Craig,
The next couple of points are obvious, and I state them only to provide
context. English, like many languages, prefers to place new information
at the end of a sentence and to that information with tonic accent.
However, we are also able to place tonic accent just about anywhere we
want in a sentence, not just at the end. We may also choose to
introduce new information initially as marked theme, in which tonic
accent is on that initial element. When Halliday says that tonal stress
tends to fall on the last lexical elements of the clause, he is not
saying why, and that is because focus position will draw tonic accent.
He does, of course, make that point elsewhere. However, it's because
the distribution information and of tonic accent are partially
independent of one another that I object to the notion "default
intonation." What used to be describes as the 231 intonation pattern of
a declarative sentence may be the most frequent, although I don't know
of any statistical work on this, but that doesn't make it the default
pattern. Too many variables are involved.
Herb
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Craig Hancock
Sent: 2008-02-29 11:52
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Right- and left-branching sentences and intonation
Herb,
I think there are default positions, and it has been laid out.
Halliday at least says that tonal stress tends to fall on the last
lexical elements in the clause. One problem might be that a linguist
feels constrained about proclaiming one text more effective than
another, but the ear certainly hears it.
Have you seen "No country for Old Men?"
"Yes, I have seen it twice." The emphasis here is on "yes" (marked
theme) and "twice" (clause ending prominence.)
"Yes, twice I have seen it" sounds awkward precisely because the
clause ends with given information, not new information, so there's a
disjunct between form (tonal prominence) and salience. The reader tries
to put default emphasis on "it" or "seen". The second feels wordy even
though the words are the same.
"Give me liberty or give me death." Compare that to "give me liberty
or death should be given." Or even "give me liberty or death." The first
portions emphasis out in two spots, the second is discordant, and the
third reduces tonal emphasis to one.
"These are the times that try men's souls" is much better than "the
times that try men's souls are these."
Writing tends to load more information into a clause. (Halliday calls
it "lexically dense".) Much of the pressure comes on the nominal groups.
But there's no question that lexical density severely impacts
readability. That's the argument Christensen makes against the sentence
combining advocates who see lexical density as a sign of "mature style."
The free modifier adds an intonation group. (Not his term, but it wasn't
available to him at the time.) It's a very detail rich way of writing,
but also very accessible. Counting it as part of the main clause can be
misleading.
Craig
STAHLKE, HERBERT F wrote:
Craig,
This is generally a reasonable description of some of the relationships
between intonation, structure, and punctuation. As a functionalist, I'm
surprised you didn't add some comments on information loading as well.
The one point I'd disagree with is your reference to default intonation.
I don't think there is such a thing. A default intonation pattern
presupposes that there are default distributions of information, and we
don't know enough about discourse production to define that notion.
Herb
-----Original Message-----
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
interface at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/