1887
Volume 14, Issue 1
  • ISSN 1874-8767
  • E-ISSN: 1874-8775
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This paper considers the relevance of various approaches to the study of ‘Given’ and ‘New’ to a number of practical problems: complaints from listeners to UK radio programmes that presenters place emphasis on the wrong words; inaudibility of openings of utterances in radio news bulletins; and ambiguity of pronouns. Approaches to ‘Given’ and ‘New’ to be discussed include those whose concerns are with intonation (e.g., Halliday & Matthiessen 2014), those who pay attention to definiteness/indefiniteness in the nominal group (e.g., Martin 1992), and those who are more concerned with what is in the minds of hearers and readers (e.g., Prince 1981Lambrecht 1994). The underlying questions that are being investigated are: How free are speakers and writers to assign ‘Given’ or ‘New’ status to entities? Are there constraints on what they can do intonationally, or with definiteness, or with pronouns?

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/etc.00041.ber
2021-09-15
2021-09-18
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Berry, Margaret
    2013 Contentful and contentlight subject themes in informal spoken English and formal written English. InChoice in Language: Applications in Text Analysis, Gerard O’Grady, Tom Bartlett & Lise Fontaine (eds). Sheffield: Equinox, 243–268.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Bolinger, Dwight
    1985 Two views of accent. Journal of Linguistics21(1): 79–123. 10.1017/S0022226700010033
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226700010033 [Google Scholar]
  3. 1989Intonation and its Uses: Melody in Grammar and Discourse. Stanford CA: Stanford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Brazil, David
    1992 Listening to people reading. InAdvances in Spoken Discourse Analysis, Malcolm Coulthard (ed.). London: Routledge, 209–241.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Brown, Gillian & George Yule
    1983Discourse Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511805226
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511805226 [Google Scholar]
  6. Butler, Christopher S.
    2005 Focusing on focus: A comparison of Functional Grammar, Role and Reference Grammar and Systemic Functional Grammar. Language Sciences27: 585–618. 10.1016/j.langsci.2005.07.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2005.07.004 [Google Scholar]
  7. Davies, Martin
    1994 “I’m sorry, I’ll read that again”: Information structure in writing. InThe Syntax of Sentence and Text: A Festschrift for František Daneš, Světla Čmejrková & František Štícha (eds). Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 75–89. 10.1075/llsee.42.10dav
    https://doi.org/10.1075/llsee.42.10dav [Google Scholar]
  8. Firbas, Jan
    1992Functional Sentence Perspective in Written and Spoken Communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511597817
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511597817 [Google Scholar]
  9. 1995 Retrievability span in functional sentence perspective. Brno Studies in English21: 17–45.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Gregory, Michael J.
    1967 Aspects of varieties differentiation. Journal of Linguistics3(2): 177–98. 10.1017/S0022226700016601
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226700016601 [Google Scholar]
  11. Gregory, Michael J. & Susan Carroll
    1978Language and Situation: Language Varieties and their Social Contexts. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Halliday, Michael A. K.
    1967 Notes on transitivity and theme in English. Part 2. Journal of Linguistics3(2): 199–244. 10.1017/S0022226700016613
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226700016613 [Google Scholar]
  13. Halliday, Michael A. K. & William S. Greaves
    2008Intonation in the Grammar of English. London: Equinox.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Halliday, Michael A. K. & Ruqaiya Hasan
    1976Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Halliday, Michael A. K. & Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen
    2014Halliday’s Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203783771
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203783771 [Google Scholar]
  16. Kuno, Susumu
    1978 Generative discourse analysis in America. InCurrent Trends in Textlinguistics, Wolfgang Dressler (ed.). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 275–294. 10.1515/9783110853759.275
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110853759.275 [Google Scholar]
  17. Lambrecht, Knud
    1994Information Structure and Sentence Form. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511620607
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620607 [Google Scholar]
  18. Martin, James R.
    1992English Text: System and Structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/z.59
    https://doi.org/10.1075/z.59 [Google Scholar]
  19. O’Grady, Gerard
    2016 Given/New: What do the terms refer to? A first (small) step. English Text Construction9(1): 9–32. 10.1075/etc.9.1.02ogr
    https://doi.org/10.1075/etc.9.1.02ogr [Google Scholar]
  20. Prince, Ellen F.
    1981 Toward a taxonomy of Given-New information. InRadical Pragmatics, Peter Cole (ed.). New York NY: Academic Press, 223–255.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Svoboda, Aleš
    1981 Two chapters on scene. Brno Studies in English14: 81–92.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/etc.00041.ber
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): activation; assumed familiarity; definiteness; given; identifiability; intonation; new; pronouns
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error