From: Augustin Speyer <speyerbabel.ling.upenn.edu>
Subject: Topicalization and Clash Avoidance: On the interaction of prosody and syntax in the history of English with a few glimpses at German
E-mail this message to a friend
Institution: University of Pennsylvania
Program: Department of Linguistics
Dissertation Status: Completed
Degree Date: 2008
Author: Augustin Speyer
Dissertation Title: Topicalization and Clash Avoidance: On the interaction of prosody and syntax in the history of English with a few glimpses at German
Subject Language(s): English (eng)
German, Standard (deu)
Middle English (enm)
Old English (ang)
Anthony S. Kroch
Donald A. Ringe
The first chapter gives a brief overview over the methods and theories
used. The object of study bears on at least three different linguistic
modules, syntax, phonology (mainly prosody) and information structure,
therefore the way how they are seen in this study and how they interact
needs to be introduced to the reader, as few readers will have full
expertise in all three fields.
In the second chapter the decline of object topicalization in the history
of English is presented. The reason is neither a general tendency of
English word order to become more rigid (topicalization stayed
grammatical), nor a loss of pragmatic environments in which topicalization
was felicitous (the environments stayed the same). By closer look we see
that only sentences with full noun subjects are affected. The
interpretation pursued in the thesis is that the loss of the V2 word order
option led to situations in which topicalization would easily lead to the
juxtaposition of focused element (as in 'beans, John likes, but peas, Mary
likes'). Since this situation conflicts with the Clash Avoidance
Requirement, language users chose not to topicalize in such cases.
Chapter 3 shows experimental evidence for the Clash Avoidance Requirement:
In both English and German the participants avoided use of constructions
violating the Clash Avoidance Requirement. If forced, they inserted clearly
measurable pauses between the clashing accents. As a consequence of these
findings, the proper treatment of metrical prominence and focal emphasis -
focal emphasis understood as emphasis on an element in narrow focus - in
the framework of Metrical Stress Theory is discussed. The Clash Avoidance
Requirement appears here as essential condition on the relevant grid
The fourth chapter investigates topicalization and the Clash Avoidance
Requirement in Old English. Among sentences with topicalization, the
variation of V2 and V3 sentences is shown not to be strictly governed by
the kind of subject - pronoun subject leading to V3, lexical NP subject to
V2 - but to be sensitive to the information-structural function of both
topicalized element and subject. As there are several V3 sentences with a
full noun phrase subject, and it can be shown by direct evidence and by
statistical modeling that they cannot be verb-last sentences in disguise,
an analysis on the lines of van Kemenade (1987) is not tenable; the data
can be explained only by analyses that feature two subject positions such
as Haeberli (2002). We detect a clear correlation between V2 and focus on
either the subject or the topicalized element which supports the theory of
a prosodic motivation for the Middle English decline presented in chapter 2.
This Year the LINGUIST List hopes to raise $60,000. This money will go to help
keep the List running by supporting all of our Student Editors for the coming year.
See below for donation instructions, and don't forget to check out our Fund Drive
2009 LINGUIST List Restaurant and join us for a delightful treat!
There are many ways to donate to LINGUIST!
You can donate right now using our secure credit card form at
Alternatively you can also pledge right now and pay later. To do so, go to:
For all information on donating and pledging, including information on how to
donate by check, money order, or wire transfer, please visit:
The LINGUIST List is under the umbrella of Eastern Michigan University and as such
can receive donations through the EMU Foundation, which is a registered 501(c) Non
Profit organization. Our Federal Tax number is 38-6005986. These donations can be
offset against your federal and sometimes your state tax return (U.S. tax payers
only). For more information visit the IRS Web-Site, or contact your financial advisor.
Many companies also offer a gift matching program, such that they will match any
gift you make to a non-profit organization. Normally this entails your contacting
your human resources department and sending us a form that the EMU Foundation fills
in and returns to your employer. This is generally a simple administrative procedure
that doubles the value of your gift to LINGUIST, without costing you an extra penny.
Please take a moment to check if your company operates such a program.
Thank you very much for your support of LINGUIST!
Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue