9. PLAN DE GESTIÓN AMBIENTAL PARA EL PROCESO PRODUCTIVO DE LA
9.2 PLANEACIÓN ESTRATEGICA
9.2.3 ANÁLISIS MATRIZ DOFA
The main argument of the present chapter has been that in French single-WH questions in situ a phonologically null WH operator moves to the specifier of CP while the indefinite remains in situ. In the present section, it is argued that in French single-WH in situ questions and in split-WH constructions in general (e.g. combien ...de livres, etc.), the indefinite with which the operator is associated remains in situ because it is defocalised. In other words, it is a topic. In the non-split alternative, the indefinite with which the WH operator is associated is localised along with the WH operator. In each case, movement of the WH operator occurs (Q is always strong in French). The only difference between a split-WH construction and a non-split (overt-movement) WH construction is thus the stranding and the associated defocalisation of the indefinite.
Split and non-split-WH constructions mean the same, i.e. they receive the same truth-conditions (or at least overlapping truth-conditions; in-situ questions may lack readings that non-in-situ questions have). However, split and non-split-WH constructions differ as to how the information is packaged: while in-situ questions involve presupposition, fi*onted-WH questions do not. Our proposal can thus be seen as an argument against the minimalist view of movement, according to which movement is always triggered by strong features (Last Resort). On our view, movement of a WH operator in French is a Last-Resort operation. However, whether the indefinite with which the WH operator is associated remains in situ or whether it is moved along with its operator is not determined by morphology, but by discourse considerations.
At this point, let me provide some definitions, since the notion of topic and focus mean different things for different people:
(119) FOCUS =def the focus is the non-presupposed part of the sentence.
a. informational or weak focus
Informational focus is simple weak focus, so called because it fills a gap in the addressee’s knowledge without the exhaustive, contrastive or counter-assertive connotations of strong focus.
b. strong focus
Strong focus is focus that does not merely fill a gap in the addressee’s knowledge, but additionally evokes and excludes alternatives. The term covers exhaustive listing, contrastive focus and counter-assertive focus.
( 120) TOPIC = def the topic is the part of the sentence which is presupposed.'^^
(121) TAIL =dcf a tail is the part of the sentence that is neither topic nor focus.
Let me concentrate on focus first, and turn to topic later.43
2.6.1 Focus
The notion of focus presented here stems from Chomsky (1971, 1976), Jackendoff (1972) and Zubizarreta (1998) - see also Reinhart (1995) and Neeleman and Reinhart (1998). In particular, I adopt Zubizarreta’s recent thesis about focus. According to her analysis, in
Germanic and Romance, the most embedded word in the sentence receives default (weak) focus. This is made to follow from the Nuclear Stress Rule (NSR);‘^’‘^^
( 122) Nuclear Stress Rule (Romance)
Given two sisters Ci and Cj, the one lower in the asymmetric c-command ordering is more prominent.
(Zubizarreta 1998:150)
Take French as an example. To a question like (123a), an answer such as (123b) is appropriate (capital letters are used to indicate main stress and brackets + F for focus to indicate the focus constituent; the weakly focused constituent is capitalised):
(123) a. ‘What did you do?’ (English)
b. Nous avons rendu son livre [à MARIE]?. (French) we have returned his book to Mary
‘We returned his book to Mary. ’
The symmetry between syntactic ordering and phrasal prominence may be broken because of an independent requirement that a focused constituent must contain the most prominent element in the sentence. son liwe receives focus, the PP à Marie is defocalized and thus becomes ‘metrically invisible’. Then, son livre is more prominent (the defocaHzed element is in italics):
b. Nous avons rendu [son LIVRE]f^ï-M377é?. (French)
This is made to follow from the Focus Prominence Rule (FPR):
( 125) Foais Prominence Rule
Given two sister nodes Q (marked [+F]) and Q (marked [-F]), Ci is more prominent than Q.
(Zubizarreta 1998:150)
In languages like Spanish, all phonologically specified material is metrically visible. Spanish has recourse to a different mechanism to resolve cases of conflict between the FPR and the NSR;
(126) a. Volvimos su libro [aMARIAJp. (Spanish)
returned his book to Maria ‘We returned his book to Maiy. ’
(127) Volvimos a Mariai [su LIBRO]f U- (Spanish)
The PP a Maria undergoes so-called P-movement which is prosodically motivated.
As Zubizarreta shows, the case of French is in fact more complicated, since it is also possible in French for a defocalised element to undergo P-movement:"^
Importantly, Germanic and Romance focus is licensed prosodically in statements, but syntactically in questions. A fronted WH phrase is licensed in virtue of occupying the specifier position of a fijnctional category bearing the feature [+WH] (i.e., via the feature- checking mechanism) (Zubizarreta 1998:92). According to Zubizarreta, whereas in statements, the nuclear stress is contained within the focused constituent, in questions it is contained within the presupposed part of the sentence. I assume that even in the case of split-WH constructions, including French single-WH-in-situ constructions, focus is licensed syntactically. So, it is not the case that the WH phrase in situ is licensed prosodically.The FCP is revised accordingly:
(129) Focus Prominejice Rule
Given two sister nodes Ci (marked [+F]) and Q (marked [-F]), Ci is more prominent than Cj, unless Ciis a WH phrase and is syntactically licensed by the WH head of Q.
2.6.2 Topic
With the background about focus in place, let us now concentrate on issues that relate to topic. As is well known, although the canonical French sentence consists of a subject DP followed by an object DP, the word order is often very different in colloquial usage. Subject DPs can be left or right dislocated:
(130) a. Jean, il est parti. (French)
Jean, he is left
b. Il est parti, Jean, he is left Jean
‘John left.’ (right dislocation)
Similarly, objects can be left or right dislocated:
(131) a. Jean, je le connais bien. Jean 1 him know well
1 know Jean well.’
b. Je le connais bien, Jean. 1 him know well Jean
1 know Jean well.’
(French)
(left dislocation)
(right dislocation)
For subjects, left dislocation is apparently more frequent than right dislocation. For direct and indirect objects, right dislocation objects are more frequent (cf. Ball 2000). The referent of a dislocated DP has already figured in the conversation, in the situational context or simply as part of the common ground (whatever is presupposed between the participants). Left and right dislocation thus correspond to topicalisation in French.
1 argue that split questions in French (and in other languages) are instances of topicalisation of the indefinite with which the WH operator is associated. While a bare operator (not necessarily overt) raises to Spec-CP, the indefinite is stranded and together with the rest of the VP becomes part of the topic. In the movement
alternative, both the WH operator and the indefinite with which it is associated are part of the focus structure. The VP is in this case neither topic nor focus, but tail.
Boeckx’s (1999) analysis is thus essentially correct in claiming that French WH questions in situ are covert clefts, but wrong in assuming that they involve strong focus. There are (at least) two kinds of cleft sentences: non-presentational and presentational clefts. Non-presentational clefts are associated with strong focus:
(132) C’ est le LIVRE que j ’ ai acheté. (French)
It is the book that I have bought ‘It’s the BOOK that I bought.’ (not the magazine).
(132) can also be used as presentational. In this case, it is associated, not with strong, but with weak focus:
(133) C’ est le livre que j ’ ai acheté. (French)
It is the book that I have bought
‘It’s the book that I bought.’/‘Here’s the book that I bought.’
This construction is not to be confused with a focus cleft. Although this construction is identical in form with the cleft sentence, it is nevertheless very different, in that it does not express contrastive focus (cf. Sasse 1987:538-539). The presentational cleft resembles a topic structure in which the NP has been left dislocated.
(134) a. J’ ai mon fils qui est malade. (French) I have my son who is sick
‘My son is sick.’
b. J’ ai la tête qui tourne. I have the head that spins ‘I feel dizzy.’
I argue that French WH questions in situ are akin to presentational clefts. They involve presupposition of the DP in situ, but of the whole VP as well. In presentational clefts, the entire VP is also presuppositional, but crucially the DP does not involve strong focus.
Since focus in Romance questions is licensed syntactically, the nuclear stress finds itself contained in the presupposed part of the sentence. The WH phrase in situ receives the default stress.
In what follows I give the focus/topic mapping for some examples;
(135) a. Qui est-ce que tu vois?
who that you see
Operator RESTRICTION SCOPE
IQuI + indefinite! X, X a person tu vois ?
FOCUS TAIL
N ew information Neither new nor old information
b. Tu vois qui?
you see who
‘Who are you seeing?’
Operator scope restriction
a
tu vois qui + indefinite?X, X a person
FOCUS TOPIC 1 T0PIC2
New information Old information Old information
(136) a. Combien de livres as-tu lus? how many of books have you read-AOR
Ope r a t o r RESTRICTION SCOPE
(Combien + de livres^ X, X a number of as-tu lus ?
books
FOCUS TAIL
New information Neither new nor old information
b. Combien as-tu lu de livres? how many have you read of books ‘How many books have you read?’
Operator restriction scope
j|Combie!j| X, X a number o f
books
as-tu lu de livres?
FOCUS TOPIC 1 T0PIC2
N ew information Old information Old information
(137) a. WcHi glaubt Uta h’ dass Karl ti gesehen hat? whom believes Uta that Karl seen has
Operator RESTRICTION SCOPE
jweij
X, X a person glaubt Uta dass Karl gesehen hat?FOCUS TAIL
New information Neither new nor old information
b. WaSj glaubt Uta tj weni Karl ti gesehen bat? WH believes Uta whom Karl seen has
‘Who does Uta believe that Karl saw?’
Operator restriction SCOPE
wen Karl gesehen hat?
X, X a person
FOCUS TOPICl T0PIC2
New information Old information Old information
(138) a. Jaki numer wykrçciles? which number you dialed ‘Which number did you dial?’
Operator RESTRICTION SCOPE
X, X a number wykrçciieé ?
FOCUS TAIL
b. Jaki wykrçciies numer? which you dialed number ‘Which number did you dial?’
Operator SCOPE RESTRICTION
wykrçciles numer?