Hostname: page-component-6898cfcb55-zkb6p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-11T07:52:38.077Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Contrast and Clausal Order: on Beyond Behaghel

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2026

Laurence R. Horn
Laurence R. Horn*
Affiliation:
Yale University
*
[laurence.horn@yale.edu]
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Since Aristotle first set out rules of natural priority, rhetoricians and linguists have sought to establish the ‘natural order’ of words, phrases, and clauses. Accounts of constituent order by classical rhetoricians and philologists and by modern linguists and psychologists have addressed word order within phrases and phrasal order within clauses. However, they have not tended to investigate clausal order within sentences, with the important but limited exception of NARRATION sequences (They had a baby and they got married), which—as recognized from Dionysius ('What is prior in time should also be prior in word order') to Grice ('Be orderly')—exhibit a robust but defeasible iconic link between order of events and order of mention. For clauses exhibiting the rhetorical relation of CONTRAST rather than narration, the literature is less perspicuous. It is on such cases that I focus here, inspired by BEHAGHEL'S SECOND LAW (1932:4): ‘That which is less important (or already known to the listener) is placed before that which is more important (or unknown) … Old concepts are placed before new'.

Keywords

Behaghel's second lawbut clausesconstituent ordercloned existential conjunctioncontrasthighlightingrepetitionssandwich sequencestautologies

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Language , Volume 98 , Issue 4 , December 2022, pp. 812 - 843
Copyright
Copyright © 2022 Linguistic Society of America

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

*

This article is a writeup of my Presidential Address presented on January 8, 2022, at the annual meeting of the LSA. I am grateful to Betty Birner, Andries Coetzee, Donka Farkas, Klaus von Heusinger, Paul Kay, Andy Kehler, Olli Silvennoinen, Kate Stanton, Gregory Ward, Ben Zimmer, and Arnold Zwicky for their comments and inspiration. I am particularly indebted to Vicky Escandell-Vidal and Elena Vilinbakhova, along with Pierre Larrivée, Raffaella Zanuttini, Mira Ariel, and Jack DuBois, for discussions of the CEC construction in crosslinguistic perspective. My earlier stabs at ‘Being orderly’ were presented over the last decade at CIL 19 in Geneva; at the CUNY Pragmatics Workshop on Relevance, Game Theory, and Communication; at AMPRA2 (American Pragmatics Association) at UCLA; at the University of Cologne; and at Pragmasophia II in Lisbon. I thank the hosts and audiences at those presentations and the above-mentioned interlocutors for their judgments and suggestions, while absolving all involved for any of my errors or misunderstandings. I am grateful to Istvan Kecskes, editor of Intercultural Pragmatics, for permission to reprint material previously appearing in that journal (see Horn 2019).

References

Abraham, Richard. 1950. Fixed order of coordinates: A study in comparative lexicography. The Modern Language Journal 34. 276–87. DOI: 10.2307/318913.Google Scholar
Anscombre, Jean-Claude, and Ducrot, Oswald. 1977. Deux mais en français? Lingua 43. 23–40. DOI: 10.1016/0024-3841(77)90046-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aristotle. 1963. Categories and de interpretatione. Ed. and trans. by J. L. Ackrill. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
Aristotle. Metaphysics. Trans. by Ross, W. D.. Online: http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/metaphysics.html.Google Scholar
Aristotle. Nicomachaean ethics, book II. Trans. by Ross, W. D.. Online: http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/nicomachaen.2.ii.html.Google Scholar
Arnold, Jennifer E., Wasow, Thomas, Losongco, Anthony; and Ginstrom, Ryan. 2000. Heaviness vs. newness: The effects of structural complexity and discourse status on constituent ordering. Language 76. 28–55. DOI: 10.1353/lan.2000.0045.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Asher, Nicholas, and Lascarides, Alex. 2003. Logics of conversation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bach, Kent. 1999. The myth of conventional implicature. Linguistics and Philosophy 22. 327–66. DOI: 10.1023/A:1005466020243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barker, Stephen. 2003. Truth and conventional implicature. Mind 112. 1–34. DOI: 10.1093/mind/112.445.1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Behaghel, Otto. 1932. Deutsche Syntax: Eine geschichtliche Darstellung, vol. 4. C. Winter: C. Winter.Google Scholar
Benor, Sarah Bunin, and Levy, Roger. 2006. The chicken or the egg? A probabilistic analysis of English binomials. Language 82. 233–78. DOI: 10.1353/lan.2006.0077.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bergen, Benjamin K., and Plauché, Madelaine C., 2005. The convergent evolution of radial constructions: French and English deictics and existentials. Cognitive Linguistics 16. 1–42. DOI: 10.1515/cogl.2005.16.1.1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biberauer, Theresa, and Sheehan, Michelle (eds.) 2014. Theoretical approaches to disharmonic word order. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Birner, Betty. 1996. The discourse function of inversion in English. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Blakemore, Diane, and Carston, Robyn. 2005. The pragmatics of sentential coordination with and. Lingua 115. 569–89. DOI: 10.1016/j.lingua.2003.09.016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boucher, Jerry, and Osgood, Charles E.. 1969. The Polyanna hypothesis. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 8. 1–8. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5371(69)80002-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carston, Robyn. 1988. Implicature, explicature, and truth-theoretic semantics. Mental representations: The interface between language and reality, ed. by Kempson, Ruth, 155–81. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Carston, Robyn. 1993. Conjunction, explanation and relevance. Lingua 90. 27–48. DOI: 10.1016/0024-3841(93)90059-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, Eve. 1970. How young children describe events in time. Advances in psycholinguistics, ed. by Flores d'Arcais, Giovanni B. and Levelt, Willem J. M., 275–84. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Cohen, L. Jonathan. 1971. Some remarks on Grice's views about the logical particles of natural language. Pragmatics of natural language, ed. by Bar-Hillel, Yehoshua, 50–68. Dordrecht: Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cole, Peter (ed.) 1978. Syntax and semantics, vol. 9: Pragmatics. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Cooper, William, and Ross, John Robert. 1975. World order. Chicago Linguistic Society (Parasession on functionalism) 11(2). 63–111.Google Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth, and Thompson, Sandra A.. 2005. A linguistic practice for retracting overstatements: ‘Concessive repair’. Syntax and lexis in conversation, ed. by Hakulinen, Auli and Selting, Margret, 257–88. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
de Jonge, Casper. 2008. Between grammar and rhetoric: Dionysius of Halicarnassus on language, linguistics and literature. Leiden: Brill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Nebrija, Antonio. 1492. Gramática de la lengua castellana, book 4.Google Scholar
Demetrius. 1995. On style. Trans. by Innes, Doreen C.. (Loeb classical library 199.) Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Halicarnassus Dionysius of. 1910. On literary composition. Ed. and trans. by W. Rhys Roberts. London: Macmillan & Co.Google Scholar
Dummett, Michael. 1973. Frege: Philosophy of language. Oxford: Duckworth.Google Scholar
Dwivedī, Rewāprasāda (ed.) 1964. The Vyaktiviveka of Rājānaka Śrī Mahimabhaṭṭa. Varanasi: Chaukhamba Sanskrit Series Office.Google Scholar
Engdahl, Elisabet, and Norén, Kerstin. 2007. Negotiating about lexical meanings. Poster presented at the Fourth International Workshop on Generative Approaches to the Lexicon. Online: http://gupea.ub.gu.se/handle/2077/21023.Google Scholar
Escandell-Vidal, Victoria, and Vilinbakhova, Elena. 2018. Coordinated tautologies in Spanish and Russian. Intercultural Pragmatics 15. 315–48. DOI: 10.1515/ip-2018-0009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farkas, Donka F. 2011. Polarity particles in English and Romanian. Romance linguistics 2010: Selected papers from the 40th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Linguistics, ed. by Herschensohn, Julia, 303–28. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Feinsilver, Lillian Mermin. 1961. On Yiddish shm-. American Speech 36. 302–3. DOI: 10.2307/453807.Google Scholar
Fenk-Oczlon, Gertraud. 1989. Word frequency and word order in freezes. Linguistics 27. 517–56. DOI: 10.1515/ling.1989.27.3.517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Féry, Caroline, and Ishikawa, Shin (eds.) 2016. The Oxford handbook of information structure. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finkbeiner, Rita. 2012. Naja, normal und normal: Zur Syntax, Semantik und Pragmatik der x-und-x Konstruktion im Deutschen. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 31. 1–42. DOI: 10.1515/zfs-2012-0001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finkbeiner, Rita. 2014. Identical constituent compounds in German. Word Structure 7. 182–213. DOI: 10.3366/word.2014.0065.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finkbeiner, Rita. 2018. Sentence-peripheral coordinative reduplication in German: A pragmatic view. In Finkbeiner & Freywald, 233–64. DOI: 10.1515/9783110592498-011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finkbeiner, Rita, and Freywald, Ulrike (eds.) 2018. Exact repetition in grammar and discourse. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Firbas, Jan. 1992. Functional sentence perspective in written and spoken communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511597817.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frege, Gottlob. 1997 [1879]. Begriffsschrift. Trans. by Michael Beaney. The Frege reader, ed. by Beaney, Michael, 47–78. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Freud, Sigmund. 1994 [1913]. The theme of the three caskets. The standard edition of the complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud, vol. 12, ed. by Strachey, James, 289–302. London: Hogarth.Google Scholar
Geurts, Bart. 2010. Quantity implicatures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511975158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ghomeshi, Jila, Jackendoff, Ray, Rosen, Nicole; and Russell, Kevin. 2004. Contrastive focus reduplication in English (The salad-salad paper). Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 22. 307–57. DOI: 10.1023/B:NALA.0000015789.98638.f9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gómez Txurruka, Isabel. 2003. The natural language conjunction and. Linguistics and Philosophy 26. 255–85. DOI: 10.1023/A:1024117423963.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph. 1963. Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements. Universals of language, ed. by Greenberg, Joseph, 73–113. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Grice, H. Paul. 1981. Presupposition and conversational implicatures. Radical pragmatics, ed. by Cole, Peter, 183–98. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Grice, H. Paul. 1989. Studies in the way of words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Haiman, John. 1985a. Symmetry. In Haiman 1985b, 73–95.Google Scholar
Haiman, John. (ed.) 1985b. Iconicity in syntax. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, John A. 1992. Syntactic weight versus information structure in word order variation. Informationsstruktur und Grammatik, ed. by Jacobs, Joachim, 196–219. Opladen: Westdeutscher. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-663-12176-3_7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, John A. 2004. Efficiency and complexity in grammars. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199252695.001.0001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horn, Laurence R. 1972. On the semantic properties of logical operators in English. Los Angeles: University of California, Los Angeles dissertation. Online: http://linguistics.ucla.edu/images/stories/Horn.1972.pdf.Google Scholar
Horn, Laurence R. 1989. A natural history of negation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. [Reissue edition, Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications, 2001.].Google Scholar
Horn, Laurence R. 1991. Given as new: When redundant affirmation isn't. Journal of Pragmatics 15. 313–36. DOI: 10.1016/0378-2166(91)90034-U.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horn, Laurence R. 2013. I love me some datives: Expressive meaning, free datives, and F-implicature. Beyond expressives: Explorations in use-conditional meaning, ed. by Gutzmann, Daniel and Gärtner, Hans-Martin, 151–99. Leiden: Brill. DOI: 10.1163/9789004183988_006.Google Scholar
Horn, Laurence R. 2016. Information structure and the landscape of (non-)at-issue content. In Féry & Ishikawa, 108–27. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199642670.013.009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horn, Laurence R. 2018. The lexical clone: Pragmatics, prototypes, productivity. In Finkbeiner & Freywald, 233–64. DOI: 10.1515/9783110592498-010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horn, Laurence R. 2019. First things first: The pragmatics of ‘natural order’. Intercultural Pragmatics 16. 257–87. DOI: 10.1515/ip-2019-0013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jakobson, Roman. 1965. Quest for the essence of language. Diogenes 51. 21–37. DOI: 10.1177/039219216501305103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jasinskaja, Katja, and Karagjosova, Elena. 2020. Rhetorical relations. The Wiley Blackwell companion to semantics, ed. by Gutzmann, Daniel, Matthewson, Lisa, Meier, Cécile, Rullmann, Hotze, and Zimmermann, Thomas Ede. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI: 10.1002/9781118788516.sem061.Google Scholar
Jaszczolt, Kasia M., and Sileo, Roberto B.. 2021. Pragmatics and grammar as sources of temporal ordering in discourse: The case of and. Inquiries in philosophical pragmatics, ed. by Macagno, Fabrizio and Capone, Alessandro, 57–82. Berlin: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-56696-8_4.Google Scholar
Kehler, Andrew. 2001. Coherence, reference and the theory of grammar. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
King, Jeffrey C., and Stanley, Jason. 2005. Semantics, pragmatics, and the role of semantic content. Semantics versus pragmatics, ed. by Szabó, Zoltán, 111–64. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199251520.003.0005.Google Scholar
Krifka, Manfred. 2008. Basic notions of information structure. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 55. 243–76. Online: https://www.jstor.org/stable/26190905.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kripke, Saul A. 2017. ‘And’ and ‘but’: A note. Thought: A Journal of Philosophy 6. 102–5. DOI: 10.1002/tht3.237.Google Scholar
Lakoff, Robin. 1971. If's, and's, and but's about conjunction. Studies in linguistic semantics, ed. by Fillmore, Charles and Langendoen, D. Terence, 114–49. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Landsberg, Marge (ed.) 1995. Syntactic iconicity and linguistic freezes. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lang, Ewald. 1977. Semantik der koordinativen Verknüpfung. Berlin: Akademie.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Legg, Angela M., and Sweeney, Kate. 2013. Do you want the good news or the bad news first? The nature and consequences of news order preferences. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 40. 279–88. DOI: 10.1177/0146167213509113.Google ScholarPubMed
Lepore, Ernie, and Stone, Matthew. 2015. Imagination and convention: Distinguishing grammar and inference in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198717188.001.0001.Google Scholar
Levelt, Willem J. M. 1981. The speaker's linearization problem. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences 295. 305–15. DOI: 10.1098/rstb.1981.0142.Google Scholar
Levelt, Willem J. M. 1989. Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linell, Per, and Mertzlufft, Christine. 2014. Evidence for a dialogical grammar: Reactive constructions in Swedish and German. Grammar and dialogism: Sequential, syntactic, and prosodic patterns between emergence and sedimentation, ed. by Günthner, Susanne, Imo, Wolfgang, and Bücker, Jörg, 79–108. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI: 10.1515/9783110358612.79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lohmann, Arne. 2014. English coordinate constructions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowe, Kate. 2012. The global consequences of mistranslation: The adoption of the ‘black but …‘ formulation in Europe, 1440–1650. Religions 3. 544–55. DOI: 10.3390/rel3030544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malkiel, Yakov. 1959. Studies in irreversible binomials. Lingua 8. 113–60. DOI: 10.1016/0024-3841(59)90018-X.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Masini, Francesca. 2006. Binominal constructions: Inheritance, specification, and subregularities. Lingue e Linguaggio 5. 207–32. DOI: 10.1418/23144.Google Scholar
McCawley, James D. 1991. Contrastive negation and metalinguistic negation. Chicago Linguistic Society (Parasession on negation) 27(2). 189–206.Google Scholar
McDonald, Janet, Bock, Kathryn; and Kelly, Michael. 1993. Word and world order: Semantic, phonological, and metrical determinants of serial position. Cognitive Psychology 25. 188–230. DOI: 10.1006/cogp.1993.1005.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meibauer, Jörg. 2008. Tautology as presumptive meaning. Pragmatics and Cognition 16. 439–70. DOI: 10.1075/pc.16.3.02mei.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Melander, Jean. 1916. Étude sur magis et les expressions adversatives dans les langues romanes. Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
Merin, Arthur. 1999. Information, relevance and social decision-making. Logic, language, and computation, vol. 2, ed. by Moss, Lawrence S., Ginzburg, Jonathan, and de Rijke, Maarten, 179–221. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Mill, John Stuart. 1869. The subjection of women. London: Longmans, Green, Reader, and Dyer. Online: https://www.gutenberg.org/files/27083/27083-h/27083-h.htm.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mollin, Sandra. 2012. Revisiting binomial order in English: Ordering constraints and reversibility. English Language and Linguistics 16. 81–103. DOI: 10.1017/S1360674311000293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgan, Jerry. 1969. On the treatment of presupposition in transformational grammar. Chicago Linguistic Society 5. 167–77.Google Scholar
Nevins, Andrew, and Vaux, Bert. 2003. Metalinguistic, shmetalinguistic: The phonology of shmreduplication. Chicago Linguistic Society 39. 702–21.Google Scholar
Norén, Kerstin, and Linell, Per. 2007. Meaning potentials and the interaction between lexis and contexts: An empirical substantiation. Pragmatics 17. 387–416. DOI: 10.1075/prag.17.3.03nor.Google Scholar
Orenstein, Peggy. 2017. She didn't say no. But she didn't say yes. The California Sunday Magazine, November 30, 2017. Online: https://story.californiasunday.com/orenstein-consent/.Google Scholar
Osgood, Charles. 1980. Lectures on language performance. New York: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-87289-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peramatzis, Michail. 2011. Priority in Aristotle's Metaphysics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Potts, Christopher. 2005. The logic of conventional implicatures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Proust, Marcel. 1919. À la recherche du temps perdu, X: Sodome et Gomorrhe. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Quintilian [= Quintilianus, Marcus Fabius]. 1920. Institutio oratoria. Trans. by Butler, H. E.. (Loeb classical library.) Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Roberts, Craige. 2012. Information structure: Towards an integrated formal theory of pragmatics. Semantics and Pragmatics 5:6. DOI: 10.3765/sp.5.6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roelofsen, Floris, and Farkas, Donka F.. 2015. Polarity particle responses as a window onto the interpretation of questions and assertions. Language 91. 359–414. DOI: 10.1353/lan.2015.0017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roelofsen, Floris, and van Gool, Sam. 2010. Disjunctive questions, intonation, and highlighting. Logic, language and meaning: Papers from the 17th Amsterdam Colloquium, 384–94. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-14287-1_39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rossi, Daniela. 2011. Lexical reduplication and affective contents: A pragmatic and experimental perspective. Belgian Journal of Linguistics 25. 148–75. DOI: 10.1075/bjl.25.07ros.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sacks, Norman. 1984. Antonio de Nebrija: Founder of Spanish linguistics. Hispanic Linguistics 1. 19–33.Google Scholar
Sadock, Jerrold M. 1978. On testing for conversational implicature. In Cole, 281–97. DOI: 10.1163/9789004368873_011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmerling, Susan F. 1978. Asymmetric conjunction and rules of conversation. In Cole, 211–31. DOI: 10.1163/9789004368811_009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwenter, Scott A. 2002. Discourse markers and the PA/SN distinction. Journal of Linguistics 38. 43–69. DOI: 10.1017/S0022226701001232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siegel, Muffy E. A. 2005. Finding conversational facts: A role for linguistics in court. International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law 12. 255–78. DOI: 10.1558/sll.2005.12.2.255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silvennoinen, Olli O. 2017. Not only apples but also oranges: Contrastive negation and register. Big and rich data in English corpus linguistics: Methods and explorations (Studies in variation, contacts and change in English 19), ed. by Hiltunen, Turo, McVeigh, Joe, and Säily, Tanja, 1–46. Online: https://varieng.helsinki.fi/series/volumes/19/silvennoinen/.Google Scholar
Silvennoinen, Olli O. 2020. Comparing corrective constructions: Contrastive negation in parallel and monolingual data. New approaches to contrastive linguistics: Empirical and methodological challenges, ed. by Enghels, Renata, Defrancq, Bart, and Jansegers, Marlies, 221–64. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI: 10.1515/9783110682588-008.Google Scholar
Sobkowiak, Wlodzimierz. 1993. Unmarked-before-marked as a freezing principle. Language and Speech 36. 393–414. DOI: 10.1177/002383099303600403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spenader, Jennifer, and Lobanova, Anna. 2009. Reliable discourse markers for contrast relations. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Computational Semantics, 210–21. Online: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/1693756.1693777.Google Scholar
Spenader, Jennifer, and Maier, Emar. 2009. Contrast as denial in multi-dimensional semantics. Journal of Pragmatics 41. 1707–72. DOI: 10.1016/j.pragma.2008.10.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strawson, P. F. 1952. Introduction to logical theory. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Tai, James. 1985. Temporal sequence and Chinese word order. In Haiman 1985b, 49–72.Google Scholar
Taylor, Ann, and Pintzuk, Susan. 2004. The effect of information structure on object position in Old English: A pilot study. Information structure and syntactic change in the history of English, ed. by Meurman-Solin, Anneli, José, Maria, López-Couso, , and Los, Bettelou, 47–65. New York: Oxford University Press. DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199860210.003.0003.Google Scholar
Toosarvandani, Maziar. 2014. Contrast and the structure of discourse. Semantics & Pragmatics 7:4. DOI: 10.3765/sp.7.4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wagner, Michael. 2016. Information structure and production planning. In Féry & Ishikawa, 541–61. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199642670.013.39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ward, Gregory L., and Hirschberg, Julia. 1991. A pragmatic analysis of tautological utterances. Journal of Pragmatics 15. 507–20. DOI: 10.1016/0378-2166(91)90109-B.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wasow, Thomas. 2002. Post-verbal behavior. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Wedgwood, Daniel. 1999. Approaches to weight, information and word order. Proceedings of the eighth University of Manchester Postgraduate Conference in Linguistics.Google Scholar
Wierzbicka, Anna. 1991. Cross-cultural pragmatics: The semantics of human interaction. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre. 1975. Presupposition and non-truth-conditional semantics. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre, and Sperber, Dan. 1998. Pragmatics and time. Relevance theory: Applications and implications, ed. by Carston, Robyn and Uchida, Seiji, 1–22. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Winter, Yoad, and Rimon, Mori. 1994. Contrast and implication in natural language. Journal of Semantics 11. 365–406. DOI: 10.1093/jos/11.4.365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winterstein, Grégoire. 2012. What but-sentences argue for: An argumentative analysis of but. Lingua 122. 1864–48. DOI: 10.1016/j.lingua.2012.09.014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, Saundra K., Hay, Jennifer; and Bent, Tessa. 2005. Ladies first? Phonology, frequency, and the naming conspiracy. Linguistics 43. 531–61. DOI: 10.1515/ling.2005.43.3.531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zwicky, Arnold M. 2019a. The desert island reaper. Arnold Zwicky's Blog, June 27, 2019. Online: https://arnoldzwicky.org/2019/06/27/the-desert-island-reaper/.Google Scholar
Zwicky, Arnold M. 2019b. GN/BN. Arnold Zwicky's Blog, July 7, 2019. Online: https://arnoldzwicky.org/2019/07/07/gn-bn/.Google Scholar