The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Focus, mode and the nucleus
Abstract
This article argues for the hypothesis that the location of the nucleus of the intonation contour is rule-governed. The term ‘nucleus’ is taken to refer to what has elsewhere been discussed as the ‘nuclear syllable’ (Crystal, 1969), ‘tonic’ (Halliday, 1967a), ‘sentence stress’ (Schmerling, 1976), ‘[I stress]’ (Chomsky & Halle, 1968), and ‘Designated Terminal Element’ (Liberman & Prince, 1977) (ignoring certain differences of analysis, such as that between double-nucleus and single-nucleus interpretation of some contours). Drawing on the facts of English and Dutch, it does so by attempting to identify the linguistic options available to speakers that are relevant to the location of the nucleus. The main argument hinges on the assumption that the chief functions of the location of the nucleus are (1) to signal the focus distribution of the sentence and (2) to signal whether the sentence is or is not meant as a counter-assertion, with the proviso that in many instances the location of the nucleus allows of more than one interpretation of one or both variables. Section 1 devotes some discussion to the problem of predictability, while the concepts of ‘focus’ and ‘normal stress’ are explored in Sections 2 to 4. Section 5 states the sentence accent assignment rule (SAAR), giving illustrations of its application. In Section 6, special attention is devoted to the pragmatic effects of SAAR in subject + predicate sentences. Section 7 attempts to give a fuller definition of the constituents the rule refers to and puts a general condition on its application. Section 8 introduces the variable mode, while Section 9 defines the problem of the location of the nucleus in sentences with minimal focus and introduces another accent assignment rule (PFR). A summary in the form of a set of propositions concludes the article. I should like to point out that most of the examples in this article are attested; it is only the more pedestrian ones that have been made up for the purpose of illustrating certain points.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Searle, J. R. (1969) · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139173438 · Cited by 11,718
Cited by
Contrastive focus vs. discourse-new: Evidence from phonetic prominence in English
Katz, J., & Selkirk, E. (2011) · Language · doi:10.1353/lan.2011.0076 · Cited by 326
Towards a typology of focus realization
Büring, D. (2009) · Information Structure · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199570959.003.0008 · Cited by 182
Landblom, S. A., & Ionin, T. (2022) · Glossa: a journal of general linguistics · doi:10.16995/glossa.5810 · Cited by 1
Metadata
- Authors
- Gussenhoven, C.
- Venue
- Journal of Linguistics
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 1983-09
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 377-417
- ISSN
- 0022-2267 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-7742
- OpenAlex
- W2044902544
- Cited by
- 341
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 3.78
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Focus, mode and the nucleus. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1017/s0022226700007799
- The paper
- Gussenhoven, C. (1983). Focus, mode and the nucleus. Journal of Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0022226700007799
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.