Taalportaal - the digital language portal

Dutch
Frisian
Saterfrisian
Afrikaans

Show all

14.3.Right dislocation

quickinfo

This section discusses two types of right dislocation (henceforth: RD), which are illustrated in example (93). Semantically, RD is characterized by the fact that the dislocated phrase adds more specific information to what is said in the preceding clause: in (93), the right-dislocated phrases provide more information about the function of Mr Jansen: he is a manager in some presupposed organization. The two types of RD differ in that afterthoughts provide additional information that is new for the hearer while backgrounded phrases provide information already familiar to the hearer but which may help him to identify the intended reference; cf. Ott & De Vries (2015). Furthermore, afterthoughts but not backgrounded phrases can often be preceded by a special marker such as je weet wel'you probably know who': Ik heb dhr. Jansen gesproken, je weet wel, de directeur.

a.	Ik	heb	dhr. Jànsen	gesproken,	de directeur.	afterthought RD
	I	have	Mr Jansen	spoken	the manager
	'I have spoken to Mr Jansen, the manager.'

b.	Ik	heb	dhr. Jansen	gespròken,	de directeur.	backgrounding RD
	I	have	Mr Jansen	spoken	the manager
	'I have spoken Mr Jansen, the manager.'

Speakers’ judgments seem to differ with respect to the question as to whether the clause-internal correlate of an afterthought can be a weak proform. For some speakers (including the second author of this work) substituting the direct object in the afterthought construction (93a) results in a degraded result, while it is easily possible in the backgrounding construction in (93b). In the remainder of this work we will follow the more permissive variety, according to which examples in (94) are both fully acceptable. We leave it to future research to investigate the differences in speakers’ judgment in more detail.

a.	%	Ik	heb	ʼm	gespròken,	de directeur.	afterthought RD
		I	have	him	spoken	the manager
		'I have spoken him, the manager.'

b.	Ik	heb	ʼm	gespròken,	de directeur.	backgrounding RD
	I	have	him	spoken	the manager
	'I have spoken him, the manager.'

Phonetically, RD constructions are characterized by the fact that the right-dislocated phrase cannot receive sentence accent (indicated by a grave accent in the examples above); this accent is always located on some element in the preceding clause. That sentence accent cannot be placed on the right-dislocated phrase is related to the fact that the latter can be preceded by an intonation break: in the case of afterthoughts this break is normally distinctly present while, at least in casual speech, it is often less prominent in the case of backgrounding. The two types of RD also differ in that afterthoughts are assigned contrastive accent (indicated by small caps), while backgrounded phrases are normally pronounced with a flat intonation contour (that is, without a prominent accent).
This section is organized as follows. Subsection I starts by showing that RD resembles left dislocation (LD) in various respects. Subsection II continues by briefly reviewing a number of differences between RD and extraposition; this partly repeats information which was discussed in more detail in Chapter 12, to which we refer the reader for more information. Subsection III discusses a number of restrictions on right-dislocated phrases and their clause-internal correlate (if present). Subsection IV continues by discussing a number of differences between afterthought RD and backgrounding RD; we will see that these can be traced back to the fact that afterthoughts provide discourse-new while backgrounded phrases provide discourse-old information. Subsection V shows that RD resembles hanging-topic LD in that it is not sensitive to various islands for wh-extraction and Subsection VI discusses a number of word order issues related to RD. Subsection VII, finally, discusses some possible theoretical approaches to RD.

I. A brief comparison between left and right dislocation
II. Right dislocation versus extraposition
III. Restrictions on right-dislocated phrases and their clause-internal correlates
IV. Differences between afterthoughts and backgrounded phrases
V. Island-sensitivity
VI. Word order restrictions
VII. Analyses of RD

[+] I. A brief comparison between left and right dislocation

The two types of RD constructions, illustrated again in the (a)-examples in (95), resemble in various respects the two types of LD constructions discussed in Section 14.2, which are illustrated in the (b)-examples.

a.	Ik	heb	hem gespròken,	de directeur.	afterthought RD
	I	have	him spoken	the manager
	'I spoke to him, the manager.'

a'.	Ik	heb	hem gespròken,	de directeur.	backgrounding RD
	I	have	him spoken	the manager
	'I spoke to him, the manager.'

b.	De directeur,	die	heb	ik	gesproken.	contrastive LD
	the manager	dem	have	I	spoken
	'The manager, I have spoken to him.'

b'.	De directeur,	ik	heb	hem	gesproken.	hanging-topic LD
	the manager	I	have	him	spoken
	'The manager, I have spoken to him.'

First, all four types of dislocated phrases in (95) seem to be clause-external, as all of them have a clause-internal pronominal associate, namely the pronouns hem'him' and die'that'. The fact that the thematic role of the verb is assigned to the pronoun suggests that the dislocated phrases are not licensed within the clause but in some other way. That the dislocated phrases are not part of the clause is also supported by the fact that (like parentheticals) they are separated from the intonation contour of the clause, which, at least in the case of afterthoughts and contrastive left-dislocated phrases, goes hand-in-hand with a distinct intonation break. More reasons for assuming that dislocated phrases are clause-external are that left-dislocated phrases precede the sentence-initial position and that right-dislocated phrases cannot be assigned sentence accent, which is again indicated by a grave accent in the (a)-examples.
Secondly, all four types of dislocated phrases provide more specific information than their clause-internal associate: in (95), they all provide information about the function of the person referred to by the pronoun.
Thirdly, LD and RD both come in two types: one type in which the dislocated phrase is typically accented and one in which the dislocated phrase is normally pronounced with a flat intonation contour. It should be noted, however, that contrastive LD and afterthought RD differ in that the former invites a set of alternative propositions, while the latter simply provides discourse-new information. This can be brought to light by the examples in (96): while (96a) is fully compatible with a contrastive maar-phrase, the use of a contrastive maar-phrase gives rise to a somewhat marked result in (96b). Note in passing that this example becomes acceptable if the weak referential pronoun is replaced by a contrastively stressed pronoun, but in that case the contrastive phrase is licensed by the pronoun and not by the afterthought.

a.	Jan,	die	heb	ik	niet	gezien	(maar	Marie	wel).	contrastive LD
	Jan	dem	have	I	not	seen	but	Marie	aff
	'Jan, I havenʼt seen him, but I did see Marie.'

b.	Ik	heb	ʼm	niet	gezien,	Jan,	(??maar	Marie	wel).	afterthought RD
	I	have	him	not	seen	Jan	but	Marie	aff
	'I havenʼt seen him, Jan.'

Finally, example (97a) shows that right-dislocated phrases may provide information that may help the speaker to identify the intended reference of the clause-internal nominal correlate, but example (97b) shows that the right-dislocated phrase may also be an epithet. If the nominal correlate is predicative, as in (97c), the right-dislocated phrase provides a more precise qualification.

a.	dat	hij	te laat	kwam,	mijn broer.
	that	he	too late	came	my brother
	'that he arrived too late, my brother.'

b.	dat	Peter	te laat	kwam,	de sukkel.
	that	Peter	too late	came	the twerp
	'that Peter came too late, the twerp.'

c.	dat	Jan een groot kunstenaar is,	de beste schilder die ik ken.
	that	Jan a great artist is	the best painter that I know
	'that Jan is a great artist, the best painter I know.'

The fact that left-dislocated phrases do not seem to have such “modifying” function is the principal reason why we will use different notions for the relation between the left and right-dislocated phrases and their clause-internal associate: resumption versus correlation. Left-dislocated phrases provide information that is simply taken up again by their clause-internal associate, while right-dislocated phrases provide more specific information than their clause-internal associate (or about it).

[+] II. Right dislocation versus extraposition

Right-dislocated and extraposed phrases both follow the verbs in clause-final position; consequently, it may sometimes be difficult to distinguish the two cases. In the case of nominal arguments, confusion will not easily arise because extraposition of such arguments is normally not possible. One example is given in (98); for more examples, see Section 12.2, sub I.

Ik	heb	<de directeur >	gesproken <*de directeur >.	extraposition
I	have	the manager	spoken
'I have spoken to the manager.'

Furthermore, nominal arguments are generally obligatorily present, as a result of which right-dislocated nominal phrases will typically have an overt clause-internal correlate, as in (93) and the (a)-examples in (95). That means that right-dislocated nominal phrases without a correlate are only expected in the case of pseudo-intransitive verbs and (optional) indirect objects. Example (99) shows that the former case indeed occurs, but only if the right-dislocated phrase functions as an afterthought, that is, if it is accented and provides new information.

Jan heeft	altijd	graag	gerookt,	sigaren/*sigaren.	RD
Jan has	always	gladly	smoked	cigars/cigars
'Jan has always liked to smoke, cigars.'

That we are dealing with a right-dislocated phrase in (99) is immediately clear from its position after the clause-final verb gerookt'smoked'. However, if no clause-final verb is present, as in the examples in (100), confusion could arise with cases in which the object occupies its regular position in the middle field of the clause, but the intonation pattern normally provides sufficient information to distinguish the two: the direct object in (100a) is integrated in the intonation contour of the clause and can carry sentence accent; the afterthought in (100b) is preceded by an intonation break and assigned contrastive accent while the sentence accent is assigned to some other element in the preceding clause.

100

a.	Jan rookt	graag	(*vooral)	sigàren.	object occupies the middle field
	Jan smokes	gladly	especially	cigars
	'Jan likes to smoke cigars.'

b.	Jan ròòkt	graag,	(vooral)	sigaren.	RD
	Jan smokes	gladly	especially	cigars
	'Jan likes to smoke, (especially) cigars.'

The distribution of the focus particle vooral'especially' can also be used as a test for recognizing RD in examples such as (100). The examples in (101) show that afterthoughts can easily be preceded by this element if the clause-internal correlate is indefinite or not present.

101

a.	Jan heeft	veel boeken gekocht,	vooral romans.
	Jan has	many books bought	especially novels
	'Jan has bought many books, especially novels.'

b.	Jan heeft	altijd	graag	gerookt,	vooral sigaren.
	Jan has	always	gladly	smoked	especially cigars
	'Jan has always liked to smoke, especially cigars.'

Clause-internal phrases, on the other hand, can only be preceded by a focus particle if they are scrambled into a designated focus position, which precedes manner adverbs such as graag'gladly'; cf. (102). The fact that vooral can immediately precede the direct object sigaren in (100b) but not in (100a) therefore supports the proposed analysis.

102

a.	dat	Jan	<vooral romans>	graag <*vooral romans>	leest.
	that	Jan	especially novels	gladly	reads
	'that Jan especially likes to read novels.'

b.	dat	Jan <vooral sigaren>	graag <*vooral sigaren>	rookt.
	that	Jan especially cigars	gladly	smokes
	'that Jan especially likes to smoke cigars.'

The second case in which a right-dislocated nominal phrase may be expected to occur without an overt correlate pertains to ditransitive constructions without an (overt) indirect object, but it seems that such cases do not occur. Example (103b) shows that they are degraded regardless of whether the right-dislocated phrase expresses new or old information; this may be due to the fact that the alternative with a prepositional indirect object in (103b') is preferred.

103

a.	dat	Jan	(zijn vrouw)	graag	bloemen	geeft.
	that	Jan	his wife	gladly	flowers	gives
	'that Jan likes to give (his wife) flowers.'

b.		dat	Jan graag	bloemen	geeft,	(vooral)	zijn ??vrouw/*vrouw.	RD
		that	Jan gladly	flowers	gives	especially	his wife/wife

b'.	dat	Jan graag	bloemen	geeft,	(vooral)	aan zijn vrouw.	RD
	that	Jan gladly	flowers	gives	especially	to his wife
	'Jan likes to give flowers, especially to his wife.'

Because prepositional indirect objects can be extraposed, confusion between extraposition and RD may arise in such cases, but again the intonation contour will generally provide sufficient information to identify the two cases (cf. Ott & De Vries 2015): the extraposed prepositional indirect object in (104a) is integrated in the intonation contour of the clause and can even carry sentence accent; the afterthought in (104b) is separated from the preceding clause by a distinct intonation break and is assigned contrastive accent. The two cases again differ in that only the latter can be preceded by the marker vooral.

104

a.	dat	Jan graag	bloemen	geeft	(*vooral)	aan zijn vròuw.	extraposition
	that	Jan gladly	flowers	gives	especially	to his wife
	'Jan likes to give flowers to his wife.'

b.	dat	Jan graag	blòemen	geeft,	(vooral)	aan zijn vrouw.	RD
	that	Jan gladly	flowers	gives	especially	to his wife
	'Jan likes to give flowers, especially to his wife.'

Prepositional objects that are obligatorily realized will not pose any problems either. The examples in (105) show that in such cases right-dislocated PPs typically have an overt clause-internal correlate, while extraposed PPs cannot be combined with such correlates. Observe that in the case of prepositional objects, the right-dislocated phrase need not be an afterthought but can also be backgrounded.

105

a.	dat	Jan	(*ernaar)	verlangt	naar vakantie.	extraposition
	that	Jan	for.it	longs	for vacation
	'that Jan is longing for a vacation.'

b.	dat	Jan	*(ernaar)	verlangt,	naar vakantie/vakantie.	RD
	that	Jan	for.it	longs	for vacation/vacation
	'that Jan is longing for.it, for a vacation.'

If the prepositional object is optional, as in the case of wachten (op)'to wait for', similar problems may arise as with pseudo-intransitive verbs in that we mainly have to rely on the intonation pattern of the construction if the correlate of the right-dislocated PP is not overtly expressed.

106

a.	dat	Jan	al	weken	(*erop)	wacht	op zijn bòeken.	extraposition
	that	Jan	already	weeks	for.it	waits	for his books
	'that Jan is already waiting for weeks for his books.'

b.	dat	Jan	al	weken	(erop)	wacht,	op zijn boeken/boeken.	RD
	that	Jan	already	weeks	for.it	waits	for his books/books
	'that Jan has already been waiting for weeks, for his books.'

Fortunately, there is an additional syntactic test that may help us distinguish extraposition from RD, namely VP-topicalization. While extraposed phrases can be pied piped under VP-topicalization, right-dislocated phrases are generally stranded.

107

a.		[VP	Wachten op zijn boeken]	doet	hij	al	weken.	extraposition
		[VP	wait for his books	does	he	already	weeks

b.		[VP	Wachten]	doet	hij	al	weken,	op zijn boeken/boeken.	RD
		[VP	wait	does	he	already	weeks	for his books/books

b'.	*	[VP	Wachten,	op zijn boeken/boeken]	doet	hij	al	weken.	RD
	*	*[VP	wait	for his books	does	he	already	weeks

Adverbial PPs pose similar problems as optional prepositional objects because they are normally optional, as shown for a comitative met-PP in (108a) and a locative PP in (109a). Consequently, right-dislocated adverbial PPs without a correlate in the preceding clause could in principle be confused with their extraposed counterparts, but the (b)- and (c)-examples show that the two diagnostics used above, intonation and VP-topicalization, may help us make the correct distinction.

108

a.	dat	Jan graag	(met Peter)	schaakt.
	that	Jan gladly	with Peter	plays.chess
	'that Jan likes to play chess (with Peter).'

b.		dat Jan	graag	(*met hem)	schaakt	met Peter.	extraposition
		that Jan	gladly	with him	plays.chess	with Peter

b'.		[VP	Schaken	met Peter]	doet	Jan	graag.
		[VP	play.chess	with Peter	does	Jan	gladly

c.		dat	Jan graag	(met hem)	schaakt,	met Peter/Peter.	RD
		that	Jan gladly	with him	plays.chess	with Peter/Peter

c'.		[VP	Schaken]	doet	Jan graag,	met Peter/Peter.
		[VP	play.chess	does	Jan gladly	with Peter/Peter

c''.	*	[VP	Schaken,	met Peter/Peter]	doet	Jan graag.
	*	*[VP	play.chess	with Peter/Peter	does	Jan gladly

109

a.	dat	Jan graag	(op zijn club)	schaakt.
	that	Jan gladly	at his club	plays.chess
	'That Jan likes to play chess (at his club).'

b.		dat Jan	(*daar)	graag	schaakt	op zijn club.	extraposition
		that Jan	there	gladly	plays.chess	at his club

b'.		[VP	Schaken	op zijn club]	doet	Jan	graag.
		[VP	play.chess	at his club	does	Jan	gladly

c.		dat	Jan	(daar)	graag	schaakt,	op zijn club/club.	RD
		that	Jan	there	gladly	plays.chess	at his club/club

c'.		[VP	Schaken]	doet	Jan graag,	op zijn club/club.
		[VP	play.chess	does	Jan gladly	at his club/club

c''.	*	[VP	Schaken,	op zijn club/club]	doet	Jan graag.
	*	*[VP	play.chess	at his club/club	does	Jan gladly

Some clausal constituents such as supplementives cannot be extraposed while they can be right-dislocated. This can also be brought to light more clearly by means of VP-topicalization as they cannot be pied-piped if they are in postverbal position.

110

a.	Jan is daarnet	<kwaad>	weggelopen <*kwaad>.	no extraposition
	Jan is just.now	angry	away-walked
	'Jan walked away angry just now.'

a'.		[VP	<kwaad>	weggelopen <*kwaad>]	is Jan daarnet.
		[VP	angry	away-walked	is Jan just.now

b.	Jan is daarnet	weggelopen,	kwaad.	RD
	Jan is just.now	away-walked	angry
	'Jan walked away angry just now.'

b'.		[VP	Weggelopen]	is Jan daarnet,	kwaad.
		[VP	away-walked	is Jan just.now	angry

b''.	*	[VP	Weggelopen,	kwaad]	is Jan daarnet.
	*	*[VP	away-walked	angry	is Jan just.now

The same pattern can be seen in various types of (especially non-prepositional) adverbial phrases headed by a manner adverb such as zorgvuldig'carefully', a temporal adverb such as morgen'tomorrow', or a modal adverb such as misschien'maybe'. It can again be brought to light by means of VP-topicalization as these modifiers must be stranded, as illustrated in (111) for the manner adverb zorgvuldig'carefully'.

111

a.	Jan heeft	het boek	<zorgvuldig>	gelezen <*zorgvuldig>.	no extraposition
	Jan has	the book	carefully	read
	'Jan has read the book carefully.'

a'.		[VP	zorgvuldig	gelezen]	heeft	Jan het boek.
		[VP	carefully	read	has	Jan the book

b.		Jan heeft	het boek	gelezen*(,)	zorgvuldig.	RD
		Jan has	the book	read	carefully

b'.		[VP	gelezen]	heeft	Jan het boek,	zorgvuldig.
		[VP	read	has	Jan the book	carefully

b''.	*	[VP	gelezen,	zorgvuldig]	heeft	Jan het boek.
	*	*[VP	read	carefully	has	Jan the book

Because the two diagnostics have been more systematically applied to a wider range of constructions in our discussion of extraposition, we will not digress on this issue any further here but refer the reader to Chapter 12 for more discussion.

[+] III. Restrictions on right-dislocated phrases and their clause-internal correlates

Backgrounded phrases resemble hanging topics in that they are pronounced with a flat intonation contour, but the examples in (112) show that they are more flexible with respect to their categorial status; while hanging topics are typically nominal in nature, backgrounded phrases can be nominal, clausal, adjectival, or adpositional. The examples in (112) also show that the clause-internal correlate of the backgrounded phrase may perform various syntactic functions: it can be an argument, as in the (a)-examples, a complementive (112b), or an adverbial phrase (112c). The correlate is typically a phonetically light element, like the pronouns ʼm'him' and het'it' or the R-word er'there', although the phonetically heavier demonstrative forms like die/dat'that' and daar'there' are occasionally found as well.

112

a.	Ik	heb	ʼm	niet	meer	gezien,	Peter.	noun phrase
	I	have	him	not	anymore	seen	Peter
	'I havenʼt seen him anymore, Peter.'

a'.	Hij	heeft	ʼt	me gisteren	verteld,	dat hij vertrekt.	clause
	he	has	it	me yesterday	told	that he leaves
	'He told it to me yesterday, that he is leaving.'

b.	Ik	ben	ʼt	mijn hele leven	geweest,	gelukkig.	AP
	I	am	it	my whole life	been	happy
	'I have been it my whole life, happy.'

c.	Ik	ben	er	gisteren	nog	geweest,	in Utrecht.	PP
	I	am	there	yesterday	prt	been	in Utrecht
	'I was there yesterday, in Utrecht.'

Judgments on the examples in (112) do not seem to change if we assign contrastive accent to the right-dislocated phrase, that is, afterthoughts have the same properties as backgrounded phrases, but the correlate can more easily be heavy or phrasal. This is illustrated in (113).

113

a.	Ik	heb	die jongen	niet	meer	gezien,	Peter.	noun phrase
	I	have	that boy	not	anymore	seen	Peter
	'I havenʼt seen that boy anymore, Peter.'

a'.	Hij	heeft	me dat	gisteren	verteld,	dat hij vertrekt.	clause
	he	has	me that	yesterday	told	that he leaves
	'He told me that yesterday, that he is leaving.'

b.	Ik	ben	dat	eigenlijk	mijn hele leven	geweest,	gelukkig.	AP
	I	am	it	in.fact	my whole life	been	happy
	'I have in fact been that my whole life, happy.'

c.	Ik	ben	daar	gisteren	nog	geweest,	in Utrecht.	PP
	I	have	there	yesterday	prt	been	in Utrecht
	'I have been there yesterday, in Utrecht.'

Right-dislocated phrases add to the information expressed by their correlates: (114a) presupposes that the hearer does not know that Mr Jansen is the manager, and (114b) suggests that the hearer may confuse the intended referent with someone who is not the manager. The right-dislocated phrase and its correlate can be interchanged but then it is presupposed that the hearer does not know the name of the manager or may confuse the intende