Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Journal of African Languages and Linguistics

Ed. by Ameka, Felix K. / Amha, Azeb

IMPACT FACTOR 2017: 0.800

CiteScore 2017: 0.76

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2017: 0.327
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2017: 1.126

See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 37, Issue 1


Discourse functions of focus marking in Avatime

Saskia van Putten
Published Online: 2016-06-15 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/jall-2016-0003


Avatime is a Kwa language spoken in Ghana. 1 It has a focus construction in which the focused element is placed in clause-initial position and marked with an extra-high tone. In this paper I discuss the functions of this focus construction, mostly based on a corpus of spontaneous discourse. The focus construction can mark focus on subjects, objects, adjuncts and verbs. Focus marking is usually interpreted as narrow focus on the focus-marked element, but the focus may be wider. Focus marking is not obligatory. In answers to questions, it is rarely used, except when the focused element is the subject. In other contexts, the focus construction is mostly used for contrastive purposes, indicating there are alternatives to the focused element or that the focused element is unexpected. These functions can be unified in the definition of focus marking as highlighting the common-ground update.

Keywords: focus; information structure; Avatime; Kwa languages


  • Ameka, Felix K. 2010. Information packaging constructions in Kwa: Micro-variation and typology. In Enoch O. Aboh & James Essegbey (eds.), Topics in Kwa syntax (Studies in natural language and linguistic theory 78), 141–176. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar

  • Bisang, Walter & Remi Sonaiya. 2000. Information structuring in Yoruba. Linguistics 38(1). 169–197.Google Scholar

  • Bobuafor, Mercy. 2013. A grammar of Tafi. Leiden: Leiden University dissertation.Google Scholar

  • Defina, Rebecca. in press (a). Serial verb constructions and their subtypes in Avatime. Studies in Language.

  • Defina, Rebecca. in press (b). Tense, aspect, and mood in Avatime. Afrika und Übersee.

  • Dik, Simon C. 1997. The theory of Functional Grammar. Part 1: The structure of the clause. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

  • Du Bois, John W. 1987. The discourse basis of ergativity. Language 63(4). 805–855.Google Scholar

  • É. Kiss, Katalin. 1998. Identificational focus versus information focus. Language 74(2). 245–273.Google Scholar

  • Fiedler, Ines, Katharina Hartmann, Brigitte Reineke, Anne Schwarz & Malte Zimmermann. 2010. Subject focus in West-African languages. In Malte Zimmermann & Caroline Féry (eds.), Information structure: theoretical, typological, and experimental perspectives, 234–257. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

  • Ford, Kevin C. 1971. Aspects of Avatime syntax: University of Ghana, Legon dissertation.

  • Güldemann, Tom, Ines Fiedler, Yukiko Morimoto & Kirill Prokhorov. 2010. Preposed verb doubling and predicate-centered focus. Paper presented at the International Conference of the SFB 632 “Information structure”, University of Potsdam and Humboldt University of Berlin, July 8–10.

  • Krifka, Manfred. 2007. Basic notions of information structure. Interdisciplinary Studies on Information Structure 6. 13–55.Google Scholar

  • Lambrecht, Knud. 1994. Information structure and sentence form: Topic, focus, and the mental representations of discourse referents. (Cambridge Studies in Linguistics 71). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Lambrecht, Knud. 2000. When subjects behave like objects: an analysis of the merging of S and O in sentence-focus constructions across languages. Studies in Language 24(3). 611–682.Google Scholar

  • Levinson, Stephen C. 2000. Presumptive meanings: the theory of generalized conversational implicature. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar

  • Matić, Dejan. 2015. Information structure in linguistics. In James D. Wright (ed.), International encyclopedia of the social and behavioural sciences (2nd edn.), 95–99. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar

  • Matić, Dejan & Daniel Wedgwood. 2013. The meanings of focus: The significance of an interpretation-based category in cross-linguistic analysis. Journal of Linguistics 49. 127–163.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • van Putten, Saskia. 2013. The meaning of the Avatime additive particle tsye. In Maria Balbach, Lena Benz, Susanne Genzel, Mira Grubic, Agata Renans, Sören Schalowski, Maja Stegenwallner & Amir Zeldes (eds.), Information structure: Empirical perspectives on theory, 55–74. Potsdam: Universitätsverlag Potsdam.Google Scholar

  • van Putten, Saskia. 2014. Information structure in Avatime. Nijmegen: Radboud University Nijmegen dissertation.Google Scholar

  • Reineke, Brigitte. 2007. Identificational operation as a focus strategy in Byali. In Enoch Oladé Aboh, Katharina Hartmann & Malte Zimmermann (eds.), Focus strategies in African languages (Trends in Linguistics, Studies and Monographs 191), 223–240. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

  • Rooth, Mats. 1992. A theory of focus interpretation. Natural Language Semantics 1. 75–116.Google Scholar

  • Schuh, Russell G. 1995. Aspects of Avatime phonology. Studies in African Linguistics 24(1). 31–67.Google Scholar

  • Selkirk, Elisabeth O. 1995. Sentence prosody: Intonation, stress and phrasing. In John Goldsmith (ed.), The handbook of phonological theory, 550–569. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar

  • Skopeteas, Stavros & Gisbert Fanselow. 2010. Focus in Georgian and the expression of contrast. Lingua 120. 1370–1391.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Skopeteas, Stavros, Ines Fiedler, Samantha Hellmuth, Anne Schwarz, Ruben Stoel, Gisbert Fanselow, Caroline Féry & Manfred Krifka (eds.). 2006. Questionnaire on information structure (QUIS): reference manual, vol. 4 Working Papers of the SFB632, Interdisciplinary Studies on Information Structure (ISIS). Potsdam: Universitätsverlag Potsdam.

  • Vallduví, Enric & Maria Vilkuna. 1998. On rheme and kontrast. In Peter Culicover & L McNally (eds.), The limits of syntax (Syntax and Semantics 29), 79–108. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar

  • Watters, John Robert. 1979. Focus in Aghem: a study of its formal correlates and typology. In Larry M. Hyman (ed.), Aghem grammatical structure. with special reference to noun classes, tense-aspect and focus marking (Southern California occasional papers in linguistics 7), 137–188. Los Angeles, CA: Department of Linguistics, University of Southern California.Google Scholar

  • Zimmermann, Malte. 2008. Contrastive focus. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 55. 347–360.Google Scholar

About the article

Published Online: 2016-06-15

Published in Print: 2016-06-01

Citation Information: Journal of African Languages and Linguistics, Volume 37, Issue 1, Pages 91–130, ISSN (Online) 1613-3811, ISSN (Print) 0167-6164, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/jall-2016-0003.

Export Citation

©2016 by De Gruyter Mouton.Get Permission

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in