Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter Mouton June 15, 2016

Discourse functions of focus marking in Avatime

  • Saskia van Putten EMAIL logo

Abstract

Avatime is a Kwa language spoken in Ghana. [1] It has a focus construction in which the focused element is placed in clause-initial position and marked with an extra-high tone. In this paper I discuss the functions of this focus construction, mostly based on a corpus of spontaneous discourse. The focus construction can mark focus on subjects, objects, adjuncts and verbs. Focus marking is usually interpreted as narrow focus on the focus-marked element, but the focus may be wider. Focus marking is not obligatory. In answers to questions, it is rarely used, except when the focused element is the subject. In other contexts, the focus construction is mostly used for contrastive purposes, indicating there are alternatives to the focused element or that the focused element is unexpected. These functions can be unified in the definition of focus marking as highlighting the common-ground update.

Abbreviations

1

first person

2

second person

add

additive

c

noun class

cfh

clause-final high tone

cm

clause marker

comp

complementizer

ctr

contrastive

def

definite

dist

distal demonstrative

foc

focus

fp

final particle

hab

habitual

indf

indefinite

inf

infinitive

int

intentional

it

itive

loc

locative

log

logophoric

neg

negative

pfv

perfective

poss

possessive

pot

potential

prog

progressive

prox

proximal demonstrative

rec

recurrent

rel

relative

sbj

subject

sbjv

subjunctive

svm

serial verb marker

References

Ameka, Felix K. 2010. Information packaging constructions in Kwa: Micro-variation and typology. In Enoch O. Aboh & James Essegbey (eds.), Topics in Kwa syntax (Studies in natural language and linguistic theory 78), 141–176. Dordrecht: Springer.10.1007/978-90-481-3189-1_7Search in Google Scholar

Bisang, Walter & Remi Sonaiya. 2000. Information structuring in Yoruba. Linguistics 38(1). 169–197.10.1515/ling.38.1.169Search in Google Scholar

Bobuafor, Mercy. 2013. A grammar of Tafi. Leiden: Leiden University dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Defina, Rebecca. in press (a). Serial verb constructions and their subtypes in Avatime. Studies in Language.10.1075/sl.40.3.07defSearch in Google Scholar

Defina, Rebecca. in press (b). Tense, aspect, and mood in Avatime. Afrika und Übersee.Search in Google Scholar

Dik, Simon C. 1997. The theory of Functional Grammar. Part 1: The structure of the clause. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar

Du Bois, John W. 1987. The discourse basis of ergativity. Language 63(4). 805–855.10.2307/415719Search in Google Scholar

É. Kiss, Katalin. 1998. Identificational focus versus information focus. Language 74(2). 245–273.10.1353/lan.1998.0211Search in Google Scholar

Fiedler, Ines, Katharina Hartmann, Brigitte Reineke, Anne Schwarz & Malte Zimmermann. 2010. Subject focus in West-African languages. In Malte Zimmermann & Caroline Féry (eds.), Information structure: theoretical, typological, and experimental perspectives, 234–257. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199570959.003.0010Search in Google Scholar

Ford, Kevin C. 1971. Aspects of Avatime syntax: University of Ghana, Legon dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Güldemann, Tom, Ines Fiedler, Yukiko Morimoto & Kirill Prokhorov. 2010. Preposed verb doubling and predicate-centered focus. Paper presented at the International Conference of the SFB 632 “Information structure”, University of Potsdam and Humboldt University of Berlin, July 8–10.Search in Google Scholar

Krifka, Manfred. 2007. Basic notions of information structure. Interdisciplinary Studies on Information Structure 6. 13–55.10.1556/ALing.55.2008.3-4.2Search in Google Scholar

Lambrecht, Knud. 1994. Information structure and sentence form: Topic, focus, and the mental representations of discourse referents. (Cambridge Studies in Linguistics 71). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511620607Search in Google Scholar

Lambrecht, Knud. 2000. When subjects behave like objects: an analysis of the merging of S and O in sentence-focus constructions across languages. Studies in Language 24(3). 611–682.10.1075/sl.24.3.06lamSearch in Google Scholar

Levinson, Stephen C. 2000. Presumptive meanings: the theory of generalized conversational implicature. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/5526.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Matić, Dejan. 2015. Information structure in linguistics. In James D. Wright (ed.), International encyclopedia of the social and behavioural sciences (2nd edn.), 95–99. Amsterdam: Elsevier.10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.53013-XSearch in Google Scholar

Matić, Dejan & Daniel Wedgwood. 2013. The meanings of focus: The significance of an interpretation-based category in cross-linguistic analysis. Journal of Linguistics 49. 127–163.10.1017/S0022226712000345Search in Google Scholar

van Putten, Saskia. 2013. The meaning of the Avatime additive particle tsye. In Maria Balbach, Lena Benz, Susanne Genzel, Mira Grubic, Agata Renans, Sören Schalowski, Maja Stegenwallner & Amir Zeldes (eds.), Information structure: Empirical perspectives on theory, 55–74. Potsdam: Universitätsverlag Potsdam.Search in Google Scholar

van Putten, Saskia. 2014. Information structure in Avatime. Nijmegen: Radboud University Nijmegen dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Reineke, Brigitte. 2007. Identificational operation as a focus strategy in Byali. In Enoch Oladé Aboh, Katharina Hartmann & Malte Zimmermann (eds.), Focus strategies in African languages (Trends in Linguistics, Studies and Monographs 191), 223–240. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar

Rooth, Mats. 1992. A theory of focus interpretation. Natural Language Semantics 1. 75–116.10.1007/BF02342617Search in Google Scholar

Schuh, Russell G. 1995. Aspects of Avatime phonology. Studies in African Linguistics 24(1). 31–67.10.32473/sal.v24i1.107410Search in Google Scholar

Selkirk, Elisabeth O. 1995. Sentence prosody: Intonation, stress and phrasing. In John Goldsmith (ed.), The handbook of phonological theory, 550–569. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar

Skopeteas, Stavros & Gisbert Fanselow. 2010. Focus in Georgian and the expression of contrast. Lingua 120. 1370–1391.10.1016/j.lingua.2008.10.012Search in Google Scholar

Skopeteas, Stavros, Ines Fiedler, Samantha Hellmuth, Anne Schwarz, Ruben Stoel, Gisbert Fanselow, Caroline Féry & Manfred Krifka (eds.). 2006. Questionnaire on information structure (QUIS): reference manual, vol. 4 Working Papers of the SFB632, Interdisciplinary Studies on Information Structure (ISIS). Potsdam: Universitätsverlag Potsdam.Search in Google Scholar

Vallduví, Enric & Maria Vilkuna. 1998. On rheme and kontrast. In Peter Culicover & L McNally (eds.), The limits of syntax (Syntax and Semantics 29), 79–108. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.10.1163/9789004373167_005Search in Google Scholar

Watters, John Robert. 1979. Focus in Aghem: a study of its formal correlates and typology. In Larry M. Hyman (ed.), Aghem grammatical structure. with special reference to noun classes, tense-aspect and focus marking (Southern California occasional papers in linguistics 7), 137–188. Los Angeles, CA: Department of Linguistics, University of Southern California.Search in Google Scholar

Zimmermann, Malte. 2008. Contrastive focus. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 55. 347–360.10.1556/ALing.55.2008.3-4.9Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2016-6-15
Published in Print: 2016-6-1

©2016 by De Gruyter Mouton

Downloaded on 27.4.2024 from https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/jall-2016-0003/html
Scroll to top button