Skip to main content

The Semantics of Focus as a Dialogue Function

  • Chapter
  • 123 Accesses

Part of the book series: Linguistische Berichte Sonderhefte ((LINGB,volume 4))

Abstract

In this paper we will present a dialogical approach to the description of the use and interpretation of intonational means to focus on certain parts of an utterance.1 That focusing of parts of utterances should be studied in connection with the communicative function of language is by no means a new observation. This view has e.g. been advocated for a long time by the Prague School (cf. Mathesius 1929, Firbas 1958, Beneš 1967). More recently, Hajičová (1984) and Sgall (1986) described an approach to the introduction of topic-focus articulation into a formal description of syntax and the meaning of the sentence. Gabbay and Moravcsik (1978) in their seminal paper on the focus of the negation operator write:

“...what constituent negation enables us to do is to indicate which part of a sentence needs to be revised in order for that sentence to convey correct information. Constituent negation is an efficient way of doing this within a natural language; i.e. one that is primarily spoken, not written and is used to convey information, criticism, etc. between language users”

(Gabbay/Moravcsik op.c. p: 255)

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   49.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   44.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Altmann, H. (1976): Die Gradpartikeln im Deutschen. Tübingen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bannert, R., Hoepelman, J. and Machate, J. (1989): “Auswertung der Fokusintonation im gesprochenen Dialog”. In: Mustererkennung 1989 (Proceedings of the 11th DAGM-Symposium). ed. by H. Burkhardt, K. H. Höhne and B. Neumann Hamburg, 536–542.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Barth, E. M. and E. C. W. Krabbe (1982): From Axiom to Dialogue. A Philosophical Study of Logics and Argumentation. Berlin.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Benes, E. (1967): Die funktionale Satzperspektive (Thema-Rhema-Gliederung) im Deutschen. Deutsch als Fremdsprache 1. Leipzig.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlson, L. (1984): “Focus and Dialogue Games”. In: Cognitive Constraints on Communication. ed. by L. Vaina and J. Hintikka. Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, N. (1971): “Deep Structure, Surface Structure and Semantic Interpretation”. In: Semantics- An Interdisciplinary Reader. ed. by D. Steinberg and L. Jakobovits. Cambridge,183–216..

    Google Scholar 

  • Culicover, P. W and M. Rochemont (1983): “Stress and Focus in English” Language 59, 1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Danes, F. (1974): “Functional Sentence Perspective and the Organization of the Text”. In: Papers on FSP. ed. by F. Danes. Prag, 106–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drach, E. (1937/1963): Grundgedanken der deutschen Satzlehre. Darmstadt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Firbas, J. (1958): Bemerkungen über einen deutschen Beitrag zum Problem der Satzperspektive. Philologica Pragensia 1. Prag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gabbay, D. M. and J. M. Moravcsik (1978): “Negation and Denial”. In: Studies in Formal Semantics. Intensionality, Temporality, Negation. ed. by. E Guenthner and Ch. Rohrer, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gentzen, G. (1934): “Untersuchungen über das logische Schließen”. Mathematische Zeitschrift 39, 176–210 und 405–431.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hajicovâ, E. (1984): “Topic And Focus”. In: Contributions to Functional Syntax, Semantics and Language Comprehension. ed. by. P. Sgall. Amsterdam, Prag, 189–202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halliday, M. A. K. (1967): “Notes on Transitivity and Theme in English: Part II”. Journal of Linguistics 3, 199–244.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hays, D. G. (1964): “Dependency Theory: A Formalism And Some Observations”. Language 40, 4, 511–524.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helbig, G. and W. Schenkel (1975): Wörterbuch zur Valenz und Distribution deutscher Verben. Leipzig.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hellwig, P. (1986): “Dependency Unification Grammar”. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING-86). Bonn, 195–198.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hintikka, J. and L. Carlson (1979): “Conditionals, Generic Quantifiers and other Applications of Subgames”. In: Formal Semantics and Pragmatics for Natural Languages. ed. by E Guenthner and S. J. Schmidt. Dordrecht: Reidel, 1–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hintikka, J. and J. Kulas (1985): Anaphora and Definite Descriptions. Dordrecht: Reidel. Hoepelman, J. (1979): “Negation and Denial in Montague Grammar”. Theoretical Linguistics 6, 2 /3, 191–209.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoepelman, J., Machate, J. and R. Schnitzer (1991): “Intonational Focusing and Dialogue Games”. Journal of Semantics 8, 3, 253–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, J. (1983): Fokus und Skalen - Zur Syntax and Semantik der Gradpartikeln im Deutschen. Tübingen: Niemeyer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, J. (1984): “Funktionale Satzperspektive und Illokutionssemantik”. Linguistische Berichte 91, 25–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, J. (1988): “Fokus-Hintergrund-Gliederung und Grammatik”. In: Intonationsforschungen. ed. by H. Altmann. Tübingen, 89–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, J. (1991): “Focus Ambiguities”. Journal of Semantics 8, 1 /2, 1–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kamp, H. (1981): “A Theory of Truth and Semantic Representation”. In: Formal Methods in the Study of Language, part 1. ed. by. Groenendijk, Janssen and Stokhof. 277–321.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lorenzen, P. and K. Lorenz (1978): Dialogische Logik. Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft. Darmstadt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Machate, J. and D. Nitsche (1990): KONTUR - Ein Parser für die freie Wortstellung im Deutschen. FhG/IAO - internes Arbeitspapier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mathesius, V. (1929): Zur Satzperspektive im modernen Englisch. Archiv für das Studium der neueren Sprachen und Literaturen 155, 202–210.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCord, M. (1989): A New Version of Slot Grammar. Research Report RC 14506, IBM Research Division, Yorktownheights, NY 10598.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schank, R. C. (1975): Conceptual Information Processing. Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sgall, P., E. Haji6ova and J. Panevova (1986): The Meaning of the Sentence in its Semantic and Pragmatic Aspects. Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1992 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Machate, J., Hoepelman, J. (1992). The Semantics of Focus as a Dialogue Function. In: Jacobs, J. (eds) Informationsstruktur und Grammatik. Linguistische Berichte Sonderhefte, vol 4. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-663-12176-3_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-663-12176-3_4

  • Publisher Name: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-531-12294-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-663-12176-3

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics