Contrast and information structure: A focus-based analysis of but

Linguistics

Volumn 43, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 207-232

  Umbach, Carla ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OSNABRÜCK   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 13244273610     PISSN: 00243949     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1515/ling.2005.43.1.207     Document Type: Review

References (33)

1. Asher, Nicholas (1993). Reference to Abstract Objects in Discourse. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
2. Brauße, Ursula (1998). Was ist Adversativität? ABER oder UND. Deutsche Sprache 2, 138-159.
3. Büring, Daniel (1998). Topic. In Focus and Natural Language Processing, Peter Bosch and Rob van der Sandt (eds.), 142-165. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
4. _(2003). On D-trees, beans, and B-accents. Linguistics & Philosophy 26(5), 511-545.
5. Carlson, Laurie (1983). Dialogue Games. Dordrecht: Reidel.
6. Foolen, Ad (1991). Polyfunctionality and the semantics of adversative conjunctions. Multilingua 10(1), 79-92.
7. Forbes, Katherine; Miltsakaki, Eleni; Prasad, Rashmi; Sarkar, Anoop; Joshi, Aravind; and Webber, Bonnie (2003). D-LTAG system - discourse parsing with a lexicalized tree adjoining grammar. Journal of Language, Logic and Information 12(3), 261-279.
8. Gaerdenfors, Peter (1994). The role of expectations in reasoning. In Knowledge Representation and Reasoning Under Uncertainty, Michael Masuch and Laszlo Polos (eds.), 1-16. Berlin and New York: Springer.
9. Ginzburg, Jonathan (1996). Interrogatives: questions, facts and dialogue. In The Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory, Shalom Lappin (ed.), 365-422. Oxford: Blackwell.
10. Givon, Talmy (1978). Negation in language: pragmatics, function, ontology. In Syntax and Semantics: Pragmatics, vol. 9, Peter Cole (ed.), 69-112. New York: Academic Press.
11. Grote, Brigitte; Lenke, Norbert; and Stede, Manfred (1997). Ma(r)king concessions in English and German. Discourse Processes 24, 87-117.
12. Höhle, Tilman (1992). Über Verum-Fokus im Deutschen. In Informationsstruktur und Grammatik, Linguistische Berichte Sonderheft 4/1991-92, Joachim Jacobs (ed.), 112-141. Frankfurt a.M.: Universität Frankfurt.
13. Jäger, Gerhard (2001). Topic-comment structure and the contrast between stage level and individual level predicates. Journal of Semantics 18(2), 83-126.
14. König, Ekkehard (1991). Concessive relations as the dual of causal relations. In Semantic Universals and Universal Semantics, Groningen-Amsterdam Studies in Semantics 12, Dietmar Zaefferer (ed.), 190-209. Dordrecht: Foris.
15. Krifka, Manfred (1993). Focus and presupposition in dynamic interpretation. Journal of Semantics 10, 269-300.
16. _(1999). Additive particles under stress. In Proceedings of SALT 8, Devon Strolovitch and Aaron Lawson (eds.), 111-128. Cornell, NY: CLC Publications.
17. Lakoff, Robin (1971). If's, and's and but's about conjunction. In Studies in Linguistic Semantics, Charles Fillmore and Terence Langendoen (eds.), 114-149. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
18. Lang, Ewald (1977). Semantik der koordinativen Verknüpfung. Studia Grammatica XIV. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag.
19. Mann, William; and Thompson, Sandra (1988). Rhetorical structure theory: towards a functional theory of text organization. Text 8(2), 243-281.
20. Posner, Roland (1980). Semantics and pragmatics of sentence connectives. In Speech Act Theory and Pragmatics, John R. Searle, Ference Kiefer, and Manfred Bierwisch (eds.), 169-203. Dordrecht: Reidel.
21. Quirk, Randolph; Svartvik, Jan; Leech, Geoffry; and Greenbaum, Syndey (1985). A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.
22. Roberts, Craige (1998). Focus, the flow of information and universal grammar. In Syntax and Semantics. Vol. 29: The Limits of Syntax, Peter Culicover and Louise McNally (eds.), 109-160. San Diego: Academic Press.
23. Rochemont, Michael (1986). Focus in Generative Grammar. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
24. Rooth, Mats (1992). A theory of focus interpretation. Natural Language Semantics 1, 75-116.
25. Sæbø, Kjell Johan (2002). Presupposition and contrast: German aber as a topic particle. Paper presented at the "Sinn und Bedeutung 2002" conference, Constance, Germany.
26. Sanders, Ted; Spooren, Wilbert; and Noordman, Leo (1992). Toward a taxonomy of coherence relations. Discourse Processes 15, 1-35.
27. Schwabe, Kerstin (2000). Coordinative ellipsis and information structure. In Ellipsis in Conjunction, Linguistische Arbeiten 418, Kerstin Schwabe and Ning Zhang (eds.), 247-269. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.
28. Steedman, Mark (2000). Information structure and the syntax-phonology interface. Linguistic Inquiry 31(4), 649-689.
29. Umbach, Carla (2003). Anaphoric restriction of alternative sets: on the role of bridging antecedents. In Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung VII, Konstanz Linguistics Working Papers 114, Matthias Weisgerber (ed.), 310-323. Konstanz: Universität Konstanz.
30. Vallduvi, Enric; and Engdahl, Elisabeth (1996). The cross-linguistic realization of information packaging. Linguistics 34(3), 459-519.
31. _; and Vilkuna, Maria (1998). On rheme and kontrast. In Syntax and Semantics. Vol. 29: The Limits of Syntax, Peter Culicover and Louise McNally (eds.), 79-108. San Diego: Academic Press.
32. van Kuppevelt, Jan (1995). Discourse structure topicality and questioning. Journal of Linguistics 31, 109-147.
33. Winter, Yoad; and Rimon, Mori (1994). Contrast and implication in natural language. Journal of Semantics 11, 365-406.