di slo cati o n - xs4all · (1) a. ce t this homme , man, je i ne ne le him con nais kno w pas ....

“FrenchSemantics” — 2004/3/22 — 12:29 — page 505 — #20

22

DislocationElisabeth Delais-Roussarie, Jenny Doetjes andPetra Sleeman

1 IntroductionDislocation involves various constructions in which a constituent is sep-arated from the rest of the clause by a pause and/or is pronounced ata different intonational level than the adjacent segments. Moreover,when this constituent is left out, what remains is a correct sentence,both from a syntactic and from a prosodic point of view (cf. Fradin1990). We will focus in this chapter on cases where the associated sen-tence contains a pronoun or another placeholder for the prosodicallydetached constituent.1

The dislocated material is usually found at the left periphery (leftdislocation) or at the right periphery (right dislocation) of a proposition:

(1) a. Cetthis

homme,man,

jeI

nene

lehim

connaisknow

pas.not

b. Je ne le connais pas, cet homme.Section 1 discusses different types of left dislocation and compares0We wish to thank the members of the PICS project group on Information and

in particular Jean-Marie Marandin for comments and discussion.1This means that we will not consider cases in which an adverbial phrase is

prosodically detached from a sentence, as in (i):(i) Ce

thissoir,evening,

jeI

nene

peuxcan

pasnot

venir.come

//

JeI

nene

peuxcan

pasnot

venir,come,

cethis

soir.evening

‘I cannot come this evening’

505

Handbook of French Semantics.NWO-CNRS PICS projectFrancis Corblin and Henriëtte de Swart (eds.).Copyright c© 2004, CSLI Publications.


506 / Delais-Roussarie, Doetjes and Sleeman

left dislocation with topicalization, another construction in which theleft periphery is involved. Section 2 investigates right dislocation as wellas some cases where the dislocated element occupies a non-peripheralposition. In both sections syntactic, semantic and prosodic factors willbe discussed.

2 Left dislocationLeft dislocation involves the prosodic detachment of a constituent atthe left edge of the clause. The dislocated constituent is picked upfurther on in the clause by a placeholder (resumptive element). It isa construction that is essentially used in the spoken language, justlike right dislocation. Various kinds of left dislocation have been dis-tinguished in the literature, depending on the categorial status of theleft dislocated constituent, the nature of the resumptive element andthe syntactic relation between these two. These various kinds of leftdislocation constructions have also been associated with different prag-matic properties. In this section we examine the syntactic (2.1) andpragmatic properties (2.2) of left dislocation in French. Furthermore,we investigate whether left dislocation constructions always have thesame prosodic properties (2.3).

2.1 Syntactic properties of left dislocationThe left detached constituent can be an NP, a PP, an AP, an infinitivalclause or a tensed clause. It can also be a pronoun or a proper name.

(2) a. Cette femme, je n’ai pas confiance en elle.this woman, I do not have confidence in her

b. A la campagne, Paul n’y reste jamais longtemps.in the country, Paul never stays there a long time

c. Heureuse, elle ne l’a jamais été.happy, she has never been it

d. Partir, c’est mourir un peu.to leave, that is to die a bit

e. Qu’il se soit trompé, c’est évident.that he has made a mistake, that is clear

f. Moi, personne ne veut m’aider.me, nobody wants to help me

g. Pierre, je n’aime pas cet idiot.Pierre, I do not like that idiot

The resumptive element can be a clitic (2b,c,f), a strong pronoun(2a), a demonstrative pronoun (2d,e) or an epithet such as cet idiot


Dislocation / 507

‘that idiot’ (2g).2

In the generative literature, several types of left dislocation construc-tions have been distinguished. For Italian, Cinque (1983) distinguishesbetween Clitic Left Dislocation (ClLD) and Hanging Topic Left Dislo-cation (HTLD) on the basis of the following properties:

TABLE 1 Syntactic properties of HTLD and ClLDHTLD ClLD(a) The lefthand phrase can be ofcategory NP only

(a) The lefthand phrase can be ofcategory NP, PP, AP, CP (essen-tially any XP)

(b) The ‘resumptive element’ canbe an epithet or an ordinary pro-noun, either tonic or clitic.

(b) The ‘resumptive element’ canbe a clitic pronoun only.

(c) There is no Case matchingbetween the lefthand phrase andthe resumptive element.

(c) There is obligatory Case match-ing between the lefthand phraseand the resumptive element.

(d) The relation between thelefthand phrase and the re-sumptive element is not sensitiveto island constraints.

(d) The relation between thelefthand phrase and the re-sumptive element is sensitive toisland constraints.

(e) There may be at most onelefthand phrase.

(e) There is no (theoretical) limitto the number of lefthand phrases.

(f) The lefthand phrase occurs typ-ically to the left of a ‘root’ sen-tence.

(f) The lefthand phrase can occurto the left of ‘root’ and ‘non-root’sentences.

2With verbs such as aimer, ‘to love’ or connaître ‘to know’, the accusative cliticcan be left out (see, e.g. Fónagy 1985 and Zribi-Hertz 1996):

(i) Lethe

bongood

yogourt,yoghurt,

ilhe

aime.likes a lot

Note that the sentence is equally good when the left dislocated constituent is leftout: the absence of the pronoun (or rather the presence of a non-overt pronominalcategory) is independent of the presence or absence of le bon yogourt. In this respectcases such as (i) differ from topicalization, another construction with a constituentin the left pe-riphery of the clause which will be considered below. In topicalizationthere is no re-sumptive element and dropping the topicalized constituent normallyleads to ungrammaticality.

Furthermore, a dislocated constituent can be loosely related to the clause, withoutits relation to the clause being explicitly expressed by a pronoun or an epithet (see,among others, Barnes 1985):

(ii) Le métro, avec la carte orange on va n’importe où.the subway, with a ticket orange you go anywhere



This distinction has been adopted for French by Fradin (1990). Ac-cording to criterion (a), sentences (2b-e) are ClLDs, since the left dis-located phrase is a category other than NP. Criterion (b) distinguishes(2a) and (2g) as HTLDs. Sentence (2f) is ambiguous between HTLDand ClLD, just like (3):

(3) Pierre, je ne l’aime pas.Pierre, I do not like him

Unlike Italian, French has no case marking on strong pronouns, whichhave a unique form (moi, toi etc.). However, the third criterion (c), canbe used to distinguish HTLD and ClLD when the placeholder is a dativeclitic (me, te, lui, nous, vous, leur), y (locative, dative) or en (genitive).In the case of ClLD these require the presence of a preposition (de ‘of’or à ‘to, in’ or other locative prepositions such as sur ‘on’, en ‘in’ ordans ‘in’). An example is (2b). The use of the PP distinguishes thesentence as a case of ClLD. If, in (2b), the PP is replaced by an NP, asin (4), we are dealing with a HTLD (see also Blasco 1999):

(4) La campagne, Paul n’y reste jamais longtemps.the country, Paul never stays there a long time

As for the fourth criterion (d), French is parallel to Italian. The cliticleft dislocated constituent is sensitive to island constraints whereas ahanging topic is not (see also Hirschbühler 1975 and Cinque 1977).3This is illustrated in (5). In this respect, ClLD (5a) resembles topical-ization (6), in which a constituent is moved to a sentence-initial positionwithout leaving a copy lui ‘to her’:

(5) a. * Ato

Marie,Marie,

jeI

connaisknow

lethe

fliccop

quiwho

lui a retiréhas taken her

sonher

permis.license

b. Marie,Marie,

jeI

connaisknow

lethe

fliccop

quiwho


sonher

permis.license

3According to De Cat (2002), ClLD is not sensitive to islands. She claims thatsentences such as (5a) are marginal because the presence of the preposition à isdispreferred in root contexts. This means that, in her view, the left dislocated con-stituent in (5a) would have the same status as the one in (2b). This sentence ismuch better without the preposition, even though the presence of the prepostionis preferred in non-root contexts (see the discussion of the last criterion (f) below).De Cat’s claim can easily be tested on the basis of ClLD in non-root contexts. Theminimal pair in (i) suggests that ClLD in French is sensitive to island constraintsand that there is a difference in grammaticality between (5a) and (2b):

(i) a.* JeI

croisthink

qu’àthat

Marie,to Marie,

jeI

connaisknow

lethe

fliccop

quiwho


sonher

permislicense

b.Je crois qu’à Marie, le flic lui a retiré son permis.We can conclude that there is a correlation between island sensitivity and the pres-ence of the preposition.


Dislocation / 509

(6) *Aof

MarieMarie

jeI

connaisknow

lethe

fliccop

quiwho

ahas

retirétaken

sonher

permis.license

Thus the fourth criterion allows us to distinguish (7) as a case of HTLD:(7) Marie, je connais le garçon qui l’aime.

Marie, I know the boy who loves herWith respect to the criteria (e-f), there are clear differences betweenItalian and French. It seems that in French there is no theoretical re-striction on the number of left dislocated constituents, either in HTLD(8) or in ClLD (9):

(8) a. Pierre, sa voiture, cet idiot ne s’occupe pas d’ elle correcte-ment.Pierre, his car, this idiot does not treat it properly

b. Marie, ce crime, je crois que je ne lui en parlerai pas.Marie, this crime, I think that I will not tell her about it

(9) A Marie, de ce crime, je crois que je ne lui en parlerai pas.to Marie, of this crime, I think I will not speak to her about it

A combination of the two types of dislocated constituents is also pos-sible, but, interestingly, only with the hanging topic first:(10) a. Marie, de ce crime, je crois que je ne lui en parlerai jamais.

b. *A Marie, ce crime, je crois que je ne lui en parlerai jamais.c. Ce crime, à Marie, je crois que je ne lui en parlerai jamais.d. *De ce crime, Marie, je crois que ne lui en parlerai jamais.

As a last difference between ClLD and HTLD, Cinque mentions thetype of clause the dislocated constituent may be detached from (cri-terion f). Whereas a hanging topic typically occurs to the left of a‘root’ sentence, a clitic left dislocated constituent can occur to the leftof ‘root’ and ‘non-root’ sentences. Larsson (1979: 76-78) notes how-ever that in French ClLD seems to be very rare (impossible for somespeakers) in ‘root’ contexts (11a), but possible to various degrees in em-bedded contexts (11b). In ‘root’ contexts, their place is taken by HTLDstructures (12a). In ‘non-root’ contexts, a hanging topic is less naturalbut not impossible. Some speakers only accept it after expressions suchas je crois, je pense ‘I think’, il est possible ‘it is possible’, il semble ‘itseems’ (12b):(11) a. A ce confort, on s’y habitue très vite.

to this comfort, one gets accustomed very fastb. Je crois qu’à ce confort, on s’y habitue très vite.

I think that to this comfort one gets accustomed very fast



(12) a. Ce confort, on s’y habitue très vite.b. Je crois que, ce confort, on s’y habitue très vite.

The conclusion of this section is that the distinction between ClLD andHTLD is less prominent in French than in Italian. For many cases ofLD, we cannot distinguish between the two types. Moreover, in mostcases where we can, only one criterion applies. As a result we cannotdecide on the basis of these cases whether there is a distinction betweentwo types of LD or whether there is just one type of LD which is morepermissive than both ClLD and HTLD in Italian. However, there aresome cases that show that there is at least some syntactic distinctionbetween two types of left dislocation in French. As shown in (5), there isa correlation between the presence of a preposition in the left dislocatedconstituent and sensitivity to islands. Moreover, as shown in (10), theorder of two LD constituents is restricted by the presence vs. absenceof the preposition. It will become clear in the next two sections, thatthe distinction between ClLD and HTLD in French does not seem toaffect either pragmatics or prosody.

2.2 Pragmatic/semantic properties of left dislocationLeft dislocation is essentially used in oral speech, at least in French.Since it is even more used than the simple SVO order in spoken French,Lambrecht (1981) distinguishes the syntax of spoken French from thesyntax of the written style. He claims that a dislocated constituentis always a topic. He concludes that spoken French is topic-oriented,whereas written French is subject-oriented.

The notion of ‘topic’ is often associated with ‘givenness’ in thesense that the referent of a topic must be assumed by the speakerto be present in the addressee’s consciousness (Chafe 1976). Lambrecht(1981) shows that different classes of left dislocated constituents canbe distinguished on the basis of the properties of the discourse referent(DR) they denote. We will take the definition of a given DR in the In-troduction as point of departure for the classification. Given (or active)DRs are inferable from the Given content G, the existential closure ofwhich is noted as CL(G) (see section 2.3 of the Introduction):(13) CL(G) ⇒ ∃x Q(x)This definition creates a set of DRs in the preceding discourse, whichall define proper referents for a dislocated constituent. In what followswe will use the terminology of Prince (1979) and Lambrecht (1981).Lambrecht shows that a distinction should be made between ‘strictlygiven’ DRs, that can be referred to by non-accented pronouns, and‘non-strictly given’ referents. This latter class will be called ‘textually


Dislocation / 511

evoked’. Dislocation also allows for a referent that is present in theextra-linguistic context or situation. In this case the DR is ‘situation-ally evoked’. The last type of DR is ‘inferable’ from the context. Basic-ally, DRs that can be inferred from (strictly) given or evoked DRs arepossible DRs for a dislocated constituent as well. Discourse new DRsare not allowed. Before going over some examples illustrating these dif-ferent cases, we can conclude that the conditions on dislocation arevery similar to the conditions on the use of definite descriptions (cf. forinstance Hawkins 1978). In general, a DR is a possible referent for a def-inite description in a non-dislocated position, this definite descriptioncan be dislocated as well. As we will see below, there is one interestingexception to this generalization: the use of a dislocation constructionis incompatible with a complex discourse strategy (see Introduction).

Quite generally, we have not found clear pragmatic differencesbetween ClLD and HTLD.4 The presence/absence of a prepositionin oblique dislocated consituents seems to be a purely syntactic issue.In what follows, we will talk about left dislocation (LD) in general.

Let us first consider a case where the dislocated expression is strictlygiven, that is, where there is a choice between the use of a pronoun andthe use of left dislocation. Lambrecht argues that ‘strict givenness’ isnot a sufficient condition for the use of left dislocated constituents. Inthe answer in (14) the speaker uses a dislocated construction instead ofa simple pronoun that would suffice to express the topic status of thesubject:(14) Q: Comment va ton frère?

how is your brother?A: Mon frère, il va bien.

my brother, he is fineIn Lambrecht’s view, this suggests that the function of the left dislo-cation is the establishment of some sort of communicative agreementbetween the speech participants. The left dislocation strategy marksthe referent as important for the conversation.

In all other cases of left dislocation, the dislocated expression cannotsimply be replaced by a pronoun. Lambrecht argues that in these casesthe communicative function of the left dislocation construction is tomark a shift with respect to the previously established topic, or, whenno previous topic was established, to create a new topic. The DR isnot strictly given but textually (15) or situationally evoked (16) or

4In this respect French seems to differ from Italian; see Cinque (1983), whoargues that the pragmatic conditions for ClLD and HTLD are not the same in thatlanguage.



inferred (17), as defined above:(15) Le bout de papier provient de l’étiquette d’une boîte de conserve,

et la boîte dont il a été arraché, je l’ai eue en main un peu avantde vous rencontrer. (Hergé)the piece of paper comes from the label of a can, and the canfrom which it has been torn off, I had it in my hands just beforeI met you

(16) After having paid and having received a lot of coins:Mon portemonnaie, il est devenu lourd.my purse, it has become heavy

(17) L’air de la ville n’est pas plus mauvais qu’un autre. Et entre nous,la mer, qu’est-ce que c’est? (Reiser)the air in town is not worse than other air. And between us, thesea, what is it?

In all of the cases mentioned above, the left dislocated constituent is notused contrastively. But this is also a possibility, as noted by Lambrecht(1981):(18)Q: Qu’est-ce que tu vas donner à Pierre et à Marie?

what will you give to Pierre and to Marie?A: (A) Pierre, je lui donnerai un livre, (à) Marie, je lui offrirai

des fleurs.to Pierre, I will give him a book, and to Marie, I will offer herflowers

The use of sentences such as the answer in (18) turns out to be restrictedin an interesting way. Kerleroux & Marandin (2002) show that certaincontexts which allow for contrastive topicalization exclude LD:(19) Marie a réuni les élèves. Aux filles, elle a donné des exercices

d’algèbre. Aux garçons, elle a dicté un problème de géométrie.Marie brought together the pupils. To the girls, she gave algebraexercises. To the boys, she dictated a geometry problem.

(20) # Marie a réuni les élèves. Aux/Les filles, elle leur a donné des ex-ercices d’algèbre. Aux/Les garçons, elle leur a dicté un problèmede géométrie.Marie brought together the pupils. (To) the girls, she gave themalgebra exercises. (To) the boys, she dictated them a geometryproblem

The example in (19), a case of topicalization, reshapes the discoursetopic: instead of talking about the children in general, as in the pre-vious sentence, the second sentence distinguishes between boys and


Dislocation / 513

girls.5 Thus, there is a shift from a simple discourse strategy to a com-plex strategy, whereby the constituent aux filles ‘to the girls’ functionsas a thematic shifter (see Introduction). The inappropriateness of (20)suggests that left dislocation does not allow shifting from a simple toa layered discourse topic. The appropriateness of (18) can be under-stood as follows. In this example, the question can be interpreted as adouble question (‘what will you give to Pierre and what will you giveto Marie?’). As a result, the answer does not imply a change of dis-course strategy. The layered discourse topic is shaped by the question.Interestingly, some speakers note a contrast between the examples in(21b,c), as answers to (21a). Note that an answer with two topicaliza-tions is always preferred, even for those speakers who find (21c) moreor less appropriate in this context:(21) a. Qu’a-t-elle dit aux étudiants?

‘What did she say to the students?’b. #(A) Durand, elle lui a dit qu’elle ferait cours, (à) Dupond,

elle lui a avoué qu’elle envisageait de tout arrêter.(to) Durand, she said to him that she would teach, (to)Dupond, she confessed him that she thought about quittingeverything

c. ?A Durand, elle a dit qu’elle ferait cours, (à) Dupond, elle luia avoué qu’elle envisageait de tout arrêter.to Durand, she said that she would teach, (to) Dupond, sheconfessed him that she thought about quitting everything

The contrast between (21b) and (21c) shows that the left dislocatedconstituent cannot be a thematic shifter, but for some speakers it canbe used once the shift has been made in an elaboration of the discoursetopic. This observation is particularly interesting with respect to twoother generalizations in French. First, as we will see in chapter 5 (In-version), several types of inversion are subject to a similar constraint.In these cases, the verbal predicate cannot be a thematic shifter, but itcan be used in a sentence elaborating a layered discourse topic. Second,

5Topicalization (i) has to be distinguished from focus preposing (ii) (see alsonote 9 below):(i) A: Tu as pensé à mon frère?

‘Have you thought of my brother?’B: Non, à ton frère, je n’avais pas encore pensé.

‘No, of your brother, I have not thought yet.’(ii) A: A qui as-tu téléphoné?

‘Whom did you call?’B: A mon père j’ai téléphoné.

‘To my father I made a call.’



as we have seen in chapter 2 (Prosody), a C accent is obligatorily real-ized in utterances that reshape the discourse topic, while it is optionalin utterances that elaborate the discourse topic. These otherwise un-related phenomena show that the distinction between reshaping andelaborating a DT is encoded in the grammar of French.

Lambrecht (1981:61) notices that from the fact that left dislocatedconstituents are always topics, it follows that they must be (referen-tially) definite. They can only be introduced by indefinite articles inthe generic reading. In such cases, the resumptive element is usually ça‘that’ (see a.o. Muller 1987, Maillard 1987):

(22) a. Un garçon, ça attend pas devant la porte.a boy, that does not wait outside the door

b. Des chats, ça miaule.cats, that miaows

It turns out however, that an indefinite left dislocated constituent isnot always generic. In these cases the resumptive element is usually en.In (23a) the left dislocated constituent is introduced by the indefinitearticle des and denotes a set whose defining property is strictly given,textually/situationally evoked or inferred. Some (but certainly not all)speakers also accept (23b). In this example the dislocated constituent isintroduced by de (Barbaud 1976, Larsson 1979). The de NP correspondsto a property which is strictly given, textually/situationally evoked orinferred. This type of example preferably contains a negation.

(23) a. Des bonbons, Jean en avait même donné à sa fille.candies, Jean of-them had even given to his daughter

b. ?De médecin, je n’en ai vu aucun.of doctor, I of-them have seen none

Having discussed the semantic and pragmatic properties of left dislo-cation and topicalization, we now turn to their prosodic properties.

2.3 Prosodic properties of left dislocationIt is a well-established fact that in French and in many other languagesthe prosodic realization of an utterance is sensitive to syntactic andpragmatic information. In this section we will compare the prosodicproperties of left dislocation and compare them with topicalization.A left dislocated or topicalized constituent constitutes an independentprosodic phrase (Major Phrase (MaP) or Intonational Phrase (IntP),see chapter 1, Introduction). The boundary of this phrase is marked byeither a Hcont demarcative tone, or an illocutionary tone H(L)% (seealso Rossi 1999).


Dislocation / 515

The Hcont demarcative tone signals the boundary of a MaP. It ischaracterized by a F0 rise and an important lengthening of the finalsyllable. The H target is usually reached at the end of the syllable.This tone can be compared to Rossi’s CTr ‘intonème’. H(L)% is anillocutionary boundary tone and is equivalent to the one realized at theend of an echo question or a confirmation request. It is characterized byan important F0 rise on the last syllable, the H target being reached atthe end of the nucleus and a slight fall being sometimes realized on thesyllable coda.6 This tone can be compared to Rossi’s CTi ‘intonème’.In case the illocutionary tone is selected, an Intonational Phrase (IntP)boundary is inserted.7

We have compared and analysed a number of sentences with HTLD,ClLD and topicalization. It turns out that the distribution of the twotones is not free but determined by both syntactic and pragmaticfactors. In ClLD and HTLD we find either of the two tones, depend-ing on pragmatic factors. In topicalization, only the Hcont demarcativetone can be used.

Let us consider first ClLD and HTLD. The choice between the twopossible tones is determined by pragmatic factors, and seems to beindependent of the distinction between ClLD and HTLD. This confirmsthe conclusions of the previous section, in which we have seen that thereare no clear pragmatic differences between the two types of LD.8 Whatcrucially determines the tone that is realized at the right boundary ofthe left detached constituent is the speaker’s attitude towards the otherparticipants. A Hcont demarcative tone is chosen if the speaker assumesthat an agreement is established between the different participants withrespect to the choice of the topic. This intonation is illustrated in (24)and in figure 1. Note that the same intonation is possible when thepreposition à is left out.(24) à mon prof)rg de linguistique)rg Hcont }IntP je lui ai donné)rg

un livre)rg L% ]IntP

6This boundary tone has a variant (a L% illocutionary boundary tone or a fall)that is obligatorily used on left dislocated constituents in questions:

(i) Marie, est-ce que c’est sûr qu’elle va partir?Marie, is it certain that she will leave?

This variant can be optionally realized in assertions.7See also Introduction. In general, MaP boundaries are determined by syntactic

and metrical factors, while IntPs, which are characterized by illocutionary boundarytones, are subject to pragmatic conditions.

8According to Cinque (1983: footnote 4) HTLD may differ intonationally fromClLD in Italian: a HTLD constituent may have a rising intonation. This correlateswith the clear syntactic and pragmatic differences between HTLD and ClLD inItalian.



to my linguistics professor, I gave him a book

FIGURE 1 F0 curve of example (24), À mon prof de linguistique, je lui aidonné un livre. (Speader FER, woman)

This utterance is typically used in contexts where the discourse ref-erent of mon prof is strictly given, as strictly given DRs usually definenon-controversial topics. Similarly, Hcont is selected in (25b), where theDR of Jean-Marie is strictly given:(25) a. Qu’est-ce qu’il a offert à Jean-Marie?

‘What did he give to Jean-Marie?’b. à Jean-Marie)rg Hcont }MaP il lui a offert)rg un compact

disque)rg L% ]IntPto Jean-Marie, he gave him a CD

When the speaker does not assume that an agreement on the choiceof the topic is established between the participants, he tentatively pro-poses one. In this case, the illocutionary boundary tone H(L) % that isfound in confirmation requests and echo questions is realized at the endof the IntP. Examples (26) and (27) show that the H(L) % illocutionaryboundary tone may be realized in both constructions HTLD and ClLD(see also figures 2 and 3):(26) à Jean-Marie)rg H(L)% ]IntP il lui a offert)rg un compact-

disque)rg L% ]IntPto Jean-Marie, he gave him a CD


Dislocation / 517

FIGURE 2 F0 curve of example (26), À Jean-Marie, il lui a offert uncompact disque. (Speaker FER)

(27) Marie)rg H(L)% ]IntP c’est clair)rg Hcont }MaP qu’elle serafâchée)rg contre son frère)rg L% ]IntPMarie, it’s clear that she will get angry with her brother.

FIGURE 3 F0 curve of example (27), Marie, c’est clair qu’elle sera fâchéecontre son frère. (Speaker FAD, woman)

Normally, these sentences are used in contexts in which the discoursereferent is not strictly given, and therefore they are more easily sub-ject to a potential disagreement about the choice of the referent forthe topic of the utterance. However, even in a context where the dis-course referent of the dislocated constituent is strictly given, this tonemay be used. Consider again (26). This utterance can be the answer to



the question in (28) below. By using the name Jean-Marie, instead ofrepeating mon fils, the speaker indicates that there might be a disagree-ment about the choice of Jean-Marie as the topic of the utterance. Thisis why the H(L)% boundary tone has to be used rather than Hcont.(28) Qu’est-ce qu’il a offert à ton fils?

‘What did he give to your son?’The two tones (Hcont and H(L)%) are also used in sequences of leftdislocated constituents. In this case, the selection and the distributionof the tones depends partly on the pragmatics. In addition, some con-straints apply on the use of these tones (cf. among others, Rossi 1999).The successive tones may be either identical or different. In case theyare identical, a succession of two H(L)% or two Hcont may be observed.In case they are different, the first boundary tone has to be H(L)% andthe second one Hcont. The sequence Hcont H(L)% is thus forbidden.

Let us now turn to topicalization.9 Topicalization resembles HTLDand ClLD insofar as the left peripheral constituent is phrased as an in-dependent MaP. However, there is no choice between the two boundarytones: the right edge of the topicalized constituent has to coincide witha Hcont demarcative tone (relatively important F0 rise and importantlengthening). The prosodic realization of (19) is given in (29) and infigure 4:(29) aux filles)rg Hcont}MaP elle a donné)rg des exercices d’algèbre)rg

Hcont}MaP et aux garçons)rg Hcont}MaP elle a dicté)rg desproblèmes)rg de géométrie)rg L%]IntPto the girls, she gave algebra exercises and to the boys, she dic-tated geometry problems

9In focus preposing (see note 5 above), the peripheral constituent is a narrowfocus. The end of this constituent is marked by an illocutionary boundary toneassociated with focus (L% in assertions). The rest of the sentence is a post-focussequence. Hence the intonation is in accordance with our findings in chapter 2(Prosody).


Dislocation / 519

FIGURE 4 F0 curve of example (29), Aux filles elle a donné des exercicesd’algèbre et aux garçons elle a dicté des problèmes de géométrie.

(Speaker FER)

The difference between topicalization (H(L)% excluded) and LD(H(L)% possible) shows that syntax influences the choice of the bound-ary tone. The relation between syntax and the choice of the boundarytone might be either direct or mediated by pragmatics. In case of adirect relation, the syntax of topicalization would not allow for inser-tion of the H(L)% tone at the right edge of the topicalized constituent.Alternatively, the syntax of topicalization might be incompatible withthe pragmatics that are required for insertion of the H(L)% tone, inwhich case there would be an indirect relation between syntax and thechoice of the H(L)% tone. We will leave this issue for further research.

To summarize, it appears that two dimensions come into play inthe prosodic realization of left peripheral constituents. The syntacticdimension allows us to distinguish left dislocation from topicalization.The pragmatic dimension comes into play whenever an agreement con-cerning the choice of the topic is not fully established between thespeech participants. In that case, the H(L)% illocutionary boundarytone is realized at the right edge of the IntP. Otherwise, we find theHcont demarcative tone.

3 Right dislocationRight dislocation (RD) is at first sight more closely related to clitic leftdislocation than to the hanging topic construction. As in ClLD, RDinvolves case agreement on the dislocated element, as in (30).10

10A loose aboutness relation (cf. note 2) is excluded, as shown in (i):



(30) Je lui ai donné un livre, *(à) MarieI to-her have given a book to Marie

Furthermore, the antecedent of the RD element is usually a clitic pro-noun. However, in what follows we will show that the resemblancebetween ClLD and RD is quite superficial. For instance, the presenceof a clitic is not always required, as it is in the case of ClLD. The factthat we have a clitic in most RD sentences can be shown to be due toindependent factors.

French also allows for dislocation in a string medial position (ex-amples will be treated below). Following Ronat (1979), Larsson (1979)and Fradin (1988, 1990), we consider middle dislocation (MD) as a spe-cial case of RD. In this we diverge from, for instance, Lambrecht (1981,2001), who claims that the right dislocated element is always locatedat the right edge of a clause.

In this section we will discuss the properties of RD from a syntactic(3.1), a pragmatic/semantic (3.2) and a prosodic (3.3) point of view.

3.1 Syntactic properties of right dislocationFrom a syntactic point of view, right dislocation initially seems to havemuch in common with clitic left dislocation. As the example in (30)shows, there is case matching between the RD constituent and the pro-noun it is associated with.11 As in the case of ClLD, the RD expressionis not necessarily a DP. It can also be a pronoun (31a), an NP precededby the element de ‘of’ (31b), a PP (usually with de ‘of’, à ‘to’, but lessfrequently also with some other locative prepositions such as sur ‘on’(31c)), an AP (31d), a finite clause (31e) or an infinitival clause (31f)(see for instance Fradin 1988, Larsson 1979). There can be several RDconstituents, the order of which is not fixed (32) (cf. Lambrecht 1981):

The use of literal glossesand paraphrases is notconsistent. Please check!

(31) a. JeI

l’aihim-have

vu,seen,

moime/I

b. Ilhe

enof-them

ahas

misput

troisthree

suron

lathe

table,table,

deof

livresbooks

c. PaulPaul

yon-it

grimpeclimbs

enin

una

clin d’oeil,wink,

suron

lethe

toitroof

(i)* Ellei

shes’estREFL is

complètementcompletely

cassée,broken,

monmy

frère,brother,

sahis

voiturei

car(cf. Mon frère, ellei s’est complètement cassée, sa voiturei)

11Pronouns do not need to show case matching. A RD pronoun can be used inoblique contexts in the absence of a preposition (cf. Lambrecht 1981, Ronat 1979,Fradin 1988, Ashby 1988, 1994). Il m’a parlé, moi is fine, while *Il lui a parlé,Pierre is excluded.


Dislocation / 521

d. Ilsthey

savaientknew

bienwell

qu’ellethat-itfem

l’était,it-was,

lourdeheavy

àto

porter,carry,

lathe

valisesuitcase

e. JeI

neNE

leit

savaisknew

pas,not,

quethat

c’étaitit-was

interditforbidden

f. Elleshe

leit

ferawill-do

touteall

saher

vie,life,

danserdanceinf

(32) a. JeI

leit

luito-him

donne,give,

moi,me/I,

lethe

livre,book,

àto

tonyour

frèrebrother

b. Je le lui donne, le livre, à ton frère, moic. Je le lui donne, à ton frère, moi, le livre

However, there are also a number of differences between RD and ClLD.These differences clearly indicate that RD is not simply the mirrorimage of left dislocation. In the first place, RD and ClLD obey differentlocality conditions. In the second place, the placeholder for a rightdislocated constituent is not necessarily a clitic.

Let us consider the locality conditions on RD and ClLD first.Whereas ClLD is subject to subjacency, a right dislocated constitu-ent has to occur directly to the right of the proposition containing thecoindexed pronoun (cf. Ross’ 1967 Right Roof Constraint, Larsson 1979,Lambrecht 1981, 2001, Fradin 1988, Kayne 1984, Cecchetto 1999):(33) a. * Qu’elle

that sheserawill-be

fachéemad

contrewith

sonher

frère,brother,

c’estthat’s

clair,clear,

MarieMarie

b. Qu’ellethat she

serawill-be

fachéemad

contrewith

sonher

frère,brother,

Marie,Marie,

c’estthat’s

clairclear

Interestingly, Larsson shows that the locality restrictions on RD go evenfurther. She discusses a number of examples in which the RD elementcannot be clause-final, as it has to remain in either a DP or a PP. Thisphenomenon can be illustrated by dislocation of a de NP in the contextof a determiner without a noun. Under certain conditions, the de NPis preferably, and for some speakers, necessarily adjacent to the DPcontaining an empty pronoun. An example is given in (34):(34) a. ?? Le

thesienhis

avaithad

toujoursalways

étébeen

propre,clean,

d’uniformeof-uniform

officielofficial



b. Lethe

sien,his,

d’uniformeof-uniform

officiel,official,

avaithad

toujoursalways

étébeen

propreclean

‘HIS official uniform had always been clean’

These data suggest that dislocated de NPs are not always placed at theright periphery of the clause. The exact conditions for the adjacencyrequirement need further investigation. The presence of the Q adverbtoujours seems to play a role. As noted already by Larsson, adjacency isnot always required (cf. La nôtre est faite, d’opinion lit.: ‘ours is made,of opinion’).

For PPs, Larsson also shows that there is an adjacency requirement.It is not possible to have a RD element in sentence-final position if itis associated with a PP, as in (35a). However, there are cases in whicha constituent that behaves otherwise like an RD expression is found atthe right edge of a PP containing a pronoun, as in the sentence (35b):

(35) a. *C’était le moment d’essayer sur elles une solution corrosive,(sur) les punaises

b. C’était le moment d’essayer sur elles, les punaises, une solutioncorrosive (Céline)

c. it was the moment to try on them, the pins, a corrosive solu-tion

We might tentatively formulate a locality condition that captures allcases in (33) through (35): RD elements usually remain inside the min-imal XP that contains the pronominal expression with which they areassociated. Obviously further research is necessary in order to developthis idea.

Cases such as (35b) - if we are right in considering them to be casesof right dislocation - also illustrate a second difference between RD andClLD: the pronoun which is coreferent with the dislocated constituentdoes not need to be a clitic. Turning back to the ‘standard’ cases ofRD, where the RD constituent comes at the end of the clause, we canalso find cases in which a non-cliticized pronoun is used. An example,again due to Larsson (1979), is given in (36):12

(36) JeI

trouvefind

çathat

écoeurant,disgusting,

lathe

dénigrationdenigration

systématiquesystematic

12Note also that right dislocated epithets such as cet idiot ‘the idiot’ can becoreferential with a full DP. We will not elaborate on this type of sentences.(i)Pierre a cassé la cafetière, cet imbécile

‘Pierre broke the coffee pot, the idiot’


Dislocation / 523

This is only possible in cases where the pronoun is not prosodicallymarked as part of the focus, which excludes most cases of non-cliticpronouns. For instance, if a PP is in sentence-final position, right dislo-cation with respect to a full pronoun in the PP is difficult. The sentence??Je parle souvent avec lui, Jean-Pierre ‘I often speak with him, Jean-Pierre’ is not very good, even though judgments vary (cf. (35b), whichis fine). The restriction follows from the assumption that RD is notavailable if the placeholder is part of the focus. As we will see below insection 3.2, this assumption is in accordance with the pragmatic prop-erties of RD, which typically backgrounds the dislocated constituent.

The examples in (34b) and (35b) present cases in which the dislo-cated element is not at the right edge of the sentence, but at the rightedge of a DP or a PP, which contain the placeholder. There are alsocases of dislocation in which the dislocated element is not located at theright edge of the sentence even though the placeholder is an argumentof the verb. This phenomenon is illustrated in (37):

(37) a. Ilihe

estis

passégone

defrom

Harris,Harris

notreour

profprof

deof

linguistiquei,linguistics

à lato

grammairegenerative

générativegrammar

b. Ilhe

estis

venu,come

sonhis

amifriend

d’enfance,of childhood

defrom

ParisP.

àto

MarseilleM.

enby

voiturecar

This construction, which we will call middle dislocation or MD is uni-formly treated in the literature as a special case of RD (see Larsson1979, Ronat 1979, Fradin 1988). However, in part of the literature onRD, MD is either ignored or its possibility is, contrary to fact, denied.13As we will see below, the prosodic properties of MD and RD confirmthe hypothesis that we are dealing with one and the same phenomenon.From a pragmatic point of view, there does not seem to be a differencebetween MD and RD either.

13Lambrecht claims that the RD element cannot precede the main intonationpeak of the sentence, as in (i) (judgment as in Lambrecht 1981):(i)* Il

‘Hea envoyésent

unea

lettre,letter,

Jean,Jean,

àto

PIERREPierre’

However, the analogous example in (37a), adapted from Ronat (1979), is grammat-ical. According to Larsson (1979), the acceptability of MD depends, among others,on rhythmic properties of the sentence. The part of the sentence following the dis-located expression should not be too short, for instance. MD also exists in otherlanguages that allow for RD, such as Dutch.



3.2 Pragmatic and semantic properties of right dislocationRD is said to foreground the new information in the sentence and toplace the theme or topic at the background (cf. Larsson 1978, 1979). Itis not the case, as a naïve analysis of right dislocation might suppose,that a right dislocated expression is necessarily completely predictablefrom the context. Both Larsson (1979) and Lambrecht (1981) showthat RD is possible in contexts in which a pronoun alone would beunintelligible. This is illustrated by (38), cited in Larsson (1979) froma novel by Michel Butor:

(38) [. . . ] comme dans le fond de leur coeur, avec quelle sincérité ils sejurent d’être fidèles l’un à l’autre! Combien de temps vont-ellesdurer ces illusions?as from the bottom of their hearts, with great sincerity they prom-ised each other to be faithful to one another! How much time arethey going to last these illusions?

If we want to interpret the pronoun elles, the presence of ces illusionsis necessary. This clearly shows that the RD element is not added afterhaving finished the sentence in order to make sure that the addresseeknows the reference of the pronoun. When using the pronoun, thespeaker already has the intention to make a dislocated sentence, inorder to foreground the new information.

As in the case of left dislocation, we can distinguish different types ofRD constituents (see Lambrecht 1981). In the first place, RD constitu-ents can have a strictly given or discourse old DR. This class includes,for instance, the rather frequent pronominal cases such as (44a) (cf.Ashby 1988, who reports 70% of pronominal RDs in his corpus). RDof a pronoun is excluded in English, which is in accordance with theobservation that English prohibits RD of a constituent with a strictlygiven discourse referent (cf. Ziv 1994). The class also includes caseswhere the RD constituent is an epithet, as in (39b):

(39) a. JeI

nene

saisknow

pas,not,

moime

b. J’aiI have

vuseen

monmy

frèrebrother

hier.yesterday.

IliHe

ahas

votévoted

pourfor

Giscard,G.,

cetthat

imbecilei

idiot

In the second place, RD constituents have a DR which is textually orsituationally evoked or inferred. An example of a RD constituent witha textually evoked DR, taken from Ashby (1988), is given in (40):


Dislocation / 525

(40) Overall discourse topic: the charm of Touraine

A: La Loire est belle. Vous avez visité la Vallée de la Loire?‘The Loire is beautiful. Did you visit the Loire valley?’

B: Oui, pas mal‘Yes, quite a bit’

A: Elleshe

estis

belle,beautiful

lathe

Loire,Loire

hein?eh

The pronoun elle would refer to la Vallée de la Loire if the dislocatedconstituent had been left out.

In (41), the RD constituent has a situationally evoked DR:

(41) Situation: guest looking at book on host’s bookshelf and shoutingto host who is working in the kitchen:

Tuyou

l’it

ashave

lu,read,

lethe

dernierlast

romannovel

deof

Grass?Grass?

In (42), the DR of the RD constituent le Portugal is inferentially ac-cessible (cited in Lambrecht 1981 from a novel by Reiser):

(42) Situation: Paris; racist Frenchman watching a Portuguese workerdoing road work:

Çathat

en faitmakes

duof

bruit,noise

una

Portugais.Portuguese

C’estit’s

sale.dirty

C’estit’s

dangereux.dangerous

[. . . ] Çait

nene

doitshould

pasnot

êtrebe

una

beaubeautiful

pays,country

le PortugalPortugal

(Reiser)

In the contexts discussed so far, the pragmatic conditions on LD andRD are similar. However, whereas RD foregrounds the new informationin the sentence and places the topic in the background, LD foregroundsthe topic. This implies that they are not always used in the same con-texts. In the first place, Ashby notes that LD can be used to mark turntaking, while RD cannot. RD, on the other hand, can be used to signalturn closing. A further difference between RD and LD is their use incontrastive contexts (cf. Larsson 1979 and Lambrecht 1981). While LDcan be used in an answer to a double question, RD is excluded in thiscontext (cf. (18) above):

(43) Question: what are you going to give to Pierre and to Marie?



# JeI

luihim

donneraiwill-give

una

livre,book,

àto

Pierre,Pierre,

etand

jeI

luiher

offriraiwill-give

des fleurs,flowers,

àto

MarieMarie

We can conclude that RD can never be used to mark an opposition.14This implies that it cannot be used as a thematic shifter either.

As in the case of LD, the fact that the RD constituent is part ofthe ground has consequences for its interpretation. This is particularlyclear in the case of dislocated indefinites (for an overview, see Larsson1979). They are often used as generics. When indefinites are interpretedgenerically, the resumptive element is usually ça:

(44) a. Çathat

peutcan

sebe

tromper,mistaken,

una

médecin.doctor

b. Ça existe, des voitures très récentes à des prix promotionnelsthat exists, very recent cars on special offer

In some cases the indefinite RD constituent is not generic and intro-duces a set or a mass, the defining property of which is strictly given,textually/situationally evoked or inferred. This is possible in contextsthat allow for existential en (see also chapter 3, ‘Towards a uniformcharacterization of Noun Phrases with des or du’, Determiners):15

(45) a. T’you

enof-it

veux,want,

de la soupe?soup

b. JeanJean

enof-them

avaithad

mêmeeven

donnégiven

àto

sahis

fille,daughter,

des bonbons.candies

RD of a de NP is similar to left dislocation with a de NP, althoughless restricted. The de NP indicates a property which is strictly given,textually/situationally evoked or inferred. An example is given in (31b),repeated here in (46):

(46) Il en a mis trois sur la table, de livres.he of-them has put three on the table, of books

14Vallduví (1994) uses this observation as evidence for his analysis in which LDconstituents are ‘links’ and RD constituents are ‘tails’: whereas links point to a spe-cific file card for the entry of the focus, the tail further specifies how the informationprovided by the focus fits on a given file card. As such, the tail is expected not tobe contrastive.

15Existential en is usually excluded in the absence of a DP without a noun: Il ena oublié #(deux) ‘he of-them forgot #(two)’. The sentences in (45) allow existentialen, for reasons that are not fully understood.


Dislocation / 527

The conditions on right dislocation and left dislocation of indefinites arerather similar, even though dislocation of de NPs yields a much betterresult in the case of RD. We will leave this issue for further research,and continue with prosodic properties of right dislocation.

3.3 Prosodic properties of right dislocationIt is usually assumed that in a sentence with a RD element, the prosodyof the main clause is equivalent to the prosody that the clause will havewithout the dislocated constituent. Consider for instance the prosodyassociated with (39b) (see figure 5):(47) Il a voté)rg pour Giscard)rg L% ]IntP, cet imbécile)rg L% ]IntP

FIGURE 5 F0 curve of example (39b) and (47), Il a vote pour Giscard, cetimbecile. (Speaker FER)

An L% boundary tone is realized on the last syllable of Giscard, andcopied at the end of the RD element cet imbécile. The clause Il a votépour Giscard has the same intonation as when it is uttered on its own.

In the literature, the prosody associated with RD elements is ana-lyzed as a low parenthesis, the boundary tone being a copy of theL% boundary tone (see, among other, Rossi 1981, 1985, 1999, Delattre1966)16. The IntP that includes the RD element is also considered tobe deaccented and dephrased in the majority of the work. The deac-centuation can be explained by the fact that RD elements cannot be

16According to Wunderli (1983), an H% boundary tone (continuation rise) mightbe realized at the end of the main clause in an assertion, the RD element beingrealized as a high parenthesis right bounded by an L% :

(i) Il est venu) de Paris à Marseille) en voiture) H% ] son ami d’enfance) L%]In our data, this realization was very rare.



used to modify discourse topics (cf. section 3.2). Concerning dephras-ing, it might result from the short length of the RD elements studied.Thus, the prosody of RD elements can be compared to the one foundin post-focus sequences (see chapter 2, Prosody).

In interrogative utterances, the intonation associated with RD ele-ments is usually described as a high parenthesis (cf. Delattre 1966): theboundary tone H% that characterizes interrogation is copied at the endof the right dislocated constituent (cf. figure 6 and (41)):

(48) tu l’as lu)rg H%]IntP le dernier roman)rg de Günther Grass?)rgH%]IntP

FIGURE 6 F0 curve of example (41) and (48), Tu l’as lu, le dernier romande Günther Grass? (Speaker FER)

To summarize, RD constituents are realized as a plateau (low orhigh), a copy of the boundary tone found at the end of the clause beingrealized at the end of the RD element. In 3.2, it has been shown that RDelements may be strictly given (39), textually or situationally evoked((40) and (41)), or inferred (42). These pragmatic differences do nothave any influence on the prosodic realization of RD elements (see alsoAshby 1994).

The prosodic realization of a non-sentence-final RD is equivalent tothe realization of incidental clauses, appositions, descriptive relativeclauses. In these cases, the constituent in the middle of the sentence isrealized with a flat contour and a compression of both pitch register andintensity (cf., among others, Rossi 1999). The boundary tone realizedat the end of the element is a copy of the preceding boundary tone(usually a demarcative Hcont tone). Consider (49) (see figures 7 and 8):


Dislocation / 529

(49) a. la femme)rg qui lui a parlé)rg Hcont }MaP à Marie-Antoinette)rgHcont !}MaP m’agace)rg L%]IntPthe woman who talked to her, (to) M-A, annoys me.

b. il est venu)rg Hcont }MaP son ami)rg d’enfance)rg Hcont!}MaP de Paris)rg à Marseille)rg en voiture)rg L %]IntPhe came, his friend, from Paris to Marseille by car.

FIGURE 7 F0 curve of example (49a), La femme qui lui a parlé, àMarie-Antoinette, m’agace. (Speaker GLR, man)

FIGURE 8 F0 curve of example (49b), Il est venu, son ami d’enfance, deParis à Marseille en voiture. (Speaker GLR)

The Hcont demarcative tone at the end of the dislocated constituentin sentence middle position is a copy of the preceding demarcative tone.



This is so in cases where we traditionally speak of RD (49a), and incases of middle dislocation (49b). Thus the realization of MD is identicalto the one found in non-sentence-final RD, which is in accordance withthe idea that MD is a special case of RD.

4 ConclusionThe different types of dislocation studied in this chapter contrast ininteresting ways. At the left periphery, HTLD, ClLD and topicaliz-ation differ from each other not only syntactically, but also from apragmatic and prosodic point of view. All three function as topic con-structions, excluding discourse new discourse referents, but unlike top-icalized constituents, left dislocated constituents cannot function asthematic shifters. The prosody of the left peripheral topic construc-tions turns out to be both sensitive to syntax and to pragmatics.

Comparing the phenomena at the left periphery and right dislocationwe found a striking asymmetry between the left and the right periphery.LD should in fact be seen as a phenomenon that plays at the leftperiphery of clauses. RD constituents are not necessarily located at theright periphery of a clause (contra Lambrecht 2001). Sentence internalcases of RD include the so-called middle dislocation and dislocationfrom DPs and PPs. The claim that MD should be seen as a subcase ofRD is confirmed by the prosodic analysis of the two sentence types.

From a pragmatic point of view, LD and RD are similar, but sinceRD backgrounds the topic, it does not allow for a contrastive reading.In both cases the dislocated constituent cannot correspond to a dis-course new DR. The discourse referent is strictly given, textually orsituationally evoked or inferred.

From a prosodic point of view, LD and RD are very different. Thisobservation is in accordance with the observations in chapter 2 (Pros-ody) and the position of the LD and the RD constituent with respectto the focus. The end of an LD constituent is marked by an Hcont

demarcative tone or an (H)L% boundary tone, depending on whetherthe speaker assumes that the speech participants agree on the choiceof the topic. RD constituents typically have the prosodic features thatcharacterize post-focus and incidental sequences in general.

di slo cati o n - xs4all · (1) a. ce t this homme , man, je i ne ne le him con nais kno w pas ....

Documents