TY - JOUR
TI - On VP- focus projection and the integration of adjuncts. Evidence from Polish
AU - Tajsner, Przemysław
TI - On VP- focus projection and the integration of adjuncts. Evidence from Polish
AB - The two main topics of the paper are VP focus projection and the integration of adjuncts in VPs. First, a few conceptual and empirical questions are raised to Hornstein’s (2009) account of VP focus projection which is based on the “pure Concatenate/dangling off” way of adding adjuncts to a VP. It is argued that an account along these lines may have to recourse to a derivational look-ahead, which is a disadvantage. It is also noted that the “dangling off “ solution proves problematic if adjuncts have to fulfill the function of modifying events. What is more, it is not clear why the integration in a structure, necessary for movement, should be treated as a sufficient condition for focus projection.Next, the paper offers a short taxonomy of VP-pre-posing types in Polish. They appear to fall in two major categories: (i) VP- pre-posing for focus, and (ii) VP-pre-posing for topic. It is argued that in the former type, representing Focus Fronting (FF), a pre-posed VP is a separate Intonation Phrase, in which, as predicted by Truckenbrodt (2001) and others, the rightmost accented phrase must receive a prominent phrasal stress. Thus, the VP-final main stress on adjuncts is derived from the interplay of syntax and phonology, unlike in Hornstein’s (2009) account. Such a view is supported by the observed cases of VP pre-posing for topic in Polish in which the earlier distribution of stresses within a VP (derived by a Nuclear Stress Rule) is conserved after movement, and no extra phonological stress rule applies.The second major topic of the paper is the mechanics of adjunct integration in VPs. It is argued that there are two ways in which adjuncts may be added to the structure of a VP; by Concatenate (a default option) or by Merge. The former is only possible if no further instance of Merge is to follow, which is at the completion of vP and CP phases. The less economical Merge option is used when the VP-plus-adjunct undergoes further pre-posing for focus or for topic. Finally, it is shown how the phase-wise derivation may map on the procedure of stress promotion in a structure of a VP. It is argued that adjuncts concatenated to the root, prior to Spell-out, cannot receive an appropriate number of stress grids, and hence cannot carry main VP-stress. 
VL - Volume 7 (2012)
IS - Vol. 7, Issue 1
PY - 2012
SN - 1732-8160
C1 - 2300-5920
SP - 37
EP - 61
UR - https://ejournals.eu/en/journal/studies-in-polish-linguistics/article/on-vp-focus-projection-and-the-integration-of-adjuncts-evidence-from-polish
KW - Focus
KW - topic
KW - adjunct
KW - Concatenate
KW - Merge
KW - Focus Fronting
KW - Intonation Phrase
KW - phase