Abstract
Left displaced elements seem to be extremely frequent, if not universal, phenomena across languages. Despite their
surface similarity, however, they tend to display strikingly different features, both structurally and functionally (Prince 1998, Lambrecht 2001, papers in Shaer et al. 2009, Gundel et al. 2010, etc.). Our purpose is to investigate (a) the correlation of the structural variability of left-detachment constructions and the overall linguistic type of the language
(head- vs. dependent-marking, head-final vs. head-initial, pronominal vs. zero anaphor, etc.), and (b) the range of
discourse-pragmatic functions these constructions can perform from the point of view of information structure and
discourse organisation. The study is based on a fine-grained analysis of naturally occurring instances of left dislocation in four
geographically and genealogically distinct languages, Avatime (Kwa, West Africa), Lakhota (Siouan, northern USA), Tundra Yukaghir (isolate, north-eastern Siberia), and Whitesands (Oceanic, Vanuatu). The formal parameters of variation investigated include prosodic features of pitch assignment and phrasing, the frequency and type of resumption within the clause, integration within the clause via case/cross-referencing on the verb, recursivity,
connectivity effects such as binding by quantifiers and island sensitivity, etc. The variation in the functional load of left
detached elements is explored on the basis of their anaphoric and cataphoric relevance, the degree and type of
activation and their semantic and information-structural relations to the clause. It is shown that the types of left
detachment represented in the languages under investigation vary depending on the argument structure marking strategies employed in the language and the types of anaphora resolution employed. Furthermore, the functional
variability is shown to be at least in part a function of the linguistic type, the relevant features being the presence of dedicated topic/focus positions in the clause architecture and the pronominal inventory.
We provide an RRG-based account of these empirical findings, which both captures the universal features of left detachment and takes the cross-linguistic variability into account.
References
Gundel J.K., B. Mamadou, G. Bryan, H. Linda & Kh. Amel (2010) Testing predictions of the Givenness Hierarchy
framework : A cross-linguistic investigation, Journal of Pragmatics 42: 1770-1785.
Lambrecht K. (2001) Dislocation. In: M. Haspelmath et al. (eds.) Language typology and language universals. Berlin:
Walter de Gruyter (vol.2: 1050-1078).
Prince, E. F. (1998) On the limits of syntax, with reference to Left-Dislocation and Topicalization. In: P. Culicover & L.
McNally (eds.), The limits of syntax. NY: Academic Press. (pp. 281-302).
Shaer, B., P. Cook, W. Frey & C. Maienborn (eds.) (2009) Dislocated elements in discourse. London: Routledge
