Download Syntax I. Word order and information structure 1. Wide scope

SYNTAX
I. Word order and information structure
1. Wide scope; informative context
Both Polish and English are classified as SVO languages. In wide scope, informative context, where
all the sentence elements are relatively new, both Polish and English use SVO as the default option.
(1) a. Popyt kreuje podaż
b. Byt określa świadomość
c. (Co się stało?) Szczenię pogryzło prosię.
Polish allows for the VSO order in a somewhat archaic literary style, as well as in proverbs and folk
song lyrics, these are, however, rather unproductive and strongly marked in contemporary (especially
spoken) Polish.
(2) a. Miał Mickiewicz wielu wrogów i w kraju i zagranicą
b. Siała baba mak
c. Nie wie lewica co czyni prawica
d. Trafiła kosa na kamień
The situation is different with intransitive and linking verbs and existential expressions, where
(A)VS(C) is the neutral order.
(3) a. Przychodzi baba do lekarza
b. Przyszedł list z Urzędu Miasta
c. W lodówce jest mnóstwo jedzenia.
d. Był sobie człowiek
In English either SVC word order is retained (4a) or the existential there is used (4b).
(4) a. A letter arrived from the City Council.
b. There is plenty of food in the fridge.
2. Narrow scope; contrastive context
Wide scope informative context is rather rare in reality, where constant foregrounding of new and
backgrounding of old information is taking place, and where words may be anaphoric not only to
previously mentioned but also situationally defined antecedents. All this gives rise to changes in stress
placement, word order, and sentence structure. Three general strategies can be applied in both Polish
and English with varying popularity to focalise an element.
1. Stress shift.
Both in Polish and English, if the informative wide scope interpretation of a sentence changes into a
contrastive one, the sentence stress is shifted, or narrowed down, to the foregrounded element. In other
words, if you want to make something important just stress it, retaining the SVO word order
(examples (5a,b)), or, if it happens to be the last word in a sentence, narrow down the focus (5c) (a
mental operation, as the main stress will fall on it anyway). Example (6) shows how the focus of B’s
utterances changes from wide to narrow with the same stress pattern).
(5) a. My neighbour is building a garage.
Mój sąsiąd buduje garaż (a nie mój brat)
b. My neighbour is building a garage.
Mój sąsiąd buduje garaż (a nie kupuje)
c. My neighbour is building a garage
Mój sąsiad buduje garaż (a nie dom)
(6) a. My neighbor is building a fence
b. Speaker A: What's this noise?
Speaker B: [F My neighbor is building a fence]
c. Speaker A: What's your neighbor doing these days?
Speaker B: My neighbor [F is building a fence]
d. Speaker A: What's your neighbor building?
Speaker B: My neighbor is building [F a fence]
3. Departures from the SVO word order
3.1 Topicalisation
Polish is often described as a free word order language. However, each variation in the word order
brings about consequences in the interpretation of a given sentence, thus (almost) excluding the
alleged freedom of ordering (see Exercises 1 and 2).
Terms: focus (=rheme) – new information (pol. remat)
topic (=theme) – old information (pol. temat)
We will also use the term contrastive topic, to refer to the sentence element that is both thematic and
contrastive as in (7) below:
(7) Kotu dam mleko, a psu wodę.
cT
In English fronting of the topic element is restricted to high style and register, in Polish topicalisation
is very popular.
(8) Syntax, I really like
In (9) below Piotr is the Focus and Ania the Topic, in (a) Piotr is focalized through stress shift, in (b)
through changed word order.
(9) Kto zaprosił Anię?
a. Piotr zaprosił Anię
b. Anię zaprosił Piotr.
3.1.1 Topicalisation with the subject present
SVO (A)n Ania poznała Krzysia na obozie płetwonurków
SVOO(A)n Piotr podał Ani tacę.
SV Marian przyszedł.
SVOC Mirek uważa Sławka za dobrego kolegę
(SVC (A)n Grześ został strażakiem 5 lat temu)
subject – podmiot (grupa podmiotu)
verb- orzeczenie
object – dopełnienie
complement – orzecznik
copula (=linking verb) – łącznik
adverbial (~ adjunct) - okolicznik
In principle, Polish is a focus last language. Topic, especially the contrastive topic will appear in the
sentence initial position (10). There is an alternative to this ordering, though (see section 3.2)
(10) Tacę Piotr podał Ani
(c)T T T F.
3.2 To-focus
When preceded by to, foci in Polish can be also placed in the sentence initial position, similarly to
English cleft sentences.
(11) To Piotrkowi Michał dał klucze.
F.
Any sentence element with the exception of the verb (contrary to English, see (13)) can be placed in
sentence initial position when preceded by the focal to.
Notice that with the focus shifted, the basic SV(Od) is retained in the remainder of the sentence. Any
manipulation here instantly focalises the last element, thus giving rise to two foci, which is
unacceptable.
(12) a. *To Piotrkowi Michał klucze dał.
F. F?
b. Piotrkowi Michał klucze dał (a Kaziowi zabrał).
cT F
(13) It was open the door that he did.
3. 3. Passivisation/impersonal construction
Consider (14) and its two possible Polish counterparts. While it can’t be said that the passive (14c) is
unacceptaple, for many a native speaker of Polish the impersonal (14b) would sound more natural.
The passive participles in Polish connect with the copula być and perfective zostać (lit. become) and in
most contexts have an adjectival rather than verbal character. (cf. Zabrocki (1981)) That is why the use
of być, zostać, plus past participle is more restricted in Polish than in English.
(14) a. You were seen
b. Widziano cię
c. Byłeś widziany
II. Overt and covert subjects
1. Some rules
Polish is a pro-drop language, which means that, unlike in English, in certain contexts the subject is
omitted. The subject in Polish can be omitted only when it is deictic (15a) or anaphoric (15b-d)
(contextually or lexically) . If there is ambiguity, (both the subject and the object have agreement
features potentially matching the verb (d)) then the omitted subject is coreferential with the subject
(and not object) of the previous clause.
(15) a. Idziemy na piechotę.
b. Piotr pomagał rodzicom jak mógł. Był bardzo zapracowany.
c. Piotr pomagał rodzicom jak mógł. Byli bardzo zapracowani.
d. Rodzice pomagali swoim synom jak mogli. RODZICE Byli bardzo zapracowani.
Deictic subjects (1st and 2nd person singular and plural) when pronominal are topics
(16) a. My przyszliśmy do was (a oni przyjechali)
b. My do was przyszliśmy, (a wy do nas nie)
In wide-scope, informative context in Polish these subjects are dropped.
(17) Przyszliśmy do was.
Similarly, 3rd person pronominal subjects are (usually contrastive) topics
(18) a. Piotr nie chciał nam przeszkadzać. On nam chciał pomóc.
b. Piotr chciał nam pomóc. Zrobił wszystko co mógł.
c. Dzieci nie bawiły się w ogrodzie. One się tam uczyły.
Anaphoric 3rd person subjects can be also iterated lexical NPs
(19) Piotr nie chciał nam przeszkadzać. Piotr nam chciał pomóc.
2. Pro drop and word order
With pro-drop sentences the topic first, focus last order is still operative in Polish.
(20) a. Daliśmy psu mleko.
b. Mleko daliśmy psu (a wodę kotu), etc.
The long pronominal forms: jego, jemu, tobie, are either contrastive topics or foci
(18) Tobie dam mleko, a jemu wodę.
(19) Wodę daję tobie.
The short pronominal forms (the clitics ci, mu, go) are never focal or contrastive.
(20) Ufam ci (vs Ufam tobie)
III. Syntactic contrasts
1. Structural differences
a) presence/lack of lexical categories, e.g., articles
b) presence/lack of a PS rule, e.g.,
VP --> być + NPdat + NPgen + NPnom (with three consecutive NPs)
Jest nam ich żal. (cf. E We feel pity for them.)
Polish S --> NP + VP, but also S --> VP vs. English S --> NP + VP
Thus in E the subject NP is obligatory, but in P is not realized in:
> Pronominal Subject Deletion, e.g.,
(On) wyjechał z Poznania.
Tomek powiedział, że (on) się zgadza.
> and in subjectless constructions:
> 3rd person sg. neuter verb (states, presence or absence): Jest nam przyjemnie. (E We’re cool.)
> non-inflected form of verb: (Jest) widać stąd miasto. (E The town can be seen ...)
> structures denoting absence or disappearance/increase: Szynki (już) nie ma. (E We’ve run out of
ham.)
> PPs: Z nim / u niego / przy nim (?) / w nim (?) jest coraz gorzej. (E He’s doing much worse.)
> 3rd person sg neuter reflexive verb (actions without specified agent or with an implied agent):
Podaje się tu kawę. (E Coffee is served here.)
> -no, -to impersonal verb forms: Pobito Henia. (E Henio has been beaten up.)
> 3rd person pl. verbs: W Poznaniu otworzyli nowe kino. (A new cinema has been opened in
Poznań/They opened a new cinema in Poznań.)
2. Categorial differences
> corresponding elements in equivalent (semantically) and congruent sentences belong to different
syntactic categories
a) adv in P – adj in E
> both languages allow adjectives and adverbs after transitive and intransitive verbs, but P uses an
adverbs in two cases:
a) verbs of sensory perception, and b) structures with an AdvP referring to a property of the object
denoted by the direct object noun
I feel bad – Czuję się źle.
They painted the wall black. – Pomalowali ścianę na czarno.
b) modal in E – main verb in P
> both in P and E modals do not appear with infinitives and cannot be preceded by another auxiliary;
but some P equivalents behave like main verbs:
> móc, musieć (can/may, must), e.g., Chciałbym móc pojechać do LA, On mógł musieć to zrobić.
> można, trzeba, e.g., będzie można/trzeba to zrobić
c) NP in P – PP in E
> genitive vs of-phrase, e.g., wierzchołek góry (E the top of the mountain)
> genitive and instrumental objects after reflexives vs prep objects, e.g., Chwalił się swoją odwagą.
(He boasted of his courage.)
> instrumental and manner adverbials vs PP, e.g., Poczęstuj go cygarem. (E Treat him to a cigar.)
> time adverbials – PP (but also reverse situations), e.g., Wiosną topnieją śniegi. (E Snow melts in
spring.)
3. Functional contrasts
> change of syntactic function between equivalent sentences
> P subject – E direct object, e.g., Klucze zginęły Jankowi. (E John lost the keys.)
> P indirect object – E subject, e.g.,
Brakuje nam pieniędzy. – We lack money.
Jest jej zimno. – She feels cold. (jest ‘zimna’?)
> P indirect object – E direct object, e.g., Ona pogratulowała mu. (E She congratulated him.)
> P indirect object – E possessive attribute, e.g., Koledze urodził się syn. (My friend’s son was born.)
> P direct object – E indirect object, e.g., Uczyłem dzieci angielskiego. (E I taught the children
English.)
> P adv noun in P – E direct object, e.g., Żyli życiem beztroskim. (E They lived an easy life.)
> in modal constructions either a verb (dać, mieć, prowadzić) or a construction V+NP can be used;
both or just one can be present in one of the languages, e.g.,
mieć pewność/być pewnym have certainty/be certain
mieć nadzieję have a hope/hope
spojrzeć take a look/look
References
Fisiak, Jacek et al. 1978. An introductory English-Polish contrastive grammar. Warszawa: PWN. (21-41)
Rothstein, Robert A. 1993. “Polish”, in: Bernard Comrie and Greville G. Corbett (eds), The Slavonic languages. London,
686-758. (723-750)
Siewierska, Anna, 1993. “Syntactic weight vs. information structure and word order variation in Polish”, Journal of
Linguistics 29/2: 233-265.