Microsoft Word - LL8.1-11-Dery 20061216.docPragmatic Focus and Word
Order Variation in Tagalog*
Jeruen E. Dery University at Buffalo, The State University of New
York
This paper is an application of the theory of information structure
and its interface in syntax as outlined in Role and Reference
Grammar (Van Valin 2005). It will be shown that the pragmatic
relations of topic and focus play a significant role in the
selection of word order in Tagalog. Both declarative and
interrogative sentences will be analyzed, showing how Lambrecht’s
(1994) focus types are reflected in the language. For interrogative
sentences, it will be shown how canonicity of word order is
significant in the variability of focus placement. Key words:
syntax-pragmatics interface, Tagalog, focus structure, word
order
1. Introduction
Ever since Constantino’s (1965) study on the different sentence
patterns of Philippine languages appeared, most of the studies
regarding sentence structure only deal with the problem in purely
syntactic terms. In fact, Constantino’s classic paper merely lists
the different types of sentences that are found in the various
Philippine languages. One of the recent studies on Tagalog only
gives an attempt on the derivations of the different sentence
forms, but does not explain why these sentence forms occur (Ceña
1994). In the current study, however, the assumptions of RRG are
utilized in order to give an analysis based on the interface of
syntax and pragmatics as seen in Tagalog. Assuming that focus
structure affects the syntax, analyses of the different sentence
forms are given, in which the effect of the pragmatic factors in
the syntax are clearly seen.
Role and Reference Grammar (RRG) is a theory of language that
focuses not just on the syntactic factors of the language, but also
on semantic and pragmatic factors as well. This paper will thus
discuss the ways in which the different factors concerning
information structure intersect and affect the syntactic structure
of the language.
* I would like to express gratitude to Maria Khristina Manueli, who
was patient enough to let me
begin this research in the first place; and to Robert Van Valin
Jr., who gave theoretical insights pertaining to RRG. I also
appreciate the feedback received during the 2005 International RRG
Conference in Taipei, Taiwan, and also the comments and
constructive criticisms that two anonymous reviewers have sent me.
Nevertheless, all mistakes are my own.
Jeruen E. Dery
374
Spoken by about 57 million people, Tagalog is one of the major
languages spoken in the Philippines. It is a Western
Malayo-Polynesian language within the Austronesian language family.
It is a predicate-initial language, although, as this paper shows,
certain pragmatic factors influence the word order of the language
and thus one can find sentences with constituents other than the
predicate in initial position.
Being a study of language in its actual use, this research has been
done using two methods of data gathering. The first method used a
fairly long survey, which was intended to simulate a discourse
fragment. A question was presented, and the respondent was asked to
choose all the natural answers from among all the grammatical
choices. Only grammatical answers are included in the choices.
However, not all are felicitous with regard to the question. The
second method used a free interview. This time, pictures were shown
to different respondents, and they were asked questions that
pertained to the pictures. These questions were designed to have
different focus types; thus, the respondents were free to use
whichever sentence form they preferred.
This paper is organized as follows. Section 2 details the interface
of syntax and pragmatics in declarative simple sentences. Section 3
will then expand on the interface of syntax and pragmatics in
interrogative simple sentences. Section 4 serves as the conclusion
of this study.
2. Declarative sentences
This section is divided into three parts. The first part expounds
on the three types of focus construction as proposed by Lambrecht
(1994). The second part will try to revise the RRG concept of
predicate focus. Evidence from Tagalog suggests that there is
actually a “predicate focus” in which the Privileged Syntactic
Argument (PSA) is included in the actual focus domain. The third
part will examine the possibility of a special focus position for
narrow focus. Initial analyses have suggested that the clause-
initial position is the default position for focus. Since Tagalog
is a predicate-initial language, this means that the focus would
fall in the position where the predicate is usually found, the
Nucleus (NUC). This hypothesis implies that any constituent that
appears before the NUC but not in the Left Detached Position (LDP),
in short, in the Pre-Core Slot (PrCS), will be a constituent
receiving narrow focus. 2.1 Types of focus constructions in
Tagalog
Originally proposed by Lambrecht (1994) and expounded by Van Valin
& LaPolla (1997), there exist three focus types: sentence
focus, predicate focus, and narrow focus.
In sentence focus, the speaker presupposes nothing in the
discourse, implying that
Pragmatic Focus and Word Order Variation in Tagalog
375
every constituent in the utterance is brand-new. Consider the
following example.1
(1) Q: Ano ang nangyari?2 what LINPF happen-PFT ‘What happened?’ A:
a. Tumirik ang kotse ko. stall-PFT.AV SUBJ car 1SG.GEN ‘My car
stalled.’ b. ??Tumirik. stall-PFT.AV ‘(My car) stalled.’ c. # Ang
kotse ko ang tumirik. SUBJ car 1SG.GEN LINPF stall-PFT.AV ‘MY CAR
stalled.’ d. ? Ang kotse ko ay tumirik. SUBJ car 1SG.GEN LINPT
stall-PFT.AV ‘My car STALLED.’ e. ? Ang kotse ko tumirik. SUBJ car
1SG.GEN stall-PFT.AV ‘My car stalled.’ f. ? Ang kotse ko, tumirik.
SUBJ car 1SG.GEN stall-PFT.AV ‘Regarding my car, it stalled.’
The discourse fragment can be analyzed as follows.
(2) Sentence: Tumirik ang kotse ko. Presupposition: ∃ x [do′ (x,
[pred′ (x, y)])] Assertion: ∃ x [do′ (x, [break.down′ (x)])] where
x = ang kotse ko Focus: ‘tumirik ang kotse ko’ Focus domain:
clause
As shown above, the most felicitous response is (1a). This is the
construction that
1 Instead of transcribing the data in standard IPA, I will opt to
use the traditional colloquial
spelling, as the choice is tangential to the topic of this paper.
2 ? – unacceptable to about 30% of the sample population, ??
– unacceptable to about 65% of the
sample population, # – infelicitous
Jeruen E. Dery
376
satisfies the conditions of sentence focus, where no variables are
presupposed. Thus, the focus is the whole clause, encompassing all
the variables. If we examine the examples, sentence focus requires
that the sentence be formed as a canonical construction, with the
predicate appearing before the arguments. All the other
constructions, such as the ones involving dropped constituents, and
the constructions that involve an argument appearing in the PrCS,
are unacceptable as replies.
Transitive sentences do not exhibit any difference with regard to
sentence focus, as the following examples show.
(3) Q: Ano ang nangyari? what LINPF happen-PFT ‘What happened?’ A:
a. Nakalmot ng pusa ang mukha ni Juna. scratch-PFT.UV NSUBJ cat
SUBJ face GEN Juna ‘A cat scratched Juna’s face.’ b. ??Nakalmot ng
pusa. scratch-PFT.UV NSUBJ cat ‘A cat scratched (Juna’s face).’ c.
# Ang mukha ni Juna ang nakalmot ng pusa. SUBJ face GEN Juna LINPF
scratch-PFT.UV NSUBJ cat ‘It was JUNA’S FACE that the cat
scratched.’ d. ? Ang mukha ni Juna ay nakalmot ng pusa. SUBJ face
GEN Juna LINPT scratch-PFT.UV NSUBJ cat ‘Juna’s face was SCRATCHED
BY A CAT.’ e. ? Ang mukha ni Juna nakalmot ng pusa. SUBJ face GEN
Juna scratch-PFT.UV NSUBJ cat ‘A cat scratched Juna’s face.’ f. ?
Ang mukha ni Juna, nakalmot ng pusa. SUBJ face GEN Juna
scratch-PFT.UV NSUBJ cat ‘Regarding Juna’s face, it was scratched
by a cat.’
Sentence focus can thus be visually represented in Figure 1.
Pragmatic Focus and Word Order Variation in Tagalog
377
Figure 1: Sentence focus
With regard to predicate focus, Van Valin & LaPolla (1997) note
that predicate
focus is the universally unmarked type of focus structure. In this
focus type, there is a topic, which is contained in the
presupposition, and the constituents in focus are the ones that
give a comment on it. Van Valin (2005) states that this
topic-comment pragmatic dichotomy corresponds to the
Subject-predicate syntactic dichotomy, where the Subject is a topic
and the predicate is the comment.
The following example illustrates this focus type and how it is
analyzed.
(4) Q: Ano ang nangyari kay Juna? what LINPF happen-PFT DAT Juna
‘What happened to Juna?’ A: a. Nahimatay siya. faint-PFT.UV
3SG.SUBJ ‘She fainted.’ b. Nahimatay. faint-PFT.UV ‘(She) fainted.’
c. # Siya ang nahimatay. 3SG.SUBJ LINPF faint-PFT.UV ‘It was SHE
who fainted.’
Jeruen E. Dery
d. ? Siya ay nahimatay. 3SG.SUBJ LINPT faint-PFT.UV ‘She FAINTED.’
e. ??Siya nahimatay. 3SG.SUBJ faint-PFT.UV ‘She fainted.’ f. ?
Siya, nahimatay. 3SG.SUBJ faint-PFT.UV ‘With regard to her, she
fainted.’
(5) Sentence: Nahimatay (si Juna). Presupposition: ∃ x [do′ (x,
[pred′ (x)])] where x = Juna Assertion: pred′ = faint Focus:
‘nahimatay’ Focus domain: predicating element
Most of the respondents actually prefer the “incomplete” sentence
form, where the presupposed constituent is actually dropped from
the sentence.3 Since the argument of the sentence is already known
to the speakers, the reply does not require it to be stated again.
Thus, (4b) is the most preferred construction. However, (4d) and
(4f) are also used frequently. Even though these constructions are
marked with a “?”, this can still be explained. Here, the linker ay
is marked as a post-topical linker. Contrasted with the other
linker ang, the post-topical linker is a linker that is used when
an argument that serves as a topic appears in front of the
predicating element. It should be pointed out that in Tagalog, the
predicating element appears as the first constituent in canonical
word order. If for some reason the first constituent is not a
predicate, there might be a pause or a linker that is inserted
between the predicate and the argument. By inserting a pause, the
argument takes the LDP and is thus outside the Potential Focus
Domain (PFD), since the LDP is not in the scope of the PFD. If a
linker is inserted, the linker may be ang or ay. The assumption
here is that ang is a post-focal linker (LINPF), while ay is a
post-topical linker (LINPT). In other words, the LINPF is used when
the argument at the beginning of the sentence is in narrow focus.
The LINPT, on the other hand, is used when the argument at the
beginning of the sentence is the topic and is not in focus.
This analysis of the linker ay is different from traditional
analyses of Tagalog
3 This however does not imply that Tagalog is a pro-drop language.
Speakers prefer to drop the
constituent ONLY when it is already accessible from previous
discourse, as in the above example. If that is not the case, then
the constituents are present in the sentence, since there is no way
of identifying the nature of the arguments from the form of the
verb, unlike other pro- drop languages.
Pragmatic Focus and Word Order Variation in Tagalog
379
sentence constructions. For example, Alejandro (1954) treats ay as
a copula or a linking verb, although he says that the copula can be
suppressed in the inverted form. Llamzon (1975) on the other hand
posits an Ay-Rule which inverts the sentences from a verb- initial
configuration to an NP-initial configuration. Analyses based purely
on syntactic terms such as these mentioned above treat these
sentences as simple variations with the same semantic content.
Called ay-preposing, this is treated as a simple inversion of
arguments and predicates. However, as the data indicates, a
consideration of the pragmatic factors of the language indicates
that there is a difference in usage of the said constructions. The
constructions involving the post-topical linker has a different
focus structure compared to the constructions using the canonical
order.
As the following examples show, the same is the case for transitive
sentences.
(6) Q: Ano ang nangyari sa mukha ni Juna? what LINPF happen-PFT DAT
face GEN Juna ‘What happened to Juna’s face?’ A: a. Nakalmot ng
pusa ang mukha niya. scratch-PFT.UV NSUBJ cat SUBJ face 3SG.GEN ‘A
cat scratched her face.’ b. Nakalmot ng pusa. scratch-PFT.UV NSUBJ
cat ‘A cat scratched (her face).’ c. # Ang mukha niya ang nakalmot
ng pusa. SUBJ face 3SG.GEN LINPF scratch-PFT.UV NSUBJ cat ‘It was
HER FACE that the cat scratched.’ d. ? Ang mukha niya ay nakalmot
ng pusa. SUBJ face 3SG.GEN LINPT scratch-PFT.UV NSUBJ cat ‘Her face
WAS SCRATCHED BY A CAT.’ e. ??Ang mukha niya nakalmot ng pusa. SUBJ
face 3SG.GEN scratch-PFT.UV NSUBJ cat ‘A cat scratched her face.’
f. ? Ang mukha niya, nakalmot ng pusa. SUBJ face 3SG.GEN
scratch-PFT.UV NSUBJ cat ‘Regarding her face, it was scratched by a
cat.’
The following are visual representations of the three types of
predicate focus.
Jeruen E. Dery
Figure 3: Predicate focus (argument in PrCS)
Pragmatic Focus and Word Order Variation in Tagalog
381
Figure 4: Predicate focus (argument in LDP)
The final focus type is narrow focus. Only one constituent is
focused this time, and
the following discourse fragment illustrates this in the Tagalog
language.
(7) Q: Nabalitaan ko na tumirik daw overhear-PFT.UV 1SG.NSUBJ CLM
stall-PFT.AV EVD ang motor mo. SUBJ motorcycle 2SG.GEN ‘I heard
that your motorcycle stalled.’ A: a. ? Tumirik ang kotse ko.
stall-PFT.AV SUBJ car 1SG.GEN ‘My car stalled.’ b. ??Tumirik.
stall-PFT.AV ‘(My car) stalled.’ c. Ang kotse ko ang tumirik. SUBJ
car 1SG.GEN LINPF stall-PFT.AV ‘MY CAR stalled.’ d. # Ang kotse ko
ay tumirik. SUBJ car 1SG.GEN LINPT stall-PFT.AV ‘My car STALLED
.’
Jeruen E. Dery
382
e. ??Ang kotse ko tumirik. SUBJ car 1SG.GEN stall-PFT.AV ‘My car
stalled.’ f. ? Ang kotse ko, tumirik. SUBJ car 1SG.GEN stall-PFT.AV
‘Regarding my car, it stalled.’
(8) Sentence: Ang kotse ko ang tumirik. Presupposition: ∃ x [do′
(x, [break.down′ (x)])] Assertion: x = ang kotse ko Focus: ‘ang
kotse ko’ Focus domain: referential phrase
As shown above, the most felicitous reply is (7c). It is a sentence
form that has an argument, the focused one, in the clause-initial
position, and the post-focal linker ang is inserted between the
focused argument and the predicating element. Again, this shows the
functional difference of the linkers ang and ay. The former is used
in narrow focus when an argument appears in clause-initial position
to show its focused status. The latter is used in predicate focus
when an argument appears on the clause-initial position to serve as
a topic, while the predicate following it is in focus.
The same is the case for transitive sentences, as the following
discourse fragment shows.
(9) Q: Nabalitaan ko na nakalmot daw overhear-PFT.UV 1SG.NSUBJ CLM
scratch-PFT.UV EVD ng pusa ang kamay ni Juna. NSUBJ cat SUBJ face
GEN Juna ‘I’ve heard that a cat scratched Juna’s hand.’ A: a. ?
Nakalmot ng pusa ang mukha niya. scratch-PFT.UV NSUBJ cat SUBJ face
3SG.GEN ‘A cat scratched her face.’ b. ??Nakalmot ng pusa.
scratch-PFT.UV NSUBJ cat ‘A cat scratched (her face).’ c. Ang mukha
niya ang nakalmot ng pusa. SUBJ face 3SG.GEN LINPF scratch-PFT.UV
NSUBJ cat ‘It was HER FACE that the cat scratched.’ d. # Ang mukha
niya ay nakalmot ng pusa. SUBJ face 3SG.GEN LINPT scratch-PFT.UV
NSUBJ cat ‘Her face WAS SCRATCHED BY A CAT.’
Pragmatic Focus and Word Order Variation in Tagalog
383
e. ??Ang mukha niya nakalmot ng pusa. SUBJ face 3SG.GEN
scratch-PFT.UV NSUBJ cat ‘A cat scratched her face.’ f. ? Ang mukha
niya, nakalmot ng pusa. SUBJ face 3SG.GEN scratch-PFT.UV NSUBJ cat
‘Regarding her face, it was scratched by a cat.’
It must be noted that not only core constituents can be subjected
to narrow focus but also peripheral constituents as well. Consider
the following discourse fragment.
(10) Q: Kailan sinuntok ni Ronald si Mark? when punch-PFT.UV NSUBJ
Ronald SUBJ Mark ‘When did Ronald punch Mark?’ A: a. Sinuntok ni
Ronald si Mark kahapon. punch-PFT.UV NSUBJ Ronald SUBJ Mark
yesterday ‘Ronald punched Mark yesterday.’ b. Sinuntok kahapon ni
Ronald si Mark. punch-PFT.UV yesterday NSUBJ Ronald SUBJ Mark
‘Ronald punched Mark yesterday.’ c. Kahapon sinuntok ni Ronald si
Mark. yesterday punch-PFT.UV NSUBJ Ronald SUBJ Mark ‘Ronald punched
Mark YESTERDAY.’ d. ? Kahapon ni Ronald sinuntok si Mark. yesterday
NSUBJ Ronald punch-PFT.UV SUBJ Mark ‘Ronald punched Mark
yesterday.’ e. # Si Mark ang kahapon sinuntok ni Ronald. SUBJ Mark
LINPF yesterday punch-PFT.UV NSUBJ Ronald ‘It was MARK whom Ronald
punched yesterday.’ f. ??Si Mark ay kahapon sinuntok ni Ronald.
SUBJ Mark LINPT yesterday punch-PFT.UV NSUBJ Ronald ‘Mark was
punched by Ronald yesterday.’ g. # Si Mark kahapon sinuntok ni
Ronald. SUBJ Mark yesterday punch-PFT.UV NSUBJ Ronald ‘Ronald
punched Mark yesterday.’ h. ??Si Mark, kahapon sinuntok ni Ronald.
SUBJ Mark yesterday punch-PFT.UV NSUBJ Ronald ‘Regarding Mark, he
was punched by Ronald yesterday.’
Jeruen E. Dery
384
i. # Si Mark ang sinuntok ni Ronald kahapon. SUBJ Mark LINPF
punch-PFT.UV NSUBJ Ronald yesterday ‘It was MARK whom Ronald
punched yesterday.’ j. ??Si Mark ay sinuntok ni Ronald kahapon.
SUBJ Mark LINPT punch-PFT.UV NSUBJ Ronald yesterday ‘Mark was
punched by Ronald yesterday.’ k. # Si Mark sinuntok ni Ronald
kahapon. SUBJ Mark punch-PFT.UV NSUBJ Ronald yesterday ‘Ronald
punched Mark yesterday.’ l. # Si Mark, sinuntok ni Ronald kahapon.
SUBJ Mark punch-PFT.UV NSUBJ Ronald yesterday ‘Regarding Mark, he
was punched by Ronald yesterday.’
The examples above show three felicitous constructions for
peripheral narrow focus. Normally, the periphery appears after the
arguments, but since it is in focus, it is allowed to appear in the
clause-initial position. The other constructions which have the
periphery in a non-initial position is made felicitous due to
accent placement. This is discussed in the third part of this
section.
The following diagrams illustrate argument and peripheral narrow
focus in Tagalog.
Figure 5: Narrow focus (argument in PrCS)
Pragmatic Focus and Word Order Variation in Tagalog
385
SENTENCE
SPEECH ACT
Figure 6: Narrow focus of peripheral constituent
In summary, the three focus types as proposed by Lambrecht (1994),
namely,
sentence focus, predicate focus, and narrow focus all appear to be
valid after being tested using data from Tagalog. However, there
are certain data that seem to be unexplainable using these three
focus types. Certain constructions seem to exhibit properties that
do not fit in these three focus types alone. These constructions
will be discussed in the second part of this section. 2.2 Predicate
focus revisited
As stated previously, predicate focus is the universally unmarked
focus type characterized by a construction that has a topic (which
is a pragmatic relation), that coincides with the PSA (which is a
syntactic relation) (Van Valin & LaPolla 1997). The focus,
which is one of the pragmatic relations, coincides with the
predicate, which consists of the predicating element plus the
remaining arguments that are not PSA. This focus type is
illustrated by the following felicitous discourse fragments.
(11) Q: Ano ang ginagawa ng lalaki? what LINPF do-PROG.UV NSUBJ man
‘What is the man doing?’
Jeruen E. Dery
386
A: a. Tumatakbo. run-PROG.AV ‘(He is) running.’ b. Tumutugtog ng
piano. play-PROG.AV NSUBJ piano ‘(He is) playing piano.’ c. Umiinom
ng alak. drink-PROG.AV NSUBJ wine ‘(He is) drinking wine.’
All of these felicitous constructions form a VP-like grouping. In
Generative Grammar, these VP-like groupings form the predicate,
hence the term predicate focus, since the syntactic Subject is
excluded from the Actual Focus Domain (AFD). However, not all
constructions exhibit this VP-like grouping in Tagalog. Consider
the following examples.
(12) Q: Ano ang ginawa ng lalaki? what LINPF do-PFT.UV NSUBJ man
‘What did the man do?’ A: a. Nagbasa ng libro. read-PFT.AV NSUBJ
book ‘(He) read a book.’ a’. Binasa ang libro. read-PFT.UV SUBJ
book ‘(He) read the book.’ b. Umakyat sa bundok. climb-PFT.AV DAT
mountain ‘(He) climbed a mountain.’ b’. Inakyat ang bundok.
climb-PFT.UV SUBJ mountain ‘(He) climbed the mountain.’ c. Uminom
ng tubig. drink-PFT.AV NSUBJ water ‘(He) drank water.’ c’. Ininom
ang tubig. drink-PFT.UV SUBJ water ‘(He) drank the water.’ d.
Nagbuhat ng sanggol. carry-PFT.AV NSUBJ baby ‘(He) carried a
baby.’
Pragmatic Focus and Word Order Variation in Tagalog
387
d’. Binuhat ang sanggol. carry-PFT.UV SUBJ baby ‘(He) carried the
baby.’
The above pairs of replies are similar to Lambrecht’s (1994) and
Van Valin & LaPolla’s (1997) examples of predicate focus. But
with regard to the primed examples, the predicating elements are
undergoer voice. Since all of these examples take lalaki to be the
actor, the examples that utilize a predicating element in the
undergoer voice must have the undergoer as its PSA, or in
traditional terms, Subject. If the Subject is included in the focus
domain, it is violating the definition of “predicate focus”, since
this focus type takes a VP-like grouping, the predicate, to be its
focus domain.
Due to the fact that one can have a Subject as the newly-introduced
constituent in the sentence, as in the primed examples above, the
notion of “predicate focus” cannot be an appropriate term for an
intermediate multi-constituent focus construction. Tagalog
certainly exhibits constructions where there is not a VP-like
quasi-predicate grouping, as voice modulation certainly has
consequences that must be explained. There must be a focus
construction that can account for the focus type where a PSA is
included in the focus domain, and yet still does not include the
whole clause in its domain.
With this in mind, it is proposed here to revise the notion of
“predicate focus” to become “multiple focus”. Multiple focus is a
focus type that allows many constituents to be in its actual focus
domain, yet it does not take the whole clause as its domain. It can
be thought of as an intermediate, mid-level focus type between
narrow focus and sentence focus. Multiple focus also does not
restrict the PSA from appearing in the focus domain. By doing so,
the primed examples in (12) can thus be explained. This results
then, in a new set of focus types, namely: narrow focus, which
pertains to the focus type in which only one constituent is in
focus, be it an argument or a periphery; multiple focus, which
pertains to a multiple-constituent focus type, but at the same
time, does not enclose the whole clause in its domain; and sentence
focus, which pertains to the focus type where all the constituents
in the clause are in focus. 2.3 Designating a special position for
narrow focus
As the examples above show, most of the constructions with narrow
focus utilize the clause-initial position as the locus of the
narrow focus, both for arguments and peripheries. However, as seen
by the felicity of the constructions in (10a) and (10b), not all
instances of narrow focus are found at the beginning of the clause.
The construction in (10a) especially has no difference whatsoever
with a construction utilizing sentence focus, since it has the
canonical predicate-initial construction. However, Selkirk
(1996)
Jeruen E. Dery
388
proposes a rule regarding accent placement and focus marking (in
Selkirk’s terms, F- marking). Her rules on F-Assignment are as
follows (quoted in Schwarzschild 1999).
(13) F-Assignment Rules a. Basic F-Rule An accented word is
F-marked. b. F Projection 1) F-marking of the head of the phrase
licenses the F-marking of the
phrase. 2) F-marking of an internal argument of the head licenses
the F-
marking of the head.
Even though this study does not use any acoustic analysis to study
the accent of the individual words, it can still be discerned which
word is in focus and thus have an accent. By looking at the
presupposed constituents, one can see in (10a) that it is only
logical to put the focus on the periphery, since it is the only
constituent that is not presupposed.
Aside from this, there are instances in which not only peripheries
but also arguments can have narrow focus but not be in the
clause-initial position. This is possible if these focused
arguments are not the PSA of the sentence. Consider the following
examples.
(14) Q: Kumain ng ano si Mark? eat-PFT.AV NSUBJ what SUBJ Mark
‘Mark ate what?’ A: a. Kumain ng pansit si Mark. eat-PFT.AV NSUBJ
noodles SUBJ Mark ‘Mark ate NOODLES.’ b. # Si Mark ang kumain ng
pansit. SUBJ Mark LINPF eat-PFT.UV NSUBJ noodles ‘It was MARK who
ate noodles.’ c. ? Si Mark ay kumain ng pansit. SUBJ Mark LINPT
eat-PFT.UV NSUBJ noodles ‘Mark ate NOODLES.’ d. ??Si Mark kumain ng
pansit. SUBJ Mark eat-PFT.UV NSUBJ noodles ‘Mark ate noodles.’ e.
??Si Mark, kumain ng pansit. SUBJ Mark eat-PFT.UV NSUBJ noodles
‘Regarding Mark, he ate noodles.’
Pragmatic Focus and Word Order Variation in Tagalog
389
f. ? Pansit ang kinain ni Mark. noodles LINPF eat-PFT.AV NSUBJ Mark
‘NOODLES were what Mark ate.’
In the above discourse fragment, the focused constituent in the
question, the WH- word, is not the PSA of the construction. Thus,
the reply must exhibit narrow focus, but since it is not the PSA,
it cannot appear in the clause-initial position. There is no choice
but to retain the canonical predicate-initial sentence form. And as
(14f) shows, the option to modulate the PSA and make the focused
constituent the PSA of the reply does not result in a felicitous
sentence either. This is because of the difference of the
Aktionsart verb class between an actor voice predicate and an
undergoer voice predicate.
In summary, most of the constituents with narrow focus are found in
the clause- initial position, as long as they are the PSA of the
sentence. Focused peripheries can be seen in any position within
their scope, since they are not constrained by rules of word order.
However, there is variation in the position of the narrow focus if
the focused constituent is not the PSA of the sentence. There is no
choice for these constructions but to retain the canonical order of
the sentence. However, one finds that these non-clause- initial
focused constituents still satisfy certain rules such as Selkirk’s
(1996) F- Assignment Rules, in order for the constituent to be in
focus. The following are the visual representation of the narrow
focus construction that is not found in the clause- initial
position.
SENTENCE
SPEECH ACT
Jeruen E. Dery
SPEECH ACT
NUC ARG
Figure 8: Narrow focus on non-PSA argument
Thus, it might be said that Tagalog has a flexible focus position.
It may be found
on different areas of the clause, provided that it satisfy certain
restrictions regarding its status as a focused constituent.
3. Interrogative sentences
This section is divided into two parts. The first part deals with
the interface of syntax and pragmatics in WH-questions while the
second part handles Yes/no-questions. Mainly, this part concerns
itself with the scope of negation. It is assumed that a certain
constituent can only be negated if it is in the AFD of the
interrogative sentence. 3.1 WH-questions
To start with, consider the following examples.
(15) Q: Sino ang nahimatay? who LINPF faint-PFT.UV ‘Who fainted?’
A: a. ? Nahimatay si Juna. faint-PFT.UV SUBJ Juna ‘Juna
fainted.’
Pragmatic Focus and Word Order Variation in Tagalog
391
b. Si Juna. SUBJ Juna ‘Juna did.’ c. ? Si Juna ang nahimatay. SUBJ
Juna LINPF faint-PFT.UV ‘It was JUNA who fainted.’ d. # Si Juna ay
nahimatay. SUBJ Juna LINPT faint-PFT.UV ‘Juna FAINTED.’ e. ??Si
Juna nahimatay. SUBJ Juna faint-PFT.UV ‘Juna fainted.’ f. ? Si
Juna, nahimatay. SUBJ Juna faint-PFT.UV ‘Regarding Juna, she
fainted.’
The WH-word in the interrogative sentence is in narrow focus. This
fact is also supported by the presence of the post-focal linker ang
after the WH-word. Based on the data, the most felicitous reply is
(15b), dropping all the other constituents and leaving only the
element that is not presupposed. This can be analyzed as
follows.
(16) Sentence: Sino ang nahimatay? Presupposition: ∃ x [do′ (x,
[faint′ (x)])] Assertion: x = sino Focus: ‘sino’ Focus domain:
WH-word
This is the case for intransitive sentences. The same is the case
for transitive sentences, as the following discourse fragment
shows.
(17) Q: Ano ang nahiwa ng kutsilyo? what LINPF cut-PFT.UV NSUBJ
knife ‘What did the knife cut?’ A: a. ? Nahiwa ng kutsilyo ang
daliri ni Mark. cut-PFT.UV NSUBJ knife SUBJ finger GEN Mark ‘The
knife cut Mark’s finger.’ b. Ang daliri ni Mark. SUBJ finger GEN
Mark ‘(The knife cut) Mark’s finger.’
Jeruen E. Dery
392
c. ? Ang daliri ni Mark ang nahiwa ng kutsilyo. SUBJ finger GEN
Mark LINPF cut-PFT.UV NSUBJ knife ‘It was MARK’S FINGERwhich the
knife cut.’ d. # Ang daliri ni Mark ay nahiwa ng kutsilyo. SUBJ
finger GEN Mark LINPT cut-PFT.UV NSUBJ knife ‘Mark’s finger WAS CUT
BY A KNIFE.’ e. ??Ang daliri ni Mark nahiwa ng kutsilyo. SUBJ
finger GEN Mark cut-PFT.UV NSUBJ knife ‘Mark’s finger was cut by a
knife.’ f. ? Ang daliri ni Mark, nahiwa ng kutsilyo. SUBJ finger
GEN Mark cut-PFT.UV NSUBJ knife ‘Regarding Mark’s finger, it was
cut by a knife.’
However, not all WH-words appear at the clause-initial position. If
the WH-word is the PSA of the sentence, then it will appear at the
beginning of the sentence. But if it is not the PSA, then it will
appear in its original clause-internal position, as the examples in
(14) show. Narrow focus can also appear clause-internally in
interrogative sentences, provided that it is not the PSA of the
construction.
Peripheral WH-questions, on the other hand, can appear in the
clause-initial position, even if they are not the PSA. This is
illustrated by the example in (10). The following diagrams
illustrate the different types of narrow focus on
WH-questions.
SENTENCE
CORE
CLAUSE
NUC
PRED
Pragmatic Focus and Word Order Variation in Tagalog
393
SENTENCE
IU IU IU IU Kailan sinuntok ni Ronald si Mark?
CORE
CLAUSE
PRCS
Figure 11: Narrow focus (Peripheral WH-question)
In summary, this section has explained that WH-questions are
instances of narrow
focus. Their position is not restricted to a clause-initial
position, but can appear in any place in the clause, provided that
they satisfy certain restrictions. An argument WH-
Jeruen E. Dery
394
word can only appear at the PrCS if it is a PSA, and it appears in
its canonical clause- internal position if it is not the PSA. A
peripheral WH-word can appear in the PrCS but is not obliged to do
so. Wherever it may appear, it still is in focus. All of these are
instances of the narrow focus type. 3.2 Yes/no questions
This subsection is further divided in two. The first part will deal
with Yes/no questions that have canonical word order. These
questions are the ones that retain the predicate-initial word
order. The second part deals with Yes/no questions that do not have
canonical word order. These are the interrogative sentences that
make use of the PrCS in the Layered Structure of the Clause (LSC).
3.2.1 Yes/No questions with canonical word order
To start with, consider the following examples.
(18) Q: Nahimatay ba si Juna? faint-PFT.UV Q SUBJ Juna ‘Did Juna
faint?’ A: a. Hindi, si Lara ang nahimatay. NEG SUBJ Lara LINPF
faint-PFT.UV ‘No, It was LARA who fainted.’ b. Hindi, nadapa siya
pero hindi siya nahimatay. NEG trip-PFT.UV 3SG.SUBJ but NEG
3SG.SUBJ faint-PFT.UV ‘No, Juna TRIPPED but she did not faint.’ c.
# Hindi, si Lara ang nadapa. NEG SUBJ Lara LINPF trip-PFT.UV ‘No,
It was LARA who TRIPPED .’
(19) Q: Nagbasa ba si Ronald ng libro? read-PFT.AV Q SUBJ Ronald
NSUBJ book ‘Did Ronald read a book?’ A: a. Hindi, si Mark ang
nagbasa ng libro. NEG SUBJ Mark LINPF read-PFT.AV NSUBJ book ‘No,
it was MARK who read a book.’ b. Hindi, magasin ang binasa niya.
NEG magazine LINPF read-PFT.UV 3SG.NSUBJ ‘No, he read A
MAGAZINE.’
Pragmatic Focus and Word Order Variation in Tagalog
395
c. Hindi, pumunta siya sa aklatan pero NEG go-PFT.AV 3SG.SUBJ DAT
library but hindi siya nagbasa. NEG 3SG.SUBJ read-PFT.AV ‘No, he
WENT TO THE LIBRARY but he did not read.’ d. # Hindi, si Mark ang
nagbasa ng magasin. NEG SUBJ Mark LINPF read-PFT.AV NSUBJ magazine
‘No, it was MARK who read a MAGAZINE.’
The above examples are discourse fragments of intransitive and
transitive Yes/no questions. As the examples show, there are many
felicitous replies, which shows the fluctuation of the position of
narrow focus. As Eschenberg (1999) points out, the con- stituent
that is being negated is the constituent receiving focus in the
original question. And since there are numerous felicitous replies,
one can discern that the focus in the interrogative question is
variable.
The variability of focus in the interrogative sentence results in
the variable felicitous replies. Depending on the focused
constituent in the question, the answer changes to accommodate the
required focus of the question. However, as can be discerned by the
infelicitous replies, a multiple focus construction is impossible
in interrogative sentences, since changing two constituents only
results in infelicity. The following diagrams illustrate the
variable positions of narrow focus in Yes/no questions.
Figure 12: Narrow focus on Yes/no question (focus on PSA)
Jeruen E. Dery
396
Figure 13: Narrow focus on Yes/no question (focus on non-PSA
argument)
Figure 14: Narrow focus on Yes/no question (focus on
predicate)
Pragmatic Focus and Word Order Variation in Tagalog
397
3.2.2 Yes/no questions with non-canonical word order
Yes/no questions with non-canonical word order pertain to sentences
that do not begin with a predicate. To begin with, consider the
following examples.
(20) Q: Nagbasa ba si Ronald ng libro kagabi? read-PFT.AV Q SUBJ
Ronald NSUBJ book last night ‘Did Ronald read a book last night?’
A: a. Hindi, kanina siya nagbasa ng libro. NEG a while ago 3SG.SUBJ
read-PFT.AV NSUBJ book ‘No, he read a book A WHILE AGO.’ b. Hindi,
si Mark ang nagbasa ng libro kagabi. NEG SUBJ Mark LINPF
read-PFT.AV NSUBJ book last night ‘No, it was MARK who read a book
last night.’ c. Hindi, magasin ang binasa niya kagabi. NEG magazine
LINPF read-PFT.UV 3SG.NSUBJ last night ‘No, he read A MAGAZINE last
night.’ d. Hindi, may libro siya kagabi NEG exist book 3SG.SUBJ
last night pero hindi niya binasa. but NEG 3SG.NSUBJ read-PFT.UV
‘No, he HAD A BOOK last night but he did not read it.’
(21) Q: Kagabi ba nagbasa si Ronald ng libro? last night Q
read-PFT.AV SUBJ Ronald NSUBJ book ‘Did Ronald read a book LAST
NIGHT?’ A: a. Hindi, kanina siya nagbasa ng libro. NEG a while ago
3SG.SUBJ read-PFT.AV NSUBJ book ‘No, he read a book A WHILE AGO.’
b. # Hindi, si Mark ang nagbasa ng libro kagabi. NEG SUBJ Mark
LINPF read-PFT.AV NSUBJ book last night ‘No, it was MARK who read a
book last night.’ c. # Hindi, magasin ang binasa niya kagabi. NEG
magazine LINPF read-PFT.UV 3SG.NSUBJ last night ‘No, he read A
MAGAZINE last night.’ d. # Hindi, may libro siya kagabi NEG exist
book 3SG.SUBJ last night pero hindi niya binasa. but NEG 3SG.NSUBJ
read-PFT.UV ‘No, he HAD A BOOK last night but he did not read
it.’
Jeruen E. Dery
398
(22) Q: Si Ronald ba ang nagbasa ng libro kagabi? SUBJ Ronald Q
LINPF read-PFT.AV NSUBJ book last night ‘Was Ronald the one who
read a book last night?’ A: a. # Hindi, kanina siya nagbasa ng
libro. NEG a while ago 3SG.SUBJ read-PFT.AV NSUBJ book ‘No, he read
a book A WHILE AGO.’ b. Hindi, si Mark ang nagbasa ng libro kagabi.
NEG SUBJ Mark LINPF read-PFT.AV NSUBJ book last night ‘No, it was
MARK who read a book last night.’ c. # Hindi, magasin ang binasa
niya kagabi. NEG magazine LINPF read-PFT.UV 3SG.NSUBJ last night
‘No, he read A MAGAZINE last night.’ d. # Hindi, may libro siya
kagabi NEG exist book 3SG.SUBJ last night pero hindi niya binasa.
but NEG 3SG.NSUBJ read-PFT.UV ‘No, he HAD A BOOK last night but he
did not read it.’
The examples in (20) illustrate a question with canonical word
order. Since the focus is variable in this case, all replies are
felicitous. However, the examples in (21) and (22) differ in the
sense that the first constituent is not the predicate. The clause-
initial constituents are a periphery, as seen in (21), and an
argument in the PrCS, as seen in (22). In these cases, the focus
position is not variable in the question. The only felicitous reply
is the one that has a narrow focus that corresponds to the original
focus position. There is no variation in focus if the question has
non-canonical order. The following are diagrams of these types of
focus.
Pragmatic Focus and Word Order Variation in Tagalog
399
Kagabi ba nagbasa si Ronald ng libro?
Figure 15: Narrow focus on fronted periphery in a Yes/no
question
Figure 16: Narrow focus on fronted argument in a Yes/no
question
Jeruen E. Dery
400
In summary, this section has dealt with Yes/no questions that are
both canonical and non-canonical in their word order. The ones with
canonical word order exhibit variable focus structure, since the
locus of the focus is variable as long as it is within the PFD. In
non-canonical interrogative sentences, however, the focus structure
is rigid, since the locus of the focus is only found on the
clause-initial position. Thus, unlike the occurrence of multiple
felicitous replies in the canonical type, only one felicitous
response is found in the non-canonical type.
4. Conclusion
This paper has shown a pragmatically-driven approach in the
analysis of the variation in sentence forms in Tagalog. It has
provided a motivation for the different forms that exist in the
language in the area of pragmatics.
It has been argued that Tagalog exhibits the three focus types as
proposed by Lambrecht (1994). However, the notion of “predicate
focus” has to be revised in order to accommodate the facts of the
language, which has a rather complex voice system. It has also been
shown that although the clause-initial position is particularly
favored for narrow focus, it is not always the case that sentence
forms with narrow focus always take the clause-initial position for
the focus position. The exceptions that appear are the sentence
forms that involve narrow focus on non-PSA constituents. It can
thus be said that Tagalog is a language with flexible syntax and
flexible focus.
It has also been demonstrated that interrogative sentences feature
only narrow focus, and that word order plays a part in the
variability of the focus position. Interrogative sentences with
canonical word order exhibit variable focus positions, resulting in
multiple felicitous replies. Interrogative sentences with
non-canonical word order, on the other hand, restrict the focus
position to the clause-initial position. Thus, there can only be
one felicitous reply.
Pragmatic Focus and Word Order Variation in Tagalog
401
References Alejandro, R. 1954. A Handbook of Tagalog Grammar.
Manila: University Book
Supply. Ceña, R. 1994. Tagalog Syntax: A First Course. Toronto:
Software Foundation. Constantino, E. 1965. The sentence patterns of
twenty-six Philippine languages. Lingua
15:71-124. Eschenberg, A. 1999. Polish Focus Structure. Buffalo:
The State University of New
York MA thesis. Lambrecht, K. 1994. Information Structure and
Sentence Form. Cambridge and New
York: Cambridge University Press. Llamzon, T. 1975. Modern Tagalog:
A Functional-Structural Description. The Hague:
Mouton. Schwarzschild, R. 1999. GIVENness, AVOIDF, and other
constraints on the placement
of accent. Natural Language Semantics 7.2:141-177. Selkirk, E.
1996. Sentence prosody: intonation, stress, and phrasing. The
Handbook of
Phonological Theory, ed. by J. A. Goldsmith, 550-569. Cambridge:
Blackwell. Van Valin, R. D. Jr. 2005. Exploring the
Syntax-Semantics Interface. Cambridge and
New York: Cambridge University Press. Van Valin, R. D. Jr., and
Randy J. LaPolla. 1997. Syntax: Structure, Meaning, and
Function. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
[Received 15 December 2005; revised 1 June 2006; accepted 1 August
2006] Department of Linguistics University at Buffalo The State
University of New York 609 Baldy Hall Buffalo, NY 14260 USA
[email protected]
Jeruen E. Dery
−
<< /ASCII85EncodePages false /AllowTransparency false
/AutoPositionEPSFiles true /AutoRotatePages /All /Binding /Left
/CalGrayProfile (Dot Gain 20%) /CalRGBProfile (sRGB IEC61966-2.1)
/CalCMYKProfile (U.S. Web Coated \050SWOP\051 v2) /sRGBProfile
(sRGB IEC61966-2.1) /CannotEmbedFontPolicy /Warning
/CompatibilityLevel 1.4 /CompressObjects /Tags /CompressPages true
/ConvertImagesToIndexed true /PassThroughJPEGImages true
/CreateJDFFile false /CreateJobTicket false /DefaultRenderingIntent
/Default /DetectBlends true /ColorConversionStrategy
/LeaveColorUnchanged /DoThumbnails false /EmbedAllFonts true
/EmbedJobOptions true /DSCReportingLevel 0 /SyntheticBoldness 1.00
/EmitDSCWarnings false /EndPage -1 /ImageMemory 1048576
/LockDistillerParams false /MaxSubsetPct 100 /Optimize true /OPM 1
/ParseDSCComments true /ParseDSCCommentsForDocInfo true
/PreserveCopyPage true /PreserveEPSInfo true /PreserveHalftoneInfo
false /PreserveOPIComments false /PreserveOverprintSettings true
/StartPage 1 /SubsetFonts true /TransferFunctionInfo /Apply
/UCRandBGInfo /Preserve /UsePrologue false /ColorSettingsFile ()
/AlwaysEmbed [ true ] /NeverEmbed [ true ] /AntiAliasColorImages
false /DownsampleColorImages true /ColorImageDownsampleType
/Bicubic /ColorImageResolution 300 /ColorImageDepth -1
/ColorImageDownsampleThreshold 1.50000 /EncodeColorImages true
/ColorImageFilter /DCTEncode /AutoFilterColorImages true
/ColorImageAutoFilterStrategy /JPEG /ColorACSImageDict <<
/QFactor 0.15 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >>
/ColorImageDict << /QFactor 0.15 /HSamples [1 1 1 1]
/VSamples [1 1 1 1] >> /JPEG2000ColorACSImageDict <<
/TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >>
/JPEG2000ColorImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256
/Quality 30 >> /AntiAliasGrayImages false
/DownsampleGrayImages true /GrayImageDownsampleType /Bicubic
/GrayImageResolution 300 /GrayImageDepth -1
/GrayImageDownsampleThreshold 1.50000 /EncodeGrayImages true
/GrayImageFilter /DCTEncode /AutoFilterGrayImages true
/GrayImageAutoFilterStrategy /JPEG /GrayACSImageDict <<
/QFactor 0.15 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >>
/GrayImageDict << /QFactor 0.15 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples
[1 1 1 1] >> /JPEG2000GrayACSImageDict << /TileWidth
256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >> /JPEG2000GrayImageDict
<< /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >>
/AntiAliasMonoImages false /DownsampleMonoImages true
/MonoImageDownsampleType /Bicubic /MonoImageResolution 1200
/MonoImageDepth -1 /MonoImageDownsampleThreshold 1.50000
/EncodeMonoImages true /MonoImageFilter /CCITTFaxEncode
/MonoImageDict << /K -1 >> /AllowPSXObjects false
/PDFX1aCheck false /PDFX3Check false /PDFXCompliantPDFOnly false
/PDFXNoTrimBoxError true /PDFXTrimBoxToMediaBoxOffset [ 0.00000
0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 ] /PDFXSetBleedBoxToMediaBox true
/PDFXBleedBoxToTrimBoxOffset [ 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 ]
/PDFXOutputIntentProfile () /PDFXOutputCondition ()
/PDFXRegistryName (http://www.color.org) /PDFXTrapped /Unknown
/Description << /FRA
<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>
/ENU (Use these settings to create PDF documents with higher image
resolution for improved printing quality. The PDF documents can be
opened with Acrobat and Reader 5.0 and later.) /JPN
<FEFF3053306e8a2d5b9a306f30019ad889e350cf5ea6753b50cf3092542b308000200050004400460020658766f830924f5c62103059308b3068304d306b4f7f75283057307e30593002537052376642306e753b8cea3092670059279650306b4fdd306430533068304c3067304d307e305930023053306e8a2d5b9a30674f5c62103057305f00200050004400460020658766f8306f0020004100630072006f0062006100740020304a30883073002000520065006100640065007200200035002e003000204ee5964d30678868793a3067304d307e30593002>
/DEU
<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>
/PTB
<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>
/DAN
<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>
/NLD
<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>
/ESP
<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>
/SUO
<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>
/ITA
<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>
/NOR
<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>
/SVE
<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>
/KOR
<FEFFd5a5c0c1b41c0020c778c1c40020d488c9c8c7440020c5bbae300020c704d5740020ace0d574c0c1b3c4c7580020c774bbf8c9c0b97c0020c0acc6a9d558c5ec00200050004400460020bb38c11cb97c0020b9ccb4e4b824ba740020c7740020c124c815c7440020c0acc6a9d558c2edc2dcc624002e0020c7740020c124c815c7440020c0acc6a9d558c5ec0020b9ccb4e000200050004400460020bb38c11cb2940020004100630072006f0062006100740020bc0f002000520065006100640065007200200035002e00300020c774c0c1c5d0c11c0020c5f40020c2180020c788c2b5b2c8b2e4002e>
/CHS
<FEFF4f7f75288fd94e9b8bbe7f6e521b5efa76840020005000440046002065876863ff0c5c065305542b66f49ad8768456fe50cf52068fa87387ff0c4ee563d09ad8625353708d2891cf30028be5002000500044004600206587686353ef4ee54f7f752800200020004100630072006f00620061007400204e0e002000520065006100640065007200200035002e00300020548c66f49ad87248672c62535f003002>
/CHT
<FEFF4f7f752890194e9b8a2d5b9a5efa7acb76840020005000440046002065874ef65305542b8f039ad876845f7150cf89e367905ea6ff0c4fbf65bc63d066075217537054c18cea3002005000440046002065874ef653ef4ee54f7f75280020004100630072006f0062006100740020548c002000520065006100640065007200200035002e0030002053ca66f465b07248672c4f86958b555f3002>
>> >> setdistillerparams << /HWResolution [2400
2400] /PageSize [612.000 792.000] >> setpagedevice