IS
UN
R
S
IS
S
E R SIT
S
137
A VIE N
SA
R
IV
A
S
UN
E R SIT
A
SA
136
IV
A VIE N
Outline
• Halliday’s information structure
Lecture 5
• Halliday’s thematic structure
• Word order modeling using a combination of constraints
IS in Systemic Functional Linguistics
• Daneš’s thematic sequences
MPI, November 2007
IS
IS
R
E R SIT
S
Systemic Functional Linguistics
SA
139
A VIE N
IV
A
UN
E R SIT
S
R
Information Structure
A
SA
138
IV
I.Kruijff-Korbayová
S
MPI, November 2007
S
Information Structure
UN
I.Kruijff-Korbayová
A VIE N
SFL: Halliday
M. A. K. Halliday (1967, 1970, 1985, . . . )
Information Structure:
• initially inspired by the Prague School works
• two independent (though interating) dichotomies:
– Information Structure: Given-New
– Thematic structure: Theme-Rheme
Close semantic relationship (though they are not the same!):
“[O]ther things being equal, a speaker choses the Theme from within what
is Given and locates information focus, the climax of the New, within the
Rheme.”
• information unit
– not exactly any unit in clause grammar (marked when boundaries overlap)
– made of two functions/elements:
∗ Given (optional; info presented as recoverable)
∗ New (obligatory, marked by prominence; info presented as nonrecoverable)
– Given typically preceds New (cf. CB/NB)
• Halliday discusses information structure in relation to intonation (in English)
• Information Struture is listener-oriented
• Thematic Structure is speaker-oriented
I.Kruijff-Korbayová
Information Structure
MPI, November 2007
I.Kruijff-Korbayová
Information Structure
MPI, November 2007
IS
UN
R
S
IS
S
E R SIT
S
141
A VIE N
SA
R
IV
A
S
UN
E R SIT
A
140
SA
cont’d
IV
A VIE N
Theme in “normal” declarative clauses
SFL: Halliday
Theme is the first experiential element (= participant or circumstance).
In declarative clauses marked iff not the Subject.
Thematic structure:
• Theme is the point of departure of a message;
Rheme is the remainder
Subject
nominal group
I had a little nut-tree.
Subject
nominal group
A wise old owl lived in an oak.
• Theme grammaticalized in many languages:
– e.g., English: first position
– Japanese: suffix -wa
– tagalog: particle ang and typically clause final (Martin, 1992)
Subject
nominalization
What I want is a proper cup of coffee.
Adjunct
adverbial group
Merrily we roll along.
Adjunct
prep. phrase
On Saturday night I lost my wife.
• Theme is a textual notion (related to global text-organization strategies; e.g.,
dates/places in biographies, places in geographical descriptions) (Fries, 1981),
locations (e.g., menus, tollbars) or means (e.g., clicking on an icon, mouse
button) in software manuals
Complement
nominal group
A bag-pudding the King did make.
Complement
nominalization
What they could not eat that night the Queen next morning fried.
Predicator
(lexical) verb
Forget it I never shall.
then
Ann
structural
conjunctive
vocative modal
interpersonal
surely
IS
IS
S
Part of the Theme
textual
continuative
Textual themacity of markers of rhetorical structure
Interpersonal the themacity of interactional information
but
R
E R SIT
A VIE N
Definitions of parts of Theme
Only a limited set of typed of words appear before the first experiential element.
continuative
textual
Theme
SA
143
A VIE N
IV
A
UN
E R SIT
Maximally extended Theme
Well
MPI, November 2007
S
R
Information Structure
A
SA
142
IV
I.Kruijff-Korbayová
S
MPI, November 2007
S
Information Structure
UN
I.Kruijff-Korbayová
wouldn’t
the best idea
mood-marking
topical
experiential
be to join the group
∗
interpersonal
structural
conjunctive
vocative
modal
mood-marking
experiential
topical
Can contain only such an element:
a member of small set of discourse signallers
(yes, no, well, oh, now)
an obligatory thematic element∗
an conjunctive Adjunct∗
any vocative item (personal name etc.)
a modal Adjunct∗
finite verbal operator or a WH- interrogative
or imperative let’s
the first experiential element
Defined later.
Rheme
I.Kruijff-Korbayová
Information Structure
MPI, November 2007
I.Kruijff-Korbayová
Information Structure
MPI, November 2007
Type
Meaning
Examples
and, or, nor, either, neither, but, yet, so, then
when, while, before, after, until, because, if, although,
unless, since, that, whether, (in order) to
even if, in case, supposing (that), assuming (that), seeing
(that), given that, provided (that), in spite of the fact
that, in the event that, so that
which, who, that, whose, when, where, (why, how)
whatever, whichever, whoever, whosever, whenever,
wherever, however
appositive
corrective
dismissive
summative
verificative
additive
adversative
variative
temporal
comparative
causal
conditional
concessive
respective
i.e., e.g.
rather
in any case
in short
actually
and
but
instead
then
likewise
so
(if . . . ) then
yet
at to that
that is, in other words, for instance
or rather, at least, to be precise
in any case, anyway, leaving that aside
briefly, to sum up, in conclusion
actually, in fact, as a matter of fact
also, moreover, in addition, besides
on the other hand, however, conversely
instead, alternatively
meanwhile, before that, later on, next, soon, finally
likewise, in the same way
therefore, for this reason, as a result, with this is mind
in that case, under the circumstances, otherwise
nevertheless, despite that
in this respect, as far as that’s concerned
MPI, November 2007
E R SIT
how likely?
how often?
how typical?
how obvious?
I think
I admit
I assure you
I presume
how desirable?
how reliable?
how valid?
how sensible?
how expected?
probably, possibly, certainly, perhaps, maybe
usually, sometimes, always, (n)ever, often, seldom
occasionally, generally, regularly, for the most part
of course, surely, obviously, clearly
in my opinion, personally, to my mind
frankly, to be honest, to tell you the truth
honestly, really, believe me, seriously
please, kindly
(un)fortunately, to my delight/distress, regrettably, hopefully
at first, tentatively, provisionally, looking back on it
broadly speaking, in general, ion the whole, in principle, strictly speaking
(un)wisely, understandably, mistakenly, foolishly
to my surprise, surprisingly, as expected, by chance
IS
(122)
(123)
(124)
(125)
Information Structure
A VIE N
Oh soldier, soldier, won’t you marry me.
Please doctor don’t give me any more of that nasty medicine.
On the other hand maybe on a weekday it would be less crowded.
So why worry.
Just to remember:
Part of the Theme
Can contain only such an element:
textual
a member of small set of discourse signallers (yes, no, well, oh, now)
an obligatory thematic element∗
an conjunctive Adjunct∗
any vocative item (personal name etc.)
a modal Adjunct∗
interpersonal
Modal Theme contains modal adjuncts.
I.Kruijff-Korbayová
S
probability
usuality
typicality
obviousness
opinion
admission
persuasion
entreaty
desirability
reservation
validation
evaluation
prediction
R
E R SIT
A
Examples
IV
Real examples of extended Theme
Modal Adjuncts are the following expressions:
Meaning
SA
147
A VIE N
Modal Theme
Type
MPI, November 2007
S
R
Information Structure
A
SA
146
IV
I.Kruijff-Korbayová
S
Information Structure
UN
I.Kruijff-Korbayová
S
Conjunctive Theme contains conjunctive adjuncts.
Structural Theme contains obligatory thematic elements.
IS
definite
indefinite
Examples
S
relatives
A VIE N
Conjunctive Adjuncts are the following expressions:
UN
Type
co-ordinator
subordinator
R
Conjunctive Theme
Obligatory thematic elements are the following expressions:
Class
conjunctions
IS
UN
IS
S
Structural Theme
E R SIT
S
145
A VIE N
SA
R
IV
A
S
UN
E R SIT
A
SA
144
IV
experiential
MPI, November 2007
I.Kruijff-Korbayová
continuative
structural
conjunctive
vocative
modal
mood-marking
topical
finite verbal operator or a WH- interrogative or imperative let’s
the first experiential element
Information Structure
MPI, November 2007
IS
UN
S
IS
S
R
A VIE N
E R SIT
S
149
SA
R
IV
A
S
UN
E R SIT
A
SA
148
IV
A VIE N
WO in Czech and English Intructional Texts
• Flexible context-dependent WO generation in Cz and En in procedural
instructions in software manual texts (Kruijff-Korbayová et al., 2002)
• Several contextual factors determined by text and sentence planning:
Information- and Thematic-Structure In
Automatic Text Generation
– Status of entities referred to: familiarity and identifiability
– Information structure: topic-focus articulation (Sgall et al., 1986)
– Discourse organization: genre-specific thematic scaffolding; theme as “point
of departure” (Halliday, 1967; Halliday, 1985)
• Language-specific constraints imposed by grammaticality and defaults
(unmarked ordering)
• Realization by a systemic functional grammar in KPML; general WO algorithm
IS
IS
S
R
E R SIT
A VIE N
Examples of WO Factors
Familiarity and indetifiability:
Information structure:
(126) Otevřete nový soubor. Nakreslete kruh.
Open
a new file.
Draw
a circle.
a. Soubor uložte.
File
save.
Save the file.
b. # Uložte soubor.
Save file.
(127) Obrázek obsahuje kruh a obdélnı́k.
The drawing contains a circle and a rectangle.
Information Structure
SA
151
A VIE N
IV
A
UN
E R SIT
Examples of WO Factors
I.Kruijff-Korbayová
MPI, November 2007
S
R
Information Structure
A
SA
150
IV
I.Kruijff-Korbayová
S
MPI, November 2007
S
Information Structure
UN
I.Kruijff-Korbayová
a. Kruh vymažte.
Circle delete.
Delete the circle.
(saying something about the circle)
b. Vymažte kruh.
Delete circle.
Delete the circle.
(saying what should happen next)
MPI, November 2007
I.Kruijff-Korbayová
Information Structure
MPI, November 2007
IS
UN
R
S
IS
S
S
153
A VIE N
E R SIT
SA
R
IV
A
S
UN
E R SIT
A
SA
152
IV
A VIE N
Examples of WO Factors
Theme as point of departure:
a. To open a file press Ctrl-O.
b. Press Ctrl-O to open a file.
Information Structure
MPI, November 2007
E R SIT
Contact thematic sequences:
I.Kruijff-Korbayová
a repetition of the preceding rheme
a derivation from the preceding rheme
a repetition of the preceding theme
a derivation from the preceding theme
the preceding utterance
a summarization of utterances U i . . . U j
a hypertheme (the theme of a supera text paragraph)
Information Structure
Notation
T i +1 = R i
T i +1 ⇐ R i
T i +1 = T i
T i +1 ⇐ T i
T i +1 = U i
T i + 1 = I i ,j
T i +1 ⇐ T ∗
MPI, November 2007
E R SIT
S
Daneš (1979, 1985) studies thematic sequences, provided that utterances are
divided into Theme (what is talked about) and Rheme (what is said about it).
IV
R
A
155
A VIE N
IS and Thematic Progression Types
Thematic sequence
thematization of
the preceding theme
continuous
theme
thematization of
preceding utterances
theme is derived from
ordinate text unit, e.g.
MPI, November 2007
SA
R
Information Structure
S
SA
154
IV
I.Kruijff-Korbayová
A
UN
I.Kruijff-Korbayová
(Purpose)
IS
(130)
Thematic Progression Types
(Means)
S
a. By pressing Ctrl-O open a file.
b. Open a file by pressing Ctrl-O.
UN
(129)
(Location)
IS
a. In the File menu choose the Open command.
b. Choose the Open command in the File menu.
S
(128)
A VIE N
Thematic Progression Example
0.
Národnı́ muzeum T 0 #R0 stojı́ na
Václavském náměstı́.
The National museum T 0 #R0 stands on the Wenceslas square.
1a. Toto náměstı́ T 1a #R1a je jednı́m z nejrušnějšı́ch mı́st v Praze.
This square T 1a #R1a is one
of the most busy places in Prague.
1b.
T 1a = R0
Hornı́ části tohoto velkého prostranstvı́ T 1b #R1b se tak dostalo
krásné
The top part of this large area
T 1b #R1b has thus received a nice
dominanty.
dominant.
T 1b ⇐ R0
2. Tato skutečnost T 2 #R2 je známa snad
každému návštěvnı́kovi Prahy.
This fact
T 2 #R2 is known perhaps by every
visitor
of Prague
T 2 = U0
I.Kruijff-Korbayová
Information Structure
MPI, November 2007
IS
MPI, November 2007
IS
R
E R SIT
S
IS
S
SA
159
A VIE N
IV
S
UN
E R SIT
S
SA
R
Information Structure
T 1 − R1
(T 1 − R1 ) conj (T 2 − R2 )
(T 1 conj T 2 ) − R1
T 1 − (R1 conj R2 )
(T 1 cond (T 2 − R2 )) − R1
or equivalently
T ∗ −R
T 1 − (R1 cond (T 2 − R2 ))
or equivalently
T − R∗
A
IV
I.Kruijff-Korbayová
T-R Condensation Example
A VIE N
Summary
From (Korbayová and Kruijff, 1996)
1. Prvnı́ autorovi známou pracı́, T 1 #R1
The first work known to the author T 1 #R1
2. která T 2 #R2 se zabývá strukturálnı́m programovánı́m
which T 2 #R2 is concerned with structural programming
3. T 3 #R3 a opı́rá se o gramatický formalismus (afixové gramatiky),
and T 3 #R3 relies on a grammar formalism (affix grammars),
4. je práce Silvarberga (1978).
is the work of Silvarberg (1978).
The complex utterance can be analyzed as (T 1 cond (T 2 − (R2 conj R3 ))) − R1
where T 3 = T 2 , and T 3 is elided
Information Structure
A VIE N
Notation
one T-R nexus
conjoined nexuses
conjoined topics
conjoined foci
nexus T 2 − R2 incorporated into topic
if T 2 = T 1 ∨ T 2 = R1 ,
T 2 can be elided
nexus T 2 − R2 incorporated into focus
if T 2 = T 1 ∨ T 2 = R1 ,
T 2 can be elided
A
UN
MPI, November 2007
158
I.Kruijff-Korbayová
R
S
UN
T4 ⇐ T∗
Information Structure
UN
IS
S
simple text units
conjoined
(paratactic)
text units
condensed
(hypotactic)
text units
4. Jiná
mimořádně významná pražská budova,
Národnı́ divadlo, T 4 #R4 je
Another remarkably important Prague building, the National theatre, T 4 #R4 is
I.Kruijff-Korbayová
S
Complex utterance
T 3b ⇐ T 0
umı́stěna na
Smetanově nábřežı́.
situated on the Smetana embankment.
E R SIT
Daneš: T-R in Complex Text Units
T 3a = T 0
Sbı́rky
Národnı́ho muzea T 3b #R3b představujı́
významnou
The collections of the National museum T 3b #R3b represent an important
národnı́ kulturnı́ hodnotu.
national cultural value.
157
A VIE N
SA
R
IV
A
S
3b.
A
{to} T 3a velmi památná budova.
3a. Je
a very memorial building.
{It} T 3a is
E R SIT
SA
156
IV
MPI, November 2007
• Information Structure (Given/New) and Thematic Structure (Theme/Rheme)
separate but related:
‘[O]ther things being equal, a speaker choses the Theme from within what is
Given and locate information focus, the climax of the New, within the Rheme.”
– Theme ≈ point of departure
– a textual notion related to global text organization strategies
– one topical element and optionally further textual and interpresonal elements
– grammaticalization of Theme
• Thematic structure as additional source of word order constraints
• Systematic relationships of Themes to preceding Themes/Rhemes
• Condensation “basic” Theme-Rheme pairs in complex utterances
I.Kruijff-Korbayová
Information Structure
MPI, November 2007