 70, 73. 86-89, 91, 93. 94. 95, 115-116, 137, 140-142, 143 n.14, 145-147, 154. 162, 197 present for disambiguation 14. 17-18 preverbal 1, J, 9, CH.1.1.4. 25, 54> 62, 66-67, 74> 102, 127, 154, 17), 174. CJL6, 197 subjunctive 140 subjunctive 17-18, 25, 132, 140-141, 142 n.1:;, 145-146 disjoint reference 140. See also obviation sustained pitch 21, 27, 43-44> 48, 50-51, 55, 57, 59> 76,82 syllable 28-29, 30, 31, J2, 35, 37> 43-44> 46-49, 51-53> 54> 56, 64 68-69, 73, 76-8o, 81, 99, 102 n.21, 104150, 16) metrically strong 28, 30, JS, 48, 58, 89 posttonlc 38-39, 41, 46, 48-49, 50-51, 56, 82 tonic 38 T theme 15 n.20, 184 See also information structure
theory of the syntactic grounding ofprosodic categories 34> 175, 198 Tone and Break Indices (ToBI) 27-28, CJL2.1.2, 40-41, 43. 55, 58. See also Cat_ToBI
tone boundary 29, 34> 39,40-41, 43. 58, 59, 69, 77, So, 150, 159-164, 17J., 193, 201 complex boundary 21, 27, 55-57. 59, 75, 87, 88, 89 edge 28-29,3h40-41,43. 46-47> 59, 164 high boundary 44. 45-49, 50, 75-76, 164 IntP-boundary 33. 35, 37, 40 ll.24, 43. 56, 58-59> 75, 92, 94, 162, 166-167, 169, 1]2, 199n.1 ip-boundary 29, 32> 33. 35, 37, 40 D.24, 43, 50, 55-56, 58, 81, 92, 94> 162, 166-167, 169, 171-172, 199 n.1 leadiog 28,49,89 low boundary 33. 43, 44> 75, 150, 159, 169, 170,173 simple 37· See also accent: monotonal trailing 29, 38 topic :;, 9, 12, 15 n.:n, 16, 18, 19, 21, 25, 62, 128, 130, 133 n.11, 149, 151-154 158, 165 n.14 171-172, 174-175, 178-179, 182, 192, 195, 199,201 Topic Phrase 41, 129-130 extemal129 internal 129
topic prosodic domain (Frascarelli 2000) 151, 153, 1]1-172, 198 topic restructuring (Frascarelli 2000) 151-152,172 n.18 topicalization 6 n.4 130 n.7, 131 n.S, 142 n.13
'fruckenbrodt, Hubert 11, 30, 33. 34. 35, 66, 93· 96, 97, 98, 100-102 truncation, tonal 41
u utterance (phonological constituent) 30, 34. 57, 58
v Vallduvi, Enric 7-8, 9, 12-13. 15, 17, 39' 128, 147> 175> 184 variation in Generative Phonology 120 verb bridge verb 142 desiderative 142 non-bridge verbs 142 volitional 142 Villalba, Xavier 8, n. 13. 24, 25, 127-129, 130 ll.7, 131, 1)6, 137, 139-140, 147-148, 149, 156' 186 Vogel, Irene 30, 31 n.7, 35, 61, 62, 66, 92, 99 ll.20 vowel reduction 5, 32
w weak pronoun. See resumptive clitic word order 7, 10, 13. 16, 86, 129, 141, 185-187 canonical :;, 7 n.6, 13 Wrap Theory 35. See also
WRAP-XI' WRAP-XI' 96, 98-100,102, 104-112, 113, 118,125-126
z Zubizarreta, Maria Luisa 8 n.9, 11, 12, 20, 39, 130, 140, 147> 150, 173
Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today A complete list of titles in this series can be found on the publishers' website. www.benjamins.wm 174 LOMASHVIU,Leila: Complex Predicates. The syntax-morphology interfac.e. Expected March 2011 173 SAPP, Christopher D.: The Verbal Complex in Subordinate Clauses from Medieval to Modem Gem1an x. 230 pp. + index. Expected February 2011 172
JUN G, Hakyung: The Syntax of the BE-Possessive. Parametric variation and surface diversities. ca. 275 pp. Expected March 2011
171 SLEEMAN, Petra and Harry PERRIDON (eds.): The Noun Phrase in Romance and Germanic. Structure, variation, and change. vii, 280 pp. + index. Expected February 2011 170 HUNTER, Tim: Syntactic Effects of Conjunctivist Semantics. Unifying movement and adjunction. ca. 200 pp. Expected February 2011 169 SANCHEZ, Liliana: The Morphology and Syntax of Topic and Focus. Minimalist inquiries in the Quechua periphery. .xiv, 239 pp. + index. Expected November2o1o 168 FELDHAUSBN, logo: Sentential Form and Prosodic Structure of Catalan 2010 . .xiii, 285 pp. 167 MERCADO,Raphaei,EricPOTSDAM and Lisa deMena TRAVIS (eds.): Austronesian and Theoretical Linguistics. vii, 374 pp. +index. Expected November 2o1o 166 BRANDT, Patrick aad Marco GARdA GARdA (eds.): Transitivity. Fol111, Meaning, Acquisition, and Processing. 2010. vi~ 308 pp. 165 BREUL, Carsten and Edward GOBBEL (eds.): Comparative and Contrastive Studies of Information Structure. 2010. xii, 306 pp. 164 ZWART, Jan-Wonter and Mark de VRIES (eds. ): Structure Preserved. Studies in syntax for Jan Koste& 201 o. xxiii, 395 pp. 163 KIZIAK, Tanja: Extraction Asymmetries. Experimental evidence from Gem1an. 2010. xvi, 27 3 pp. 162 BOTT,Oliver: The Processing of Events. 201o.xvii, 383 pp. 161 HAAN, Germen J. de: Studies in West Frisian Grammar. Edited by Jarich Hoekstra. Willem Visser and Golfe Jensma. 2010. x. 384 pp. 160 MAVROGIORGOS, Marios: Clitics in Greek A mininlalist aro>unt of proclisis and enclisis. 2010. X. 294 pp. 159 BREITBARm, Anne, Christopher LUCAS, Sheila WATTS and David WILLIS (eds.): Continuity and Change in Grammar. 2010. viii, 359 pp. 158 DUGUINE, Mala, Susana HUIDOBRO and Nerea MADARIAGA (eds.): Argument Structure and Syntactic Relations. A cross-linguistic perspective. 2010. vi, 348 pp. 157 FISCHER, Sasann: Word-Order Change as a Source of Grammaticalisation. 2010. ix. 200 pp. 156 DI SCIULLO, Anna Maria and Virginia HILL (eds.): Edges, Heads, and Projections. InterfiH:e properties. 2010. vii, 265 pp. 155 SATO, Yosake: Minimalist Interfaces. Evidenc.e from Indonesian and Javanese. 2010. xiii, 159 pp. 154 HORNSTEIN, Norbert and Maria POLINSKY (eds.): Movement Theory of Control. 2010. vii, 330 pp. 153 CABREDO HOFHERR,Patricia and Ora MATUSHANSKY (eds.): Adjectives. Formal analyses in syntax and semantics. 2010. vii, 335 pp. 152 GALLEGO, Angel J.: Phase Theory. 2010. xii, 365 pp. 151 SUDHOFF, Stefan: Focus Particles in Gem1an Syntax. prosody, and infom1ation structure. 2010. xiii, 335 pp. 150 EVERAERT, Marti a, Tom LENTZ, Hannah de MULDER, 0ystein NILSEN aad Arjen ZONDERVAN (eds.): The Linguistics Enterprise. From knowledge of language to knowledge in linguistics. 2010. ix. 379 pp. 149 AELBRECHT,Lobb: The Syntactic Licensing of Ellipsis. 2010. xii, 2 30 pp. 148 HOGEWEG, Lotte,IW.en de HOOP and Andrej MALCIRJKOV (eds.): Cross-linguistic Semantics of Tense, Aspect, and Modality. 2009. vii, 406 pp. 147 GHOMESHI, Jila,Deaaa PAUL and Martina WILTSCHKO (eds.): Detenniners. Universals and variation. 2009. vii, 247 pp. 146 GEIDEREN,Fllyvan (eel.): Cyclical Change. 2009. viii, 329 pp. 145 WESTERGAARD, Marit: The Acquisition ofWord Orde& Micro-cues, infom1ation structure, and economy. 2009. xii, 245 pp. 144 PUTNAM, Michael T. (eel.): Towards a Derivational Syntax. Survive-minimalism. 2009. :x:. 269 pp.
143 ROTHMAYR,Antonia: The Structure of Stative Verbs. 2009. xv. 216 pp. 142 NUNES, Jairo (ed.): Minimalist Essays on Brazilian Portuguese Syntax. 2009. vi, 243 pp. 141 ALEXIADOU, Artemis, Jorge HANKAMER, Thomas Md1ADDEN, Justin NUGER and Florian SCHAFER (eds.): Advances in Comparative Germanic Syntax. 2009. xv, 395 pp. 140 ROEHRS, Dorian: Demonstratives and Definite Articles as Nominal Auxiliaries. 2009. xii, 196 pp. 139 lllCKS, Glyn: The Derivation of Anaphoric Relations. 2009. xi~ 309 pp. 138 SIDDIQI, Daniel.: Syntax within the Word. Economy. allomorphy. and argument selection in Distributed Morphology. 2009. .Iii, 138 pp. 137 PFAU, Roland: Grammar as Processor. A Distributed Morphology account of spontaneous speech errors. 2009. xii~ 372 pp. 136 KANDYBOWICZ, Jason: The Grammar of Repetition. Nupe grammar at the syntax-phonology interface. 2oo8. xiii, 168 pp. 135 LEWIS, William D., Simin KARIMI,Heidi HARLEY and Scott 0. FARRAR (eds.): Tinle and Again. Theoretical perspectives on formal linguistics. In honor of D. Terence Langendoen. 2009. xiv, 265 pp. 134 ARMON-LOTEM, Sharon, Gabi DANON aad Susaa D. ROmSTBIN (eds.): Current Issues in Generative Hebrew Linguistics. 2008. vii, 39 3 pp. 133 MACDONALD, Jonathan E.: The Synta.."'l:ic Nature of Inner Aspect A minimalist perspective. 2008. XV, 241 PP· 132 BIBERAUER, Theresa (ed.): The Limits of Syntactic Variation. 2008. vii, 521 pp. 131 DE CAT,C8:lleandKatherineDEMUTH (eds.): The Bantu-Romance Connection. A comparative investigation of verbal agreement. DPs, and information structure. 2008. xi.x, 355 pp. 130 KALLUUI, Dalina and Llliane TASMOWSKI (eds.): Clitic Doubling in the Balkan Languages. 2008. ix. 442 PP· 129 STURGEON, Anne: The Left Periphery. The interaction of syntax, pragmatics and prosody in C2ech. 2008. X~ 143 pp. 128 TALEGHANI, Azl.ta JL: Modality, Aspect and Negation in Persian. 2008. ix. 183 pp. 127 DURRLEMAN-TAME, Stephanie: The Syntax of Jamaican Creole. A cartographic perspective. 2008. xii,190 pp. 126 SCHAFER,Floriaa: The Syntax of (Anti-)Causatives. External arguments in change-of-state contexts. 2008. ~ 324pp. 125 ROTHSTEIN,Bjllm: The Perfect Time Span. On the present perfect in German, Swedish and English. 2008. xi, 171 pp. 124 lliSANE, Tabea: The Layered DP. Form and meaning of French indefinites. 2008. i.x, 260 pp. 123 STOYANOVA, Marina: Unique Focus. Languages without multiple wh-questions. 2008. ~ 184 pp. 122 OOSTERHOF, Albert M.: The Semantics of Generics in Dutch and Related Languages. 2008. xviii, 286 pp. 121 TUNGSETH, Mai Ellin: Verbal Prepositions and Argument Structure. Path, place and possession in Norwegian. 2008. ix. 187 pp. 120 ASBURY, Anna, Jakub DOTI.ACIL,Berit GEHRKE and Rick NOUWEN (eds.): Syntax and Semantics of Spatial P. 2008. vi. 416 pp. 119 FORTUNY, Jordi: The Emergence of Order in Syntax. 2008. viii, 211 pp. 118 JAGER, Agnes: History of German Negation. 2008. ix. 350 pp. 117 HAUGEN, Jason D.: Morphology at the Interfaces. Reduplication and Noun Incorporation in Uto-A2tecan. 2008. XV, 257 pp. 116 ENDO, Yosbio: Locality and Information Structure. A cartographic approach to Japanese. 2007. x. 235 pp. 115 PUTNAM, Michael T.: Scrambling and the Survive Principle. 2007. x. 216 pp. 114 LEE-SCHOENFELD, Vera: Beyond Coherence. The syntax of opacity in German. 2007. viii, 206 pp. 113 EYTH6RSSON, 1h6mallur (ed.): Grammatical Change and Linguistic Theory. The Rosendal papers. 2008. ~441 pp. 112 AXEL, Katrin: Studies on Old High German Syntax. Left sentence periphery, vetb placement and vetbseoond 2007. xii, 364 pp. 111 EGUREN, Luis and Olga FERNANDEZ-sORIANO (eds.): Coreference, Modalily, and Focus. Studies on the syntax-semantics interface. 2007.xii, 239 pp. 110 ROTHSTEIN, Susan D. (ed.): Theoretical and Crosslinguistic Approaches to the Semantics of Aspect 2008. viii,453 pp.
1 09 CHOCANO, Gema: Narrow Syntax and Phonological Form. Scrambling in the Germanic languages. 2007. X. 333 pp. 1 o8 REULAND, Eric, Tanmoy BHATTACHARYA and Giorgos SPATHAS (eels.): Argument Structure. 2007. xviii, 243 pp. 107 CORVER, Norbert and Jaim NUNES (eels.): The Copy Theory of Movement 2007. vi, 388 pp. 106 DEiffi,Nicole andYordanka KAVALOVA (eels.): Parenthetical& 2007. xii, 314 pp. 105 HAUMANN,Dagmar: Adverb Licensing and Clause Structure in English. 2007. ix, 438 pp. 104 JEONG, Youngmi: Applicatives. Structure and interpretation from a mininlalisl perspective. 2007.
vii, 144 pp. 103 WURFF, Wim van der (ed.): Imperative Clauses in Generative Grammar. Studies in honour of Frits Beukema. 2007. viii, 352 pp. 102 BAYER, Josef, Tanmoy BHATTACHARYA and M. T. Hany BABU (eds.): Linguistic Theory and South Asian Languages. Essays in honour of K. A. Jayaseelan. 2007. x. 282 pp. 101 KARIMI, Simla, Vida SAMIIAN a ad Wendy K. WILKINS (eds.): Phrasal and Clausal Architecture. Synt.a.."1ic derivation and interpretation. In honor of Joseph E. Emonds. 2007. vi, 424 pp. 1 oo SCHWABE, Kentin and Susanne WINKLER (eds.): On Information Structure, Meaning and Form. Generalizations aaoss languages. 2007. vii, 570 pp.
99 98 97 96
95 94 93 92
91 90
89 88 87 86 85 84 83
MARTiNEZ-GIL, Fernando and Sonia COUNA (eds.): Optimality-Theoretic Studies in Spanish Phonology. 2007. viii, 564 pp. PIRES,Acrisio: The Mininlalist Syntax of Defective Domains. Gerunds and infinitives. 2006. xiv, 188 pp. HARTMANN, Jutta M. and Lmlo MOLNARFI (eels.): Comparative Studies in Germanic Syntax. From Afrikaans to Zurich German. 2006. vi, 332 pp. LYNGFELT,Benjamin and Thrgrim SOLSTAD (eds.): Demoting the Agenl Passive, middle and other voice phenomena. 2006. x. 333 pp. VOGELEER, Svetlaaa aad Liliane TASMOWSKI (eels.): Non-definiteness and Plurality. 2006. vi, 358 pp. ARCHB, Marla J.: Individuals in Time. Tense, aspect and the individuaVstage distinction. 2006. xiv, 281 pp. PROGOVAC,Ljljana,KatePAESANI,Eugenia CASIELLES andFJienBARTON (eels.): The Syntax of Nonsententials. Multidisciplinary perspectives. 2006. x. 372 pp. BOECKX, Cedric (ed.): Agreement Systems. 2006. ix, 346 pp. BOECKX, Cedric (ed.): Minimalist Essays. 2006. xvi. 399 pp. DALMI, GNte: The Role of Agreement in Non-Finite Predication. 2005. xvi, 222 pp. VELDE, John R. te: Deriving Coordinate Symmetries. A phase-based approacl! integrating Select. Merge, Copy and Match. 2oo6. x, 385 pp. MOHR, Sabiae: Clausal Architecture and Subject Positions. Impersonal constructions in the Germanic languages. 2005. viii, 207 pp. JUUEN, Marit: Nominal Phrases from a Scandinavian Perspective. 2005. xvi, 348 pp. COSTA, Joio and Maria Cristina FIGUEIREDO SILVA (eels.): Studies on Agreement. 2006. vi, 285 pp. MIKKELSEN, Line: CopularCiauses. Specification, predication and equation. 2005. viii, 210 pp. PAFEL, Jtlrgen: Quantifier Scope in German. 2006. xvi, 312 pp. SCHWEIKERT, Walter: The Order of Prepositional Phrases in the Structure of the Clause. 2005.
xii, 338 PP· QUINN, Heidi: The Distribution of Pronoun Case Forms in English. 2005. xii, 409 pp. 81 FUSS, Eric: The Rise of Agreement A formal approacl! to the syntax and grammaticalization of verbal 82
8o
79 78 77
76 75
inflection. 200 5· xii, 336 pp. BURKHARDT SCHUMACHER, Petra: The Syntax-Discourse Interfac.e. Representing and interpreting dependency. 2005. xii, 259 pp. SCHMID, Tanja: Infinitival Syntax. Infinitivus Pro Participio as a repair strategy. 2005. xiv, 2 51 pp. DIKKEN,Marcel den and O!ristina TORTORA (eds.): The Function of Function Words and Functional Categories. 200 5· vii. 292 pp. OZTCRK, Ballaz: Case. Referentiality and Phrase Structure. 2005. x, 268 pp. STAVROU, Melita and Arbon to TERZI (eds.): Advances in Greek Generative Syntax. In honor of Dimitra Theophanopoulou-Kontou. 2005. viii, 366 pp. DI SCIULLO, Anna Maria (ed.): UG and External Systems. Language, brain and romputation. 2005. xviii, 398 pp.
74 HEGGIE,Lorie aod Francisco ORD6fffiz (eds.): Clitic and Affix Combinations. Theoretical perspectives. 2005- viii. 390 pp. 73 CARNIE, Andrew, Heidi HARLEY and Sheila Ann DOOLEY (eds.): Verb First On the syntax of verbinitial languages. 200 5· .xiv, 434 pp. 72 FUSS, Eric and Carola TRIPS (eds. ): Diachronic Clues to Synchronic Grammar. 2004 viii, 228 pp. 71 GEIDEREN,EIIy van: Grammaticalization as Ec.onomy. 2004 xvi, 320 pp. 70 AUSTIN, Jennifer R., Stefan ENGELBERG and Gisa RAUH (eds.): Adverbials. The interplay between meaning. context. and syntactic structure. 2004 x. 346 pp. 69 KISS. Katalin E. and Henk van RIEMSDIJK (eds. ): Verb Clusters. A study of Hungarian, German and Dutch. 2004 vi, 514 pp. 68 BREUL, Carsten: Focus Structure in Generative Grammar. An integrated syntactic, semantic and intonational approach. 2004. x. 432 pp. 67 MI~SKA TOMIC, Olga (ed.): Balkan Syntax and Semantics. 2004 xvi, 499 pp. 66 GROHMANN, Kleaothes K.: Prolific Domains. On the Anti-Locality of movement dependencies. 2003. XV~ 372 pp. 65 MANNINEN, Satu JW.eoa: Small Phrase Layers. A study of Finnish Manner Adverbials. 2003. .xii, 275 pp. 64 BOECKX, Cedric and Kleantbes K. GROHMANN (eds.): Multiple Wb-Fronting. 200 3. x. 292 pp. 63 BOECKX, Cedric: Islands and Chains. Resumption as stranding. 2003. .xii, 224 pp. 62 CARNIE, Andrew, Heidi HARLEY and Mary Ann WILUE (eds.): Formal Approaches to Function in Grammm:; In honor of Eloise Jelinek. 2003. xii, 378 pp. 61 SCHWABE, Kentin and Susanne WINKLER (eds.): The Interfac.es. Deriving and interpreting omitted structures. 2003. vi, 40 3 pp. 6o TRIPS, Carola: From OV to VO in Early Middle English. 2002. .xiv, 359 pp. 59 DEiffi, Nicole: Particle Verbs in English. Syntax, information structure and intonation. 2002. xii, 305 pp. 58 DI SCIULLO, Anna Maria (eel.): Asymmetry in Grammm:; Volume 2: Morphology, phonology, w:.quisition. 2003. vi, 309 pp. 57 DI SCIULLO, Anna Maria (eel.): Asymmetry in Grammm:; Volume 1: Syntax and semantics. 2003. vi, 405 pp. 56 COENE, Martioe and Yves DliULST (eds.): From NP to DP. Volume 2: The expression of possession i noun phrases. 2003. x. 295 pp. 55 COENE, Martioe and Yles DliULST (eds.): From NP to DP. Volume 1: The syntax and semantics of noun phrases. 2003. vi, 362 pp. 54 BAPTISTA, Madyse: The Syntax of Cape Verdean Creole. The Sotavento varieties. 2003. xxii, 294 pp. (incl. CD-rom). 53 ZWART, Jan-Woater and Werner ABRAHAM (eds.): Studies in Comparative Germanic Syntax. Proc.eedings from the 15th Workshop on Comparative Germanic Syntax ( Groningen, May 26-27, 2ooo). 2002. .xiv, 407 pp. 52 SIMON, Horst J. aod Helke WIESE (eds.): Pronouns -Grammar and Representation. 2002 . .xii, 294 pp. 51 GERLACH, Birgit Clitics between Syntax and Le.xicon. 2002. .xii, 282 pp. 5o STEINBACH, Markus: Middle Voice. A comparative study in the syntax-semantics interface of German. 2002. .xii, 340 pp. 49 ALEXIADOU, Artemis (ed.): Theoretical Approaches to Universals. 2002. viii, 319 pp. 48 ALEXIADOU, Artemis,Eleoa ANAGNOSTOPOULOU, SjefBARBIERS aod Hans-Martin GARTNER (eds.): Dimensions of Movement From features to remnants. 2002. vi, 345 pp. 47 BARBIERS, Sjef, Frits BEUKEMA a ad Wim vao der WURFF (eds.): Modality and its Intera..i:ion with the Verbal System. 2002. x, 290 pp. 46 PANAGIOTIDIS,E. Pboevos: Pronouns, Clitics and Empty Nouns. 'Pronominality' and licensing in synta.L 2oo2.x, 214 pp. 45 ABRAHAM, Werner and Jan-Woater ZWART (eds.): Issues in Formal German(ic) Typology. 2002. xviii, 336 pp. 44 TAYLAN,Eser Ergavanh (ed.): The Verb in Turkish. 2002. xviii. 267 pp. 43 FEATHERSTON, Sam: Empty Categories in Sentence Processing. 2001. xvi, 279 pp. 42 ALEXIADOU,Artlemis: Functional Structure in Nominals. Nominalization and ergativity. 2001. x. 233 pp. 41 ZELLER, Jochen: Particle Verbs and Local Domains. 2001. .xii. 325 pp.
