Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-hvd4g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-23T21:42:45.120Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Petr Sgall, Eva Hajičovǎ & Eva Benešová, Topic, focus and generative semantics. (Forschungen Linguistik und Kommunikationswissenschaft, I.) Kronberg/Taunus: Scriptor Verlag, 1973. Pp. 327.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Östen Dahl
Östen Dahl
Affiliation:
University of Göteborg
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Reviews
Information
Journal of Linguistics , Volume 11 , Issue 2 , September 1975 , pp. 347 - 354
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1975

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.)

References

REFERENCES

Bolinger, D. (1952). Linear modification. PMLA 1117–1147.Google Scholar
Brekle, H. (1969). Generative semantics vs. deep syntax. In Kiefe, F. (ed.) Studies in syntax and semantics. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
Chafe, W. (1974). Language and consciousness. Lg 50. 111–133.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1970). Deep structure, surface structure and semantic interpretation. In Jakobson, R. (ed.) Studies in Oriental and general linguistics. Tokyo: TEC Co.Google Scholar
Dahl, Ö. (1969). Topic and comment: a study in Russian and general transformational grammar. (Slavica Gothoburgensia 4. Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.) Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
Dahl, Ö. (1974a). Topic-comment structure revisited. In Dahl, Ö. (ed.) Topic and comment, contextual boundness and focus. Hamburg: Helmut Buske.Google Scholar
Dahl, Ö. (1974b). How to open a sentence: Abstraction in natural language. Logical Grammar Reports 12. Univ. of Göteborg, Dept. of Linguistics.Google Scholar
Firbas, J. (1966). Non-thematic subjects in contemporary English. TLP 2. 239–254.Google Scholar
Firbas, J. (1971). On the concept of communicative dynamism in the theory of Functional Sentence Perspective. Sbornik praci filosofické fakulty brnenské university.Google Scholar
Kuno, S. (1972). Functional sentence perspective. Lin 3. 269–320.Google Scholar
Kuroda, S.-Y. (1972). The categorical and the thetic judgment: Evidence from Japanese syntax. FL 9. 153–185.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. (1971). On generative semantics. In Steinberg, D. & Jacobovits, L. (eds.) Semantics: An interdisciplinary reader in philosophy, linguistics, and psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar