Documentation

Linglib.Phenomena.Focus.Studies.Kiss1998

É. Kiss (1998) — Identificational Focus versus Information Focus #

@cite{kiss-1998} @cite{hartmann-zimmermann-2007}

@cite{kiss-1998} argues for a structural distinction between two focus types in Hungarian:

Hungarian is the empirical pivot in the typological debate that @cite{hartmann-zimmermann-2007} later use Hausa to challenge: Hungarian validates the Meaning-Structure Mapping Hypothesis (focus position determines focus type and exhaustivity); Hausa refutes it.

This file is the second of two studies that instantiate Theories.Semantics.Focus.MSMH.MeaningStructureMapping (the polymorphic hypothesis). The contrast is deep, not analogical: the same theorem statement holds for Hungarian (hungarian_satisfies_MSMH below) and fails for Hausa (hausa_falsifies_MSMH in HartmannZimmermann2007.lean). The two refutations / validations use the same predicate from Theories/Semantics/Focus/.

The §3 distributional restrictions are encoded via Fragments.Hungarian.Focus.ConstituentClass.compatibleWith. The positive theorems onlyPhrase_forces_identificational and someIndef_never_licensed live at the Fragment level (they are universal closures over arbitrary licensed configs); this file only adds the empirical cells from the paper and the typological contrast theorems.

Out of scope: §4 scope (identificational focus binds variables; information focus does not); §5.2 the cleft-construction realisation of identificational focus in English (would need an English Cleft Fragment); §6 the cross-linguistic feature typology ([±exhaustive], [±contrastive]) parametrising Italian, Romanian, Catalan, Greek, Arabic, Finnish; §7 focus iteration and projection (eq. 51–53). The §1 examples are tagged in docstring prose with cell labels rather than encoded as separate per-PAC cells (Hungarian PACs are not yet formalised as a TAM type).

source
def Phenomena.Focus.Studies.Kiss1998.preverbal_identificational :
Fragments.Hungarian.Focus.FocusConfig

Eq. (5a): Tegnap este Marinak mutattam be Pétert 'It was to MARY that I introduced Peter last night.' Identificational/preverbal: of the relevant set of persons, it was Mary and no one else that I introduced Peter to.

Equations
Instances For
    source
    def Phenomena.Focus.Studies.Kiss1998.postverbal_information :
    Fragments.Hungarian.Focus.FocusConfig

    Eq. (5b): Tegnap este be mutattam Pétert MARINAK 'Last night I introduced Peter TO MARY.' Information/postverbal: presents Mary as nonpresupposed information, without suggesting Mary was the only one.

    Equations
    Instances For
      source
      def Phenomena.Focus.Studies.Kiss1998.preverbal_hat :
      Fragments.Hungarian.Focus.FocusConfig

      Eq. (8a): Mari egy kalapot nézett ki magának 'It was a HAT that Mary picked for herself.' Identificational/preverbal of a regular DP.

      Equations
      Instances For
        source
        def Phenomena.Focus.Studies.Kiss1998.postverbal_hat :
        Fragments.Hungarian.Focus.FocusConfig

        Eq. (8b): Mari ki nézett magának EGY KALAPOT 'Mary picked for herself A HAT.' Information/postverbal of a regular DP — non-exhaustive.

        Equations
        Instances For
          source
          def Phenomena.Focus.Studies.Kiss1998.starred_universal_identificational :
          Fragments.Hungarian.Focus.FocusConfig

          Eq. (17b — starred): *Mari minden kalapot nézett ki magának 'It was every hat that Mary picked for herself.' Universal quantifier in identificational focus position is ungrammatical (paper §3). Constructed directly to demonstrate the distributional restriction has bite.

          Equations
          • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
          Instances For
            source
            def Phenomena.Focus.Studies.Kiss1998.universal_information :
            Fragments.Hungarian.Focus.FocusConfig

            Eq. (19b): Minden kollégámat meg hívtam 'I invited EVERY COLLEAGUE OF MINE.' Universal quantifier as postverbal information focus — grammatical, demonstrating that minden is barred only from identificational position, not from focus altogether.

            Equations
            Instances For
              source
              def Phenomena.Focus.Studies.Kiss1998.HungarianMSMH :
              Prop

              MSMH instantiated for Hungarian. The polymorphic hypothesis from Theories/Semantics/Focus/MeaningStructureMapping.lean, specialised with FocusConfig.Licensed as the admissibility filter, position as the structural projection, and focusType as the interpretation projection.

              Equations
              • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
              Instances For
                source
                theorem Phenomena.Focus.Studies.Kiss1998.hungarian_satisfies_MSMH :
                HungarianMSMH

                Hungarian satisfies the MSMH. Two licensed configurations with the same position must have the same focus type. The proof reduces to licensed_position_determines_type: the Hungarian fragment encodes the position–type pairing in Licensed, so sameness of position transports along the pairing.

                source
                theorem Phenomena.Focus.Studies.Kiss1998.preverbal_iff_exhaustive (c : Fragments.Hungarian.Focus.FocusConfig) (h : c.Licensed) :
                c.position = Fragments.Hungarian.Focus.Position.preverbal ↔ c.focusType.IsExhaustive

                Position determines exhaustivity for licensed Hungarian focus. Composition of the position–type and type–exhaustivity equivalences. The semantic payoff of the §2 structural distinction.

                source
                theorem Phenomena.Focus.Studies.Kiss1998.starred_universal_identificational_not_licensed :
                ¬starred_universal_identificational.Licensed

                Universal quantifiers cannot be identificational foci (paper eq. 17b). The starred_universal_identificational configuration fails licensing because universal.compatibleWith .identificational = False.

                source
                theorem Phenomena.Focus.Studies.Kiss1998.universal_information_licensed :
                universal_information.Licensed

                Universal quantifiers can be information foci (paper eq. 19b). The same universal class that is barred from preverbal position is admissible postverbally. The asymmetry is exactly the §3 typological observation.

                source
                theorem Phenomena.Focus.Studies.Kiss1998.only_information_not_licensed :
                ¬{ position := Fragments.Hungarian.Focus.Position.postverbal, focusType := Fragments.Hungarian.Focus.FocusType.information, cclass := Fragments.Hungarian.Focus.ConstituentClass.onlyPhrase }.Licensed

                Only-phrases must be identificational foci (paper §3 last paragraph): the csak X construction is obligatorily realised as identificational focus. The information-focus alternative is therefore ill-licensed.

                source
                theorem Phenomena.Focus.Studies.Kiss1998.someIndef_neither_licensed :
                ¬{ position := Fragments.Hungarian.Focus.Position.preverbal, focusType := Fragments.Hungarian.Focus.FocusType.identificational, cclass := Fragments.Hungarian.Focus.ConstituentClass.someIndef }.Licensed ∧ ¬{ position := Fragments.Hungarian.Focus.Position.postverbal, focusType := Fragments.Hungarian.Focus.FocusType.information, cclass := Fragments.Hungarian.Focus.ConstituentClass.someIndef }.Licensed

                Indefinite valami/valaki is barred from both focus types (paper eq. 17e). Both attempted licensings fail.

                source
                theorem Phenomena.Focus.Studies.Kiss1998.preverbal_identificational_licensed :
                preverbal_identificational.Licensed
                source
                theorem Phenomena.Focus.Studies.Kiss1998.postverbal_information_licensed :
                postverbal_information.Licensed
                source
                theorem Phenomena.Focus.Studies.Kiss1998.minimal_pair_distinct_types :
                preverbal_hat.focusType ≠ postverbal_hat.focusType

                The eq. (5a/5b) minimal pair: same constituent (a regular DP), different positions, different focus types — both licensed, validating the paper's claim that the two positions encode genuinely distinct focus types rather than free interpretational variants.