Re: V2 languages

At 11:37 am -0700 30/5/99, Sally Caves wrote:
>Raymond A. Brown wrote:
........
>> Sally explicitly says she is 'focussing' and she continues to use that
>> term. And as Sally has knowledge of Welsh, I think it very likely that she
>> has taken the Welsh practice of _focus first_ into Teonaht.
>
>Hi Ray... thanks; I sometimes don't know WHAT I am doing with Teonaht.
>Topic and focus in Teonaht definitely need prime attention.  Teonaht's
[snip]
>in Teonaht.  I've lost those.  In the meantime, though, I need to
>understand
>what it means to focus in Teonaht as it is and to topicalize.  Until I
>do,
>I can't revise the Syntax part of my grammar (not loaded yet).
OK.  Let's focus on what is meant by 'topic' & 'focus' first :)

There two terms are not contrastive; the opposite of 'topic' is 'comment',
so let's deal with that first.

The topic/comment distinction is an alternative binary description of a
sentence to the traditional subject/predicate distinction that, e.g. I was
taught in school 40 - 50 years back and is ultimately derived from
Arisotelian logic.  The  modern topic/comment distinction is also known by
the terms theme/rheme which were coined by the Prague School of
linguistics.

The 'topic' or 'theme' is the entity about which something is said.  It
often, tho by no means necessarily, corresponds to the grammatical subject(
e.g.' _The book_ is on the table'; but cf. ' _The answer_  I'll give you if
you wait a moment').   It carries the lowest degree of communicative
dynamism, as opposed to the.....

'comment' or 'rheme' which is the part of the sentence that adds further
information about the topic; it adds extra meaning and has a higher degree
of communicative dynamism; e.g. if "the book" is the topic, then "is on the
table" is the comment which gives us extra info about the book.

'Focus' is that part of the comment which focuses our attention on new info
not presupposed by either speaker.  If the reply to "What did you give John
for his birthday?" was:

For his birthday I gave him a book.
'For his birthday' is the 'topic' - it's what we're talking about.
'I gave him a book' is the 'comment'.
'a book' is the focus.

Of course when answering a question we usually just give the focus and
leave the rest of the sentence 'understood' (i.e. presupposed).  But it's
interesting to contrast the different way in which German & Welsh would
word a complete sentence reply to "What has she given him for his birthday?"

Was hat sie ihm zum Geburtstag geschenkt?
Zum Geburtstag hat sie ihm ein Buch geschenkt.
[For (his) birthday has she him a book given]

Beth mae hi wedi rhoi iddo fe i'w ben-blwydd?
Llyfr mae hi wedi rhoi iddo fe i'w ben-blwydd.
[A book is she after giving to him for his birthday]

German fronts the topic 'Zum Geburstag'  whereas Welsh fronts the focus
'Llyfr'.

>                TEBNAR, KWA'R   PERVA LO?
>                Tebnar, what INT. place  he (is)? <--unexpressed copula
>                ("where's Tebnar?")
>
>                REVBOMCCOVAT LO.
>                With outwalking he.
>                ("He's out walking.")
>
>                LO REVBOMCCOVAT KWA'R PERVA    AI?
>                His outwalking  what INT place it (is)?
>                "Where's he walking?"
>
>                CELIL VERINYN LO ATWA.
>                In the park   he walks.
>                "He's walking in the park."
>
>If topic (and I'm recalling this from memory) is the new information
>that
>forms the subject of the new sentence, then that gets fronted.
Ah - if I understand you aright, you mean that, e.g. 'revbomccovat' has
been given as new information and then gets put at the start of the next
question.  As I understand it, when given as the answer to the first
question, it is the focus (Certainly in the last answer 'celil verinyn' is
the focus); but in the following question, you are picking up what has
already been focussed and are now using it as an established fact, i.e.
that he's out walking, and it is therefore the entity, i.e. topic, that the
next questions wants comments about (if you see what I mean :)

>But it
>also looks as though focus gets fronted as well.
I agree.
It looks to me as tho in the questions the topic is fronted and in the
answers the focus gets fronted.

>How about with a verb?

>                KWA'R    TOBRE LODDEY?
>                What INT thing  he does?
>                ("What's he doing?")
>
>                ATWAREM CELIL VERINYN LODDEY, HDOVNAKA.
>                Walking  in the park  he does, silly.
>                ("He's walking in the park, you idiot.")
>        --most T. would leave out the second "loddey."--
Again in the answer the focus is fronted.

>The verb can only be fronted if it's turned into a nominalization.
>Let's
>see:
>
>                HOVAR KWA'R      TOBRE LODDEY?
>                There what INT.  thing  he does?
>                "What is he doing there?"
>
>                BOMHHTINDELREM EUIL TAHN LO.
>                With singing   to the songbirds he.  <--copula suppressed
>                "He's singing to the songbirds."
Yes, that's fronting the focus in the answer.  It's not unlike what Welsh
does either, since if you want to focus the verb, then the verbnoun must be
used. For example:

Beth mae e yna?
Canu i'r adar mae e.  (Singing to the birds is he)
- where the finite verb "mae" comes after the focus.

If we have a conjugated form of the verb the difference between the
focussed and unfocused forms is more noticeable, e.g.
Prynodd fy nhad y teledu lliw.   My father bought the color TV.

Prynu'r teledu lliw wnaeth fy nhad.  My father _bought_ the color TV. (lit.
Buying [of] the color TV did my father].

>Yep.  It's seems the opposite of English, that puts focus and new
>information
>at the end of the sentence.
Yes, I agree.

>Maybe I don't really understand the difference between topic and focus.
Topic is already established - it's what we are talking about.  'comment'
is what we say about it. I guess every complete sentence must have topic &
comment (theme & rheme).

Focus is new info. we want to bring to the attention of our listener/reader
(addressee); it will be part of the comment.

As I understand it, not all sentences will have focus.   Thus "Prynodd fy
nhad y teledu lliw." does not have any particular focus.  Whether 'fy nhad'
or 'y teledu lliw' is the topic depends on context, i.e. whether 'my
father' is the entity we're talking about or the 'color TV' is.

>
>                KWA'R     FEPON HTINDEL?
>                What INT. person sings?
>                "Who's singing?"
>
>                LO DEY, HDOVNAKA!
>                "He does, stupid!"
>
>                KWA'R TOBRE LODDEY?
>                What INT. thing does he?
>
>                THINDELREM LO DEY.
>                Singing   he  does.
>
>("thindelrem"--the gerund--answers "tobre"--a noun.)
The replies both put the focus first.

>                KWA'R HTELRE DOVNAKA EUIL TAHN HTINDEL?
>                "What kind  (of) fool to the birds sings?
>
>                or:  EUIL TAHN KWA'R HTELRA DOVNAKA HTINDEL?
>
>The pattern seems to be there.  Maybe I need more complicated examples.
And again.

It looks very much like the Welsh practice of fronting the focus.

Ray.