A PHONOLOGICAL ACCOUNT OF
CONTRASTIVE TOPICS
(A PILOT-STUDY)
Jacopo Torregrossa
Department of Linguistics, Verona University
INTRODUCTION
A: Mario ha invitato i suoi fratelli al matrimonio?
(Did Mario invite his brothers to the wedding?)
B: Francesco, l’ha invitato, ma Giovanni, ha deciso di non chiamarlo.
(Francesco, he invited, but Giovanni, he decided not to call him).
Background.
The discourse function of a Contrastive Topic (CT) consists in:
 evoking alternatives with respect to other topics, such as both the CT and the alternatives are members of a contextually given set;
 selecting the referred object to the exclusion of at least some other members of the relevant set.
Across the literature, different criteria have been proposed for the identification of CTs: Büring (1997) relies on prosodic features (i.e., the fall-rise intonation pattern),
while the cartographic program to syntactic parameters (i.e., the existence of a specific functional projection).
Research question: The analysis assumes that contrast is an autonomous informational notion on a par with topic and focus. The aim of the study is to disentangle CTs
into their basic informational categories, i.e., topic and contrast, and to investigate which linguistic means are used to express each of them. It is well-known that
topicalization is marked by syntactic A-bar movement to some left-peripheral projection (see Rizzi 1997 as a main reference). Which linguistic features express contrast?
READING
MATERIALS
METHODS
Task
Reading
Materials
4 main sentences: i) left-dislocated constituent in a contrast-inducing context; ii) in-situ constituent in a
contrast-inducing context; iii) left-dislocated constituent in a non contrast-inducing context; iv) in-situ
constituent in a non contrast-inducing context (see Reading materials) + fillers.
Participants
Five Italian speakers (3F, 2M), all students aged 21-28, 4 from the North-East of Italy and only one
speaking a central variety.
Analysis:
 F0 contour of each sector in the test utterances
 range (i.e., the difference between the maximal and the minimal F0-value) of the left-dislocated
constituents
 length of the syllable corresponding to the highest F0-value in the left-dislocated sectors
RESULTS
+ TOPIC
-TOPIC
+ CONTRAST
(Dobbiamo tenere
sotto controllo la
nostra
alimentazione)
I formaggi, li
mangiamo di
frequente, ma le
verdure, non
riusciamo proprio
ad apprezzarle.
Mangiamo i
formaggi di
frequente, ma le
verdure, non
riusciamo proprio
ad apprezzarle.
- CONTRAST
(La mamma ha
comprato lo
stracchino e la
ricotta)
I formaggi, li
mangiamo di
frequente.
Mangiamo i
formaggi di
frequente.
RESULTS
The speakers rely on two different strategies to express contrast: phonetic (Strategy I – 3 speakers) or
phonological (Strategy II – 2 speakers).
STRATEGY II
THE SAME TONAL EVENT IN BOTH
SYNTACTIC POSITIONS
( EXAMPLE OF A CONTRASTIVE INTERPRETATION)
STRATEGY I
THE SAME TONAL EVENT CORRESPONDS TO THE SAME SYNTACTIC POSITION
THE TONAL EVENTS DIFFER IN THE WAY THEY ARE REALIZED PHONETICALLY
DISCUSSION AND FURTHER RESEARCH
Left-dislocated constituents with a contrastive
interpretation are realized through a higher pitch
range.
The syllable associated with the highest F0values in the left-dislocated constituent tends to
be longer in contrastive contexts.
Contrast is expressed by means of specific prosodic
features, either phonetic (Strategy I) or phonological (Strategy
II).
 Contrast is a suprasegmental phenomenon which appears
in association with phrasal constituents in different syntactic
positions (as shown in (2)).
SELECTED REFERENCES AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Frascarelli M./Hinterhölzl R. 2007, Types of topics in German and Italian, in Winkler/Schwabe (eds.), On information structure,
meaning and form (pp. 87-116), Amsterdam/Philadelphia, John Benjamins; Krifka M. 2007, Basic notions of information structure, in
Fery/Krifka (eds.), Interdisciplinary Studies of Information Structure 6, Potsdam; Rizzi L. 1997, The Fine Structure of the Left
Periphery, in Haegeman (ed.), Elements of Grammar, Kluwer, Dordrecht; Tomioka, S. (to appear), Contrastive Topics operate on
Speech-Acts, in Féry/Zimmermann (eds.), Information Structure from Different Perspectives, OUP.
Many thanks to: Birgit Alber, Valentina Bambini, Kristine Bentzen, Denis Delfitto, Barbara Gili Fivela, Chiara Melloni, Stefan
Rabanus, Peter Svenonius and to Anna, Francesco, Ilaria, Maria, Riccardo, Sara, Vera.
(2) [TopP TOPIC* [FocP [TopP TOPIC* [IP [VP… CONTRAST
 How does ‘contrast’ interact with ‘focus’?
 What are the implications of the present study for the
general architecture of grammar?