Grammar of Inversion after Fronting in English

Eva Podivínská

Bakalářská práce
2015/2016
ABSTRAKT

Tato bakalářská práce se zabývá inverzí po předsazení v angličtině. Teoretická část práce
popisuje souvislost mezi předsazením a inverzí, pravidla a okolnosti podmiňující jejich
použití. Práce také zmiňuje obecná pravidla slovosledu a struktury sdělení. Cílem následu-
jící části je analýza poznatků za pomoci korpusů BNC a COCA.

Klíčová slova: slovosled, předsazení, inverze, podmět, sloveso, pomocné sloveso, zdůraz-
nění, struktura sdělení

ABSTRACT
This bachelor thesis deals with inversion after fronting in English. The theoretical part de-
scribes the connection between fronting and inversion, the rules and the circumstances
under what they are used. This thesis also mentions general rules of canonical word order
and information structure in a clause. The aim of the following part is an analysis of find-
ings with the use of corpora BNC and COCA.

Keywords: word order, fronting, inversion, subject, verb, operator, emphasis, information
structure
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

In this way, I would like to express my gratitude to my dear friend who encouraged me not
to give up in times when I was losing hope. My thanks also belong to my sister for her un-
derstanding and being here for me.
CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 8
I THEORETICAL PART ................................................................................................... 9
1 WORD ORDER ........................................................................................................ 10
1.1 FIXED WORD-ORDER LANGUAGE .......................................................................... 10
1.2 WORD ORDER PATTERNS ...................................................................................... 10
1.3 INFORMATION STRUCTURE IN A CLAUSE ............................................................... 11
2 FRONTING .............................................................................................................. 14
2.1 FOCUS FRONTING AND TOPICALISATION ............................................................... 14
2.2 FRONTED UNITS .................................................................................................... 15
2.2.1 Fronting of nominals .................................................................................... 15
2.2.2 Fronting of objects ....................................................................................... 16
2.2.3 Fronting of predicatives ............................................................................... 17
2.2.4 Fronting in dependent clauses ...................................................................... 19
3 INVERSION ............................................................................................................. 20
II PRACTICAL PART ....................................................................................................... 21
4 RESEARCH .............................................................................................................. 22
CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................. 23
BIBLIOGRAPHY .............................................................................................................. 24
SEZNAM TABULEK ........................................................................................................ 26
UTB ve Zlíně, Fakulta humanitních studií 8

INTRODUCTION

Besides other things, people communicate with the use of words. They put them in some
order and create a message. This thesis is about syntactical structures of fronting accompa-
nied by inversion. These two devices are used quite rarely in English, though they are fully
functional.

The theoretical part of the thesis describes the canonical word order, briefly reasons why is
English considered to be a fixed word-order language and it describes the information
structure in a sentence. The second chapter focuses on fronting, when it is used, its func-
tions and more importantly it mentions different parts of sentences that can be fronted and
which of them are accompanied by the inversion. In the third chapter the inversion is just
shortly described.

The practical part should be based on research from British National Corpus and Corpus of
Contemporary American English. The aim is to examine frequencies of using these two
devices in both spoken and written language.
UTB ve Zlíně, Fakulta humanitních studií 9

I. THEORETICAL PART
UTB ve Zlíně, Fakulta humanitních studií 10

1 WORD ORDER

Word order is a term used in syntax and it is related to the order of elements in a sentence.
Naturally, its importance from the grammatical point of view differs throughout languages,
as well as its functions. (Dušková 2003, 518)

English is considered as “fixed word-order language” and the grammatical function

is important. The reason is mainly determining types of sentences and sentence members.
Since there are not many ways how to distinguish different sentence functions, in English
it can be recognized by the position in a sentence. On the basis of the position of specific
sentence members, it can be also identified whether it is a declarative, imperative or inter-
rogative sentence. (ibid.)

1.1 Fixed word-order language

The reason why English is described as fixed word order language is mainly because
of stern rules about placement of the core elements (S V O). The strictness of the word
order, however, is relative. According to Quirk et al. (1985, 51) the word order is the less
strict the more distant the element is from the main clause which means that some elements
are more likely to move from their usual positions than others. Comparing the sentences in
(1), it can be seen that adverbial phrase very often can be moved to almost every position,
whereas it is not possible to do so with the core elements (S V O), as shown in (2).

(1) a) I very often clean my room. (2) a) *Clean my room I very often.
b) Very often I clean my room. b) *I my room very often clean.
c) I clean my room very often. c) *Very often clean my room I.
Nonetheless, even the core elements may be moved under the certain conditions (3). This
is an example of fronting and subject/verb inversion (which will be described in more de-
tail later), (Biber et al. 1999, 898).

(3) “Clean your room,” said my mother. O V S

1.2 Word order patterns

There are several basic rules of word order that should be mentioned. The fundamen-
tal canonical word order of declarative clause is subject, verb, and object – S V O, but for
creating a sentence, subject and verb are sufficient (4), (Biber et al. 1999, 899). Addition-
ally, besides the fact that there does not have to be any object, this general pattern does not
UTB ve Zlíně, Fakulta humanitních studií 11

include negation or inversion in questions. Thus, as Veselovská and Emonds state in their
Course in English Syntax (2011, 67), more accurate pattern would be S M/A V (O), where
M/A is modal or auxiliary. Moreover, although subject and verb are obligatory, there is an
exception in idioms (5a) and imperatives (5b), where the subject can be omitted (Platzack
and Rosengren 1997, 178).

(4) A bird flies.

(5) a) Easy come, easy go.
b) Do not step on the grass.

Whether there are some other elements, such as objects or adverbials needed or not,
depends on the valency of a verb. Generally, an object comes after a verb and adverbials
follow the object. Placing of more adverbials happens usually on the basis of its type. Ad-
verbial of manner goes commonly first after a verb, then locative adverbial and after that
temporal. Adverbials which work as a connection with the previous context are often in the
initial position, for instance – to begin with, firstly, secondly, moreover, therefore, how-
ever, in other words etc. Next category, adverbials of frequency such as often, always,
usually, sometimes, never etc., usually occurs between a subject and a verb. Intensifying
adverbials are located in front of the word, they intensify – completely, deeply, partly, very,
hardly etc. (Dušková 2003, 521 – 522)

A structure of interrogatives is the same as in declarative clauses - S M/A V (O).

However, the compulsory feature is a subject-operator inversion. Thus closed alternative or
yes/no questions normally start with an auxiliary verb. In open interrogatives, though, wh-
words are put at the beginning of the sentence and an auxiliary comes after (Huddleston
and Pullum 2005, 161 – 162). If the question asks about a subject, wh-word takes place of
the subject as it is shown in (6) – it is a location that is requested here (Biber et al. 1999,
899).

(6) Where are you?

1.3 Information structure in a clause

When composing a sentence, there are two parts in a clause: one, which expresses in-
formation which is already known from the previous discourse (theme, topic), and new
important information that a writer/speaker wants to present (rheme, focus). Basic princi-
ples describing the arrangement of information are called the given-before-new principle
UTB ve Zlíně, Fakulta humanitních studií 12

or simply the information principle and the principle of end weight. (Aarts 2011, 315 –
316), (Biber et al. 1999, 896)

The first principle says that the clause begins with old information and the new one is
at the end of the sentence. Biber and others (1999, 896 – 897) also point out, that this dis-
tribution makes the communication easier for all participants of a conversation because it
is not that complicated to arrange and to decode. Apparently, it also helps to make a text
cohesive by connecting the new information from the previous sentence and the one which
is now familiar because they are closer to each other.

The end-weight principle suggests that complex and long elements are at the end of
the sentence. Those elements are supplemented by pre and postmodifiers and they are often
described as heavy (Aarts 2011, 316). Moreover, Biber and others (1999, 898) state that
due to this rule it is simpler for the receiver to process this information since he/she does
not have to remember the complicated phrase from the beginning. In addition, the complex
phrase commonly holds also the essential information which supports the given-before-
new principle, too.

Nonetheless, the main information does not have to be necessarily at the end of the
sentence as well as complex phrases. Biber and others (1999, 897) also claim, that there
could be more than 1 focal element in a clause. They suggest that a complex subject placed
in its typical position before verb can gain focus and therefore also an emphasis even
though it is characteristic for constituents at the end of the clause (end-focus). This promi-
nence can be obtained also by other constituents including a non-restrictive modifier or a
locative adverbial situated in the initial position as it is shown in the example (7). Initial
locative adverbial – in the corner, is followed by complex subject – a little blue-eyed child,
with non-restrictive modifier – guilty of spilling the milk and the verb phrase – started to
cry. There are four elements in focus – corner, child, milk, and cry. (Collins and Hollo
2010, 151)

(7) In the corner, a little blue-eyed child, guilty of spilling the milk, started to cry.

As stated by Aarts (2011, 314), emphasizing is quite usual in English. In spoken

form of communication, it could be easily done by intonation and putting a stress on a par-
ticular word. Nevertheless, it is not conceivable in written language, in this case, the word
order has to be changed.
UTB ve Zlíně, Fakulta humanitních studií 13

The information above follows that if the producer of a text wants to highlight some-
thing, it should be put at the beginning or at the end of the clause. In this way, the producer
can direct the attention towards certain elements or adjust the information according to
context and create the message that will be easier to decode for the addressee. Specifically,
expected information may be reduced and the important ones may be highlighted. (Quirk et
al. 1985, 88 – 89)

For changing the position of an element in a sentence, there are several different de-
vices such as cleft sentence, extraposition or fronting. Cleft sentence allows any constituent
to be prominent and to move to the initial position. There are different types of clefts
(pseudo-cleft, reversed-pseudo cleft, etc.) but in the example (8b) and (8c), an expletive it
is used (it-cleft). Extraposition is shifting a component which is normally supposed to be in
nonfinal position to the final position, which is demonstrated in (9a) and (9b). On the con-
trary, fronting is moving a constituent into an initial position. (Quirk et al. 1985, 89)

(8) a) The dog ate my lunch. (common word order sentence)

b) It was my lunch that the dog ate.
c) It was the dog that ate my lunch.
(9) a) A diamond of blue colour was stolen. (common word order sentence)
b) A diamond was stolen of blue colour.

To sum up, the word order plays in the English grammar a significant role especially
in identifying sentence members and types of sentences because it is considered as fixed
and the basic pattern for creating an English sentence is S M/A V (O). That means that
noun in post-verbal position is probably an object. Nonetheless, elements can be shifted in
order to change the information structure. This can have more reasons, e.g. to highlight the
item, to contribute to the cohesion of the text or to make the text easier to decode and more
understandable for the addressee. For changing the position of the elements there are de-
vices, such as cleft sentences, extraposition or fronting which is going to be described in
more detail in the next chapter.
UTB ve Zlíně, Fakulta humanitních studií 14

2 FRONTING

As it was indicated above, moving some element, that is in canonical word order com-
monly placed after the verb, to the beginning of a clause is called fronting (pre-posing) –
(1). It is used in order to highlight that constituent, to indicate contrast or to arrange infor-
mation to make text cohesive, (Biber et al. 1999, 900). A comma is sometimes used after
the fronted element to enhance its prominence even more. (Quirk et al. 1985, 1377)

(1) Mushrooms I cannot stand. (fronted object)

Quirk and others (1985, 1377 – 1378) claim that the only constituents that can be
fronted are those which depend on a verb. It can be, for example, an object, a subject com-
plement, or a nominal part of a predicate itself. Nevertheless, these are elements which are
usually required by the verb. Biber and others add that pre-posing of core elements is in
English quite unusual and Tárnyiková (2002, 101) declare that other facultative post-verbal
elements, for instance, adverbials or adjuncts, should not be fronted because they are, con-
trary to the core elements, quite movable as such.

Another condition for using this syntactic device is an anaphoric reference to the pre-
ceding context. As a result, the information structure is changed because the fronted ele-
ment creates a contrast with the preceding context, plus it makes the text cohesive, (Tárny-
iková 2002, 101). The fact that the fronted information should depend on a context is sup-
ported by the rather frequent use of demonstratives (e.g. this, that, such etc.) together with
fronted units, like in an example (2). With meeting these two conditions, all the functions
of fronting which are mentioned by Biber et al. would be maintained.

(2) Most of these problems a computer could take in its stride. (Quirk et al. 1985, 1377)

2.1 Focus fronting and topicalisation

Fronting can be divided into two kinds according to intonation (in spoken language)
and information structure: focus fronting and topicalisation, (Prince 1981, in Tárnyiková
2009, 101). In the first type, the fronted item bears the focus and it is stressed. This ar-
rangement also puts two elements in contrast – (3).

(3) A Welshman I was born, and a Welshman I shall die. (Tárnyiková 2009, 102)

Furthermore, Tárnyiková (2009, 102) says that the fronted element is often used as an epit-
ome of a high quality feature or some other relevant class, which can be derived from the
UTB ve Zlíně, Fakulta humanitních studií 15

context. It is called epitomisation and she gives the following example (4), where Julia
Roberts represents simply a good actress. A common use of this structure is likewise in
advertisements because it has a high rate of expressivity, or it might be an echo of previous
context – (5). Either way, the fronted element is emphasized and also depends on context.
(Quirk et al. 1985, 1377), (Tárnyiková 2009, 103)

(4) So what do you say about her performance?

Well, Julia Roberts she is not. (ibid.)
(5) Customer: Vegetarian pizza and large beer.
Waiter: Large beer you ordered? (ibid.)

On the contrary, in the case of topicalisation, the fronted element is not in focus
because its main purpose is to make the text cohesive. In (6), there is an example of ana-
phoric repetition of the word learn and the fronted verb, learn, is not a focal element of the
clause. The focus is on emphatic auxiliary did. (ibid.), (Birner and Ward 1998, 52)

(6) As members of a Gray Panthers committee, we went to Canada to learn, and learn
we did. (ibid.)

2.2 Fronted units

There are various rules and conditions for fronting of different parts of sentences. A
lot of cases of pre-posing are, for instance, accompanied by an inversion, which is in sim-
ple terms shifting the position of subject and verb or auxiliary. It was also mentioned that
fronting may have different purposes and it varies depending on the stress and information
structure.

2.2.1 Fronting of nominals

Fronted nominal can have a function of direct object – (7), subject or object com-
plement examples of which are in (8) – the prior one is a subject complement and the latter
one is an object complement. Here Biber and others (1999, 901) point out that although
some of the elements have different sentence functions they may be in contrast. Lastly,
there can be an adjective complement – (9).

(7) His face not many admired, while his character still fewer could praise. (Quirk et
al. 1985, 1378)
(8) Traitor he has become and traitor we shall call him. (ibid.)
UTB ve Zlíně, Fakulta humanitních studií 16

(9) Pretty she is but kind she is definitely not.

Concerning the focus in these sentences, it is habitually on the fronted element

and on a verb in the non-fronted part of the sentence. Nonetheless, there are cases with
single focus which is only on the pre-posed item. As an example, Biber provides following
sentence (14), where there is no focus on the verb had.

(10) Only one saucepan we had!

2.2.2 Fronting of objects

It was already indicated above that the object which is put into the initial position is
frequently a demonstrative pronoun. Moreover, as an anaphoric link, it supports the infor-
mation principle, and therefore it contributes to the cohesion.

Nevertheless, Biber and others (1999, 900) here emphasise that it is not a satisfactory
reason for pre-posing them. They add that unstressed object pronouns (e.g. it, him or
them) are never fronted – (11) a) and b), whereas a speaker would commonly stress a de-
monstrative pronoun in a canonical word order. This apparently supports the fact, that one
of the functions of fronting is actually highlighting the constituent and also that the sen-
tence can then be double focused. In fact, it is not possible to stress both elements in the
regular word order when they are next to each other, either in spoken or written form,
comparing examples a) and b) in (12).

(11) a) Toby is bruised because his dad beats him every day.
b) *Toby is bruised because him his dad beats every day.
(12) a) I do not understand this.
b) This I do not understand. (ibid.)

Another type of object that can be fronted is a complement clause. Despite the fact
that this type of clauses holds new information because in canonical word order they would
be at the end of a clause, there is always a pronoun which is related to the previous content.
Pre-posing of complement clauses, as an example (13) shows, also breaks the principle of
end-weight. Additionally, in most cases there is a negation in the main clause which results
in contrast between these two utterances. This again creates a double focused sentence
which would not be achievable without fronting the complement clause. However, the con-
trast may be achieved even without the negation, for instance with the use of verb or sub-
ject – in (14), they vs. we. (Biber et al. 1999, 901)
UTB ve Zlíně, Fakulta humanitních studií 17

(13) Why he came this way I will probably never know. (ibid.)
(14) What they can do, we can do. (ibid.)

None of these examples showed that fronting of objects would be accompanied by the in-
version because it would probably damage the balance of the sentence. (ibid.)

2.2.3 Fronting of predicatives

While no subject-verb inversion appears when the object is fronted, for some kinds
of predicate fronting it is typical – (15). Furthermore, in agreement with Biber et al. (1999,
902), comparatives are used quite often with this kind of pre-posing, in example (16) there
is a comparative item “far more”, which has a cohesive function and it is joined by the
subject-verb inversion.

(15) Shot by nationalist guerrillas were two entirely innocent tourists. (Quirk et al.
1985, 1379)
(16) Far more serious were the severe head injuries; in particular a bruising of the
brain. (Biber et al. 1999, 902)

Another anaphoric linkage with preceding context might be also a definite noun phrase,
fronted as a part of predicate – (17). The meeting is old information, known from the pre-
vious sentence and the new information is at the end, therefore, with this structure, the in-
formation principle is maintained as well.

(17) A group of councillors, along with council officials from North Down, recently
met with representatives from the Board to discuss the move. Present the meeting
were outgoing Mayor Ellie McKay, deputy mayor Jane Copeland... (ibid.)

Fronting of parts, which provide information about proportion is one of the special
types and it is often introduced by the. The subject-verb inversion here depends on the
form and complexity of the subject. The long subject usually shifts with verb – (18), but if
the subject is a pronoun, it ordinarily stays in place – (19). (Biber et al. 1999, 903)

(18) The more general the domain, the more general, selective and tentative are the
statements about its style.
(19) The larger the base, the easier it will be to perform the action.

Subject-verb inversion may occur as well in the sentences with fronted adjective intensi-
fied by an adverb so, although the subject is a pronoun. Again, so refers to the previous
UTB ve Zlíně, Fakulta humanitních studií 18

information. As can be seen in the sentence (20), what follows is normally a comparative
clause. (ibid.)

(20) So preoccupied was she at the moment, (that) she was unaware that Diana was
standing in the arched doorway to the sitting room. (ibid.)

Fronting of non-finite predicates

In agreement with Biber et al. (1999, 905), there are three types of non-finite predi-
cates that can be fronted. The first one is the infinitive predicate which cannot be joined by
inversion because the operator (plus the other auxiliaries, if there are some) has to stay in
place and make the clause finite. Biber also compares this kind of sentence (21) a), with
the regular word order one – (21) b). The fronted verb usually echoes the foregoing con-
text, which makes the text cohesive and it is therefore in agreement with the information
principle. In the second sentence (21) b), the fronted constituent is omitted and the focus is
just on the last item. Comparing that with (21) a), there is clearly a double focus (on did
but also on come down), which means that pre-posed infinitive predicate can have an em-
phatic function, too.

(21) a) I had said he would come down and come down he did.
b) I had said he would come down and he did. (ibid.)

When fronting ed-predicates, the participle becomes an adjective. The action is sup-
plemented with a subject-verb inversion (as an example (22) shows), which then supports
the end-weight principle and the sentence is well balanced. Besides that, the definite noun
phrase in the fronted part indicates old information and thereby also the information prin-
ciple is kept. It is proved also by an indefinite noun phrase as a subject which means that
the information is new. These two principles are, however, broke with a fronting of gone –
(23). Not only the fronted part does not refer back to the previous text, but the subject is a
definite noun phrase. The inversion, however, occurs here as well. (Biber et al. 1999, 906)

(22) Nothing on the walls, with one exception: Tacked over the bed was a yellow,
deckle-edged photograph. (ibid.)
(23) Gone were the crises that had once produced banner headlines.

The last type is fronting of ing-predicates, which is, as far as the information princi-
ple is concerned, similar to fronting of ed-predicates. It again includes the subject-verb
inversion that can be seen in example (24) because the subject is usually heavy. The in-
UTB ve Zlíně, Fakulta humanitních studií 19

verted subject in the first sentence is then located at the beginning of the second one be-
cause it becomes known information. (Biber et al. 1999, 907)

(24) Standing on the step was Father James Morrow, the Roman Catholic priest (...).
Father Morrow felt it his duty to try to appeal face to face to Tony’s parents to al-
low their son to live. (ibid.)

2.2.4 Fronting in dependent clauses

Apart from dependent wh-clauses, where the fronting is quite ordinary, the other
dependent clauses can be fronted only with the use of as or though. However, it is even
more complicated because it is frequently joined by another type of fronting, usually adjec-
tives and adverbs. It is indicated in the examples (25) and (26), and as it shows, there is no
subject-verb inversion. There is no doubt that this structure is mainly for emphasizing the
constituents. (Biber et al. 1999, 908 – 909)

(1) Astounded though she was, Francesca was thrilled and excited. (ibid.)
(2) Hard as I tried, I was not able to do it.

To sum up, the elements that can be fronted are required by the main verb. Fronting
has three functions – to highlight, to contrast and to make the text cohesive. However,
some elements do not meet all of them after they are fronted. Fronting can be divided into
two groups: focus fronting, which gives focus on the fronted element, and topicalisation, in
which case the fronted element does not gain the emphasis and works rather as an ana-
phoric link.

From all of the units that can be fronted and were described above, inversion ap-
pears mostly with pre-posed predicatives, particularly then with the element of compari-
son, ing-predicates and ed-predicates. The exception is when the subject is a pronoun and it
is not stressed, in that case, the subject and verb cannot be inverted. Inversion also does not
occur with fronted objects and infinitive predicates. It seems that whether the inversion is
included or not depends a lot on the complexity of sentence members and principle of end-
weight in order to keep the sentence well balanced.
UTB ve Zlíně, Fakulta humanitních studií 20

3 INVERSION

Generally, inversion is placing the subject in post-verbal position. It is related to the front-
ing and as opposed to it, inversion can rhematize the subject and thus also give it the
prominence – (1), (Tárnyiková 2009, 105).

(1) Up flies the bird. (Adv V S)

Biber and others (1999, 911) mention that in the past, it was not possible to place the
verb in other than the second position in a sentence and the subject did not have to precede
the verb. Thus, any other constituent could be in initial position, which basically entailed
the subject-verb inversion. It was used mainly in dramatic narrative. Nowadays it does not
really matter, how many elements are before the verb but following canonical word order
(SVO), the subject should be in pre-verbal position.

There are two main types of inversion: full inversion, also known as subject-verb
inversion and partial or subject-auxiliary inversion. They are quite different but both of
them are usually a consequence of pre-posing of another part of the sentence.
UTB ve Zlíně, Fakulta humanitních studií 21

II. PRACTICAL PART

UTB ve Zlíně, Fakulta humanitních studií 22

4 RESEARCH

To be added on the basis of research of corpuses BNC and COCA.

UTB ve Zlíně, Fakulta humanitních studií 23

CONCLUSION

No conclusions can be made without the practical part.

UTB ve Zlíně, Fakulta humanitních studií 24

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BOOKS

Aarts, Bas. 2011. Oxford Modern English Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Biber, Douglas, Susan Conrad, and Geoffrey N. Leech. 2002. Longman student grammar
of spoken and written English. Harlow, Essex: Longman.

Birner, Betty, J. And Gregory Ward. 1998. Information Status and Noncanonical Word
Order in English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Co.

Birner, Betty. 1996. The Discourse Function of Inversion in English. – New York: Garland.

B rjars, Kersti, and Kate Burridge. 2001. Introducing English Grammar. London: Arnold.

Chalker, Sylvia, Bas Aarts, and E. S. C. Weiner. 2014. The Oxford Dictionary of English
Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Collins, Peter, and Carmella Hollo. 2010. English Grammar: An Introduction. New York:
Palgrave Macmillan.

Dušková, Libuše. 2003. Mluvnice současné angličtiny na pozadí češtiny. 3rd ed. Praha:
Academia.

Halliday, M.A.K. 1985. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold.

Huddleston, Rodney D. 1988. English Grammar: An Outline. Cambridge: Cambridge Uni-

versity Press.

Huddleston, Rodney, and Geoffrey K. Pullum. 2002. The Cambridge Grammar of the Eng-
lish Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Huddleston, Rodney, and Geoffrey K. Pullum. 2005. A Student’s Introduction to English

Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lambrecht, Knud. 1994. Information Structure and Sentence Form: Topic, Focus, and the
Mental Representations of Discourse Referents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Mereu, Lunella. 1999. Boundaries of Morphology and Syntax. Amsterdam: J. Benjamins.

Prince, Ellen, F. 1981. Toward a Taxonomy of Given-new Information. New York: Aca-
demic Press, quoted in Tárnyiková, Jarmila. 2009. From Text to Texture. Olomouc: Uni-
verzita Palackého v Olomouci.
UTB ve Zlíně, Fakulta humanitních studií 25

Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech, and Jan Startvik. 1994. A Compre-
hensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.

Tárnyiková, Jarmila. 2002. From Text to Texture: An Introduction to Processing Strate-

gies. Olomouc: niverzita Palackého.

Tárnyiková, Jarmila. 2009. From Text to Texture. Olomouc: niverzita Palackého

v Olomouci.

Veselovská, Ludmila, and Joseph Emonds. 2011. A Course in English Syntax: Syllabi for
the Lectures: Examples and Exercises. Olomouc: niverzita Palackého v Olomouci.

ONLINE SOURCES

Akmajian, Adrian. 1970. “On Deriving Cleft Sentences from Pseudo-cleft Sen-
tences”. Linguistic Inquiry 1 (2). The MIT Press: 149–68.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/4177550.

Birner, Betty J.. 1994. “Information Status and Word Order: An Analysis of English Inver-
sion”. Language 70 (2). Linguistic Society of America: 233–59. doi:10.2307/415828.

Guéron, Jacqueline. 1980. “On the Syntax and Semantics of PP Extraposition”.Linguistic

Inquiry 11 (4). The MIT Press: 637–78. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4178188.

Haegeman, Liliane. 2003. “Notes on Long Adverbial Fronting in English and the Left Pe-
riphery”. Linguisti Inquiry 34 (4). The MIT Press: 640–49.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/4179254.

Platzack, Christer, and Inger Rosengren. 1997. “On The Subject Of Imperatives: A Mini-
malist Account Of The Imperative Clause.” Journal Of Comparative Germanic Linguis-
tics 3: 177-224. Accessed December 20, 2015. doi:10.1023/A:1009747522177.

Prince, Ellen. 1978. “A Comparison of Wh-clefts and It-clefts in Discourse”. Language 54

(4). Linguistic Society of America: 883–906. doi:10.2307/413238.
UTB ve Zlíně, Fakulta humanitních studií 26

SEZNAM TABULEK

To be added