View More View Less
  • 1 Pázmány Péter Catholic University
Full access

The paper reports on three experiments in which the exhaustive interpretation of sentences containing the focus particle csak ‘only’, structural focus constructions, and sentences with neutral intonation and word order were investigated. The results obtained not only reveal the developmental trajectory of the adult-like comprehension of each sentence type, but also contribute to the discussion concerning the semantic or pragmatic nature of their exhaustive meaning component. As the three construction types were judged in different ways on a three-point scale, the findings appear to support the hypothesis according to which exhaustivity is part of the asserted content of sentences with csak ‘only’, it is context-independently presupposed in the case of structural focus, and in certain contexts it can arise as an implicature in the case of neutral utterances, as well.

  • Abusch, Dorit. 2002. Lexical alternatives as a source of pragmatic presuppositions. In B. Jackson (ed.) Proceedings of the 12th Semantics and Linguistic Theory Conference. New York: CLC Publications. 119.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Balázs, Andrea and Anna Babarczy. 2014. A felnőttek és a négyévesek ige előtti fókuszos mondat értelmezése [Adults’ and four-year-olds’ interpretation of sentences with preverbal focus]. Paper presented at Pszicholingvisztikai Nyári Egyetem, Balatonalmádi, Hungary.

  • Beaver, David and Brady Clark. 2008. Sense and sensitivity. Malden, MA & Oxford: Blackwell.

  • Bende-Farkas, Ágnes. 2009. Adverbs of quantification, it-clefts and Hungarian focus. In K. É. Kiss (ed.) Adverbs and adverbial adjuncts at the interfaces (Interface explorations 20). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 317348.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Berger, Frauke and Barbara Höhle. 2012. Restrictions on addition: Children’s interpretation of the focus particles “auch” ‘also’ and “nur” ‘only’ in German. Journal of Child Language 39. 383410.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Büring, Daniel and Manuel Križ. 2013. It’s that, and that’s it! Exhaustivity and homogeneity presuppositions in clefts (and definites). Semantics & Pragmatics 6. 129.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Crain, Stephen, Weija Ni and Laura Conway. 1994. Learning, parsing and modularity. In C. Clifton, L. Frazier and K. Rayner (eds.) Perspectives on sentence processing. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. 443467.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Destruel, Emilie, Daniel Velleman, Edgar Onea, Dylan Bumford, Jingyang Xue and David Beaver. 2015. A cross-linguistic study of the non-at-issueness of exhaustive inferences. In F. Schwarz (ed.) Experimental perspectives on presuppositions. Berlin: Springer. 135156.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • É. Kiss, Katalin. 1981. Syntactic relations in Hungarian, a “free” word order language. Linguistic Inquiry 12. 185215.

  • É. Kiss, Katalin. 1998. Identificational focus versus information focus. Language 74. 245273.

  • É. Kiss, Katalin. 2010. Structural focus and exhaustivity. In M. Zimmermann and C. Féry (eds.) Information structure. Theoretical, typological and experimental perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 6488.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Gazdar, Gerald. 1979. Pragmatics: Implicature, presupposition, and logical form. New York: Academic Press.

  • Gerőcs, Mátyás, Anna Babarczy and Balázs Surányi. 2014. Exhaustivity in focus:: Hungarian. In J. Emonds and M. Janebová (eds.) Language use and linguistic structure. Olomouc: Palacký University. 181194.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Grice, H. Paul. 1975. Logic and conversation. In P. Cole and J. L. Morgan (eds.) Syntax and semantics, vol. 3: Speech acts. New York: Academic Press. 4158.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Gualmini, Andrea, Simona Maciukaite and Stephen Crain. 2003. Children’s insensitivity to contrastive stress in sentences with only. In Proceedings of the 25th Annual Penn Linguistics Colloquium. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. 87110.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Hackl, Martin, Ayaka Sugawara and Ken Wexler. 2015. Question–answer (in)congruence in the acquisition of “only”. In E. Grillo and K. Jepson (eds.) BUCLD 39: Proceedings of the 39th annual Boston University Conference on Language Development. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press. 204217.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Horn, Laurence R. 1969. A presuppositional analysis of “only” and “even”. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society 5. 98107.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Horn, Laurence R. 1996. Exclusive company: Only and the dynamics of vertical inference. Journal of Semantics 13. 140.

  • Horvath, Julia. 2005. Is “focus movement” driven by stress? In C. Piñón and P. Siptár (eds.) Approaches to Hungarian 9: Papers from the Düsseldorf conference. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó. 131158.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Horvath, Julia. 2007. “Discourse features”, syntactic displacement and the status of contrast. Manuscript. Tel Aviv University.

  • Kálmán, László and Noor van Leusen. 1993. The semantics of free focus. ILLC: Amsterdam.

  • Karttunen, Lauri. 1974. Presuppositions and linguistic context. Theoretical Linguistics 1. 18194.

  • Kas, Bence and Ágnes Lukács. 2013. Focus sensitivity in Hungarian adults and children. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 60. 217245.

  • Katsos, Napoleon and Dorothy V. M. Bishop. 2011. Pragmatic tolerance: Implications for the acquisition of informativeness and implicature. Cognition 20. 6781.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Kenesei, István. 1986. On the logic of Hungarian word order. In W. Abraham and S. de Meij (eds.) Topic, focus, and configurationality. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 143159.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Kenesei, István. 2006. Focus as identification. In V. Molnár and S. Winkler (eds.) The architecture of focus (Studies in Generative Syntax 82). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 137168.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Komlósy, András. 1994. Complements and adjuncts. In F. Kiefer and K. É. Kiss (eds.) The syntactic structure of Hungarian (Syntax and semantics 27). San Diego/New York: Academic Press. 91178.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Müller, Anja, Petra Schulz and Barbara Höhle. 2011. How the understanding of focus particles develops: Evidence from child German. In M. Pirvulescu, M. C. Cuervo, A. T. Pérez-Leroux, J. Steele and N. Strik (eds.) Proceedings of the 4th Conference on Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition North America. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project. 163171.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Notley, Anna, Peng Zhou, Stephen Crain and Rosalind Thornton. 2009. Children’s interpretation of focus expressions in English and Mandarin. Language Acquisition 16. 240282.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Onea, Edgar. 2007. Exhaustivity, focus and incorporation in Hungarian. In M. Aloni, P. Dekker and F. Roelofsen (eds.) Proceedings of the 16th Amsterdam Colloquium. Amsterdam: ILLC. 16974.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Onea, Edgar and David Beaver. 2011. Hungarian focus is not exhausted. In S. Ito and E. Cormany (eds.) Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT) 19. Ithaca, NY: CLC Publications. 342359.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Paterson, Kevin B., Simon P. Liversedge, Diane White, Ruth Filik and Kristina Jaz. 2005.2006. Children’s interpretation of ambiguous focus in sentences with “only”. Language Acquisition 13. 253284.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Percus, Orin. 1997. Prying open the cleft. In K. Kusumoto (ed.) Proceedings of the 27th Annual Meeting of the North East Linguistic Society. Amherst, MA: GLSA. 337351.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Potts, Christopher. 2005. The logic of conventional implicatures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • R Development Core Team. 2014. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: Foundation for Statistical Computing. http://www.R-project.org

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Roberts, Craige. 2011. “Only”: A case study in projective meaning. In B. H. Partee, M. Glanzberg and J. Skilters (eds.) Formal semantics and pragmatics: Discourse, context and models. Manhattan, KS: New Prairie Press. 159.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Rooij, Robert van and Katrin Schulz. 2007. “Only”: Meaning and implicatures. In M. Aloni, A. Butler and P. Dekker (eds.) Questions and answers. Amsterdam: Elsevier. 193224.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Skopeteas, Stavros and Gisbert Fanselow. 2011. Focus and the exclusion of alternatives: On the interaction of syntactic structure with pragmatic inference. Lingua 121. 16931706.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Sperber, Dan and Deirdre Wilson. 1986. Relevance: Communication and cognition. Cambridge, MA & Oxford: Blackwell.

  • Surányi, Balázs. 2011. A szintaktikailag jelöletlen fókusz pragmatikája [On the pragmatics of syntactically unmarked focus]. Általános Nyelvészeti Tanulmányok 23. 281313.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Szabolcsi, Anna. 1981. Compositionality in focus. Folia Linguistica 15. 141161.

  • Szabolcsi, Anna. 1981b. The semantics of topic–focus articulation. In J. Groenendijk, T. Janssen and M. Stokhof (eds.) Formal methods in the study of language. Amsterdam: Mathematisch Centre. 503540.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Szabolcsi, Anna. 1994. All quantifiers are not equal: The case of focus. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 42. 171187.

  • Velleman, Dan, David Beaver, Emilie Destruel, Dylan Bumford, Edgar Onea and Elizabeth Coppock. 2012. It-clefts are IT (Inquiry Terminating) constructions. In A. Chereches (ed.) Proceedings of the 22nd Semantics and Linguistic Theory Conference, held at the University of Chicago in Chicago, Illinois, May 18–20, 2012. Washington, DC: Linguistic Society of America. 441460.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Wedgwood, Daniel. 2005. Shifting the focus. From static structures to the dynamics of interpretation. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

  • Wilson, Deirdre and Dan Sperber. 2004. Relevance theory. In L. R. Horn and G. Ward (eds.) The handbook of pragmatics. Oxford & Malden, MA: Blackwell. 607632.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Zhou, Peng and Stephen Crain. 2010. Focus identification in child Mandarin. Journal of Child Language 37. 9651005.

The author instruction is available in PDF.
Please, download the file from HERE

Editors

Editor-in-Chief: András Cser

Editor: Éva Dékány

Review Editor: Tamás Halm

Editorial Board

  • Anne Abeillé / Université Paris Diderot
  • Željko Bošković / University of Connecticut
  • Marcel den Dikken / Eötvös Loránd University; Hungarian Research Centre for Linguistics, Budapest
  • Hans-Martin Gärtner / Hungarian Research Centre for Linguistics, Budapest
  • Elly van Gelderen / Arizona State University
  • Anders Holmberg / Newcastle University
  • Katarzyna Jaszczolt / University of Cambridge
  • Dániel Z. Kádár / Hungarian Research Centre for Linguistics, Budapest
  • István Kenesei / University of Szeged; Hungarian Research Centre for Linguistics, Budapest
  • Anikó Lipták / Leiden University
  • Katalin Mády / Hungarian Research Centre for Linguistics, Budapest
  • Gereon Müller / Leipzig University
  • Csaba Pléh / Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Central European University
  • Giampaolo Salvi / Eötvös Loránd University
  • Irina Sekerina / College of Staten Island CUNY
  • Péter Siptár / Hungarian Research Centre for Linguistics, Budapest
  • Gregory Stump / University of Kentucky
  • Peter Svenonius / University of Tromsø
  • Anne Tamm / Károli Gáspár University of the Reformed Church
  • Akira Watanabe / University of Tokyo
  • Jeroen van de Weijer / Shenzhen University

 

Acta Linguistica Academica
Address: Benczúr u. 33. HU–1068 Budapest, Hungary
Phone: (+36 1) 351 0413; (+36 1) 321 4830 ext. 154
Fax: (36 1) 322 9297
E-mail: ala@nytud.mta.hu

Indexing and Abstracting Services:

  • Arts and Humanities Citation Index
  • Bibliographie Linguistique/Linguistic Bibliography
  • International Bibliographies IBZ and IBR
  • Linguistics Abstracts
  • Linguistics and Language Behaviour Abstracts
  • MLA International Bibliography
  • SCOPUS
  • Social Science Citation Index
  • LinguisList

 

2020

 

Total Cites

219

WoS

Journal
Impact Factor

0,523

Rank by

Linguistics 150/193 (Q4)

Impact Factor

 

Impact Factor

0,432

without

Journal Self Cites

5 Year

0,500

Impact Factor

Journal 

0,72

Citation Indicator

 

Rank by Journal 

Linguistics 144/259 (Q3)

Citation Indicator 

 

Citable

19

Items

Total

19

Articles

Total

0

Reviews

Scimago

10

H-index

Scimago

0,295

Journal Rank

Scimago

Cultural Studies Q1

Quartile Score

Language and Linguistics Q2

 

Linguistics and Language Q2

 

Literature and Literary Theory Q1

Scopus

72/87=0,8

Scite Score

Scopus

Literature and Literary Theory 42/825 (Q1)

Scite Score Rank

Cultural Studies 247/1037 (Q1)

Scopus

1,022

SNIP

Days from 

58

sumbission

to acceptance

Days from 

68

acceptance

to publication

Acceptance

51%

Rate

2019  
Total Cites
WoS
155
Impact Factor 0,222
Impact Factor
without
Journal Self Cites
0,156
5 Year
Impact Factor
0,322
Immediacy
Index
0,870
Citable
Items
23
Total
Articles
23
Total
Reviews
0
Cited
Half-Life
11,2
Citing
Half-Life
16,6
Eigenfactor
Score
0,00006
Article Influence
Score
0,056
% Articles
in
Citable Items
100,00
Normalized
Eigenfactor
0,00780
Average
IF
Percentile
9,358
Scimago
H-index
9
Scimago
Journal Rank
0,281
Scopus
Scite Score
53/85=0,6
Scopus
Scite Score Rank
Cultural Studies 293/1002 (Q2)
Literature and Literary Theory 60/823(Q1)
Scopus
SNIP
0,768
Acceptance
Rate
25%

 

Acta Linguistica Academica
Publication Model Hybrid
Submission Fee none
Article Processing Charge 900 EUR/article
Printed Color Illustrations 40 EUR (or 10 000 HUF) + VAT / piece
Regional discounts on country of the funding agency World Bank Lower-middle-income economies: 50%
World Bank Low-income economies: 100%
Further Discounts Editorial Board / Advisory Board members: 50%
Corresponding authors, affiliated to an EISZ member institution subscribing to the journal package of Akadémiai Kiadó: 100%
Subscription fee 2021 Online subsscription: 544 EUR / 680 USD
Print + online subscription: 624 EUR / 780 USD
Subscription fee 2022 Online subsscription: 558 EUR / 696 USD
Print + online subscription: 638 EUR / 796 USD
Subscription Information Online subscribers are entitled access to all back issues published by Akadémiai Kiadó for each title for the duration of the subscription, as well as Online First content for the subscribed content.
Purchase per Title Individual articles are sold on the displayed price.

Acta Linguistica Academica
Language English
Size B5
Year of
Foundation
2017
Publication
Programme
2021 Volume 68
Volumes
per Year
1
Issues
per Year
4
Founder Magyar Tudományos Akadémia
Founder's
Address
H-1051 Budapest, Hungary, Széchenyi István tér 9.
Publisher Akadémiai Kiadó
Publisher's
Address
H-1117 Budapest, Hungary 1516 Budapest, PO Box 245.
Responsible
Publisher
Chief Executive Officer, Akadémiai Kiadó
ISSN 2559-8201 (Print)
ISSN 2560-1016 (Online)