MARRI AMON Initial and Final Detachments Study in Spoken Estonian: a in the Framework of Information Structuring

DISSERTATIONES MARRI AMON LINGUISTICAE UNIVERSITATIS TARTUENSIS 24 Initial and final detachments in spoken Estonian: a study the framework of Information Structuring MARRI AMON Initial and final detachments in spoken Estonian: a study in the framework of Information Structuring Tartu 2015 ISSN 1406-5657 ISBN 978-9949-32-869-7 DISSERTATIONES LINGUISTICAE UNIVERSITATIS TARTUENSIS 24 DISSERTATIONES LINGUISTICAE UNIVERSITATIS TARTUENSIS 24 MARRI AMON Initial and final detachments in spoken Estonian: a study in the framework of Information Structuring University of Tartu, Institute of Estonian and General Linguistics Dissertation accepted for the commencement of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy on May 13rd, 2015 by the Committee of the Institute of Estonian and General Linguistics, Faculty of Philosophy, University of Tartu Supervisors: M.M. Jocelyne Fernandez-Vest, Professor Emerita, CNRS&Université Paris 3 La Sorbonne Nouvelle Senior Researcher PhD Liina Lindström, University of Tartu Opponent: Professor Marja-Liisa Helasvuo, University of Turku, Finland Commencement: Jakobi 2-438, Tartu, on 26 August 2015 at 11.15. This study has been supported by the European Social Fund ISSN 1406-5657 ISBN 978-9949-32-869-7 (print) ISBN 978-9949-32-870-3 (pdf) Copyright: Marri Amon, 2015 University of Tartu Press www.tyk.ee PREFACE As my thesis took quite a long time to prepare, with a few interruptions along the way, I would like to express my gratitude to all the people whom my life has brought me in contact with during this period, both in academia and in other spheres of life, and who have supported and encouraged me in various ways, if even simply by showing interest in how my work was progressing. To begin with, I’d like to thank my thesis supervisors. Professor M. M. J. Fernandez-Vest was readily willing to help me when my work adopted a different perspective and I needed an alternate viewpoint in order to find a clearer path by which to approach my thesis topic. As my first specialty is French philology, this gave me an opportunity to deepen my knowledge of French linguistics, in which M.M.J. Fernandez-Vest’s assistance was ines- timable. I am also thankful for the opportunity to participate in her doctoral seminar at the University of Paris III: Sorbonne Nouvelle and in several international colloquia which she organized. Her clear ideas and capacity for work have served as a great example for me. My other supervisor was PhD Liina Lindström of the University of Tartu, who helped me tremendously with questions related to Estonian and who always found time to discuss my problems and provide thorough comments and suggestions. My heartfelt thanks to them both. In addition to my supervisors, I have received great support from the researchers at the Department of Estonian and Finno-Ugric Linguistics at the University of Tartu, primarily from professor emeritus Ago Künnap, with whom this whole adventure began. I would also like to thank professors Renate and Karl Pajusalu for their constant good-hearted support, as well as professor Helle Metslang, who gave me an excellent idea at a most appropriate time and who has continually supported and encouraged me, and docent Külli Habicht, who has provided friendly support. In working with the University of Tartu’s corpus of spoken language, I received valuable assistance from researcher Olga Gerassimenko and PhD Tiit Hennoste; researcher Pärtel Lippus aided me in using the phonetic corpus, and senior researcher Eva-Liina Asu-Garcia helped to clarify a number of com- plicated phonetics-related questions for me. My correspondence with researcher Nele Salveste also helped me to put my thoughts in order. I would also like to express my gratitude to the participants in the morpho- syntax working team seminar organised by Helle Metslang for their thorough and extraordinarily supportive examination of certain parts of my thesis, which was a great help to me. Various exchanges of ideas with the French-Estonian working team in the G.F. Parrot joint programme have helped me to improve the focus of my work. I am grateful to my colleagues from the Department of Romance Studies, Anu Treikelder and Marge Käsper, for the inspiring discussions we have had on a number of other problematic linguistic topics. 5 I would also like to thank the preliminary reviewers of my thesis, professor Marja-Liisa Helasvuo and PhD Heete Sahkai, who made extremely helpful remarks concerning the thesis text. My thanks also go out to coordinator Tiia Margus for assisting me in a variety of matters. I have received support from University of Tartu Doctoral School of Linguistics, Philosophy and Semiotics in order to write my thesis and participate in conferences, as well as from the Institute of Estonian and Finno- Ugric Linguistics for the editing of my thesis. I would also like to thank David Ogren for English language editing. At the intersection of academic and personal life, special thanks are due to my good friend and outstanding professor Eva Toulouze, who has supported and encouraged me for over twenty years and served as an example to me in more ways than I can count. This thesis would not have been possible without the support and interest of my family, my husband Ramin, my children, and my friends, as well as my relatives both close and distant; their patience has encouraged me and helped me to believe in myself. My thanks also go to our lovely babysitters Kristel, Mailika and Kätlin, and to our universal helper Heli, all of whom have offered us their time and support when we needed it the most. 6 CONTENTS ABBREVIATIONS USED IN INTERLINEAR GLOSSING ....................... 10 1. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................... 11 1.1. Overview of the thesis ....................................................................... 13 1.2. Description of the corpus .................................................................. 14 1.2.1. Criteria used for compiling the examples ................................ 17 1.2.1.1. Examples of initial detachments ................................ 17 1.2.1.2. Examples of final detachments .................................. 19 1.3. Transcription symbols ....................................................................... 20 2. INFORMATION STRUCTURING: THEORETICAL AND METHODOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK .................................................. 21 2.1. The state of the issue: problems and criticisms ................................. 23 2.1.1. Terminological questions ........................................................ 23 2.1.2. The level and the scope of the analysis ................................... 26 2.2. Different interpretations of IS categories in some generalizing approaches ......................................................................................... 29 3. INFORMATION STRUCTURING: FROM THE FIRST STUDIES AND THE PRAGUE SCHOOL TO THE INVESTIGATION OF SPOKEN LANGUAGE ...................................................................... 31 3.1. Some preliminary sets of notions leading to the problematics of the Prague school: from H. Weil to V. Mathesius. ....................... 31 3.1.1. (Psycho)logical Subject and Predicate and the word order ..... 33 3.1.2. The point of departure for the problematics of Theme-Rheme: Vilém Mathesius ..................................................................... 34 3.2. The Prague school and the Functional Sentence Perspective ............ 35 3.3. After the Prague school: sentence, text, discourse ............................ 37 3.3.1. Text and discourse. Textual linguistics ................................... 38 3.3.2. Spoken and written language .................................................. 40 3.3.3. Mental processes linked to the treatment of the referents ....... 45 3.3.4. Transition from sentence to text and related terminological questions .................................................................................. 47 3.4. Text- (discourse-) based approaches ................................................. 50 3.4.1. Textual-typological approach of M.M.J.Fernandez-Vest ....... 50 3.4.2. Modular approach (Geneva school) ........................................ 51 3.4.3. Some other approaches ........................................................... 53 3.5. Word order ........................................................................................ 53 3.6. Prosody and Information Structuring: a problem not yet resolved ... 57 3.6.1. Detachment constructions and prosody .................................. 60 4. ESTONIAN LINGUISTICS AND INFORMATION STRUCTURING .. 62 7 5. THEME AND MNEME (POST-RHEME, TAIL) AS INFORMATIONAL CONSTITUENTS ............................................. 68 5.1. Theme and the thematic field from the informational perspective .... 69 5.1. A-thematic utterances ........................................................................ 71 5.2. Post-Rheme (Anti-Topic, Mneme, Tail) as the third informational component ......................................................................................... 74 6. DETACHMENT CONSTRUCTIONS IN LANGUAGES: A GENERAL PERSPECTIVE ......................................................................................... 78 6.1. Detachment constructions as a universal in unplanned discourse: general characteristics and definitions............................................... 78 6.1.1. Some formal properties of detached constructions ................. 84 6.1.2. About the semantic aspects

Load more