LV INFORMATION FOCUS IN ENGLISH AND VIETNAMESE SENTENCES

-1-

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION
1.1 RATIONALE
English, like any other language, is full of problems for the foreign learner.
As L.G. Alexander [40, p.9] states, what makes language difficult is not just
words, but the way words are combined to make sentences, for a sentence is a
sum-total of words and this sum-total is greater than its parts. Methodologists
[57, p.116] have pointed out that the goal of foreign language learning is to
communicate appropriately by means of the foreign language and that
understanding the grammar of English can help learners to communicate
appropriately since grammar is the support system of communication.
As for language teaching and learning in general, both teachers and students
usually pay much attention to vocabulary and grammar. However, how to make
use of grammatical knowledge in order to carry out communication is still a
more important matter.
Linguistic communication is not merely a matter of transmitting meanings
from one mind to another but also of achieving communicative effects. One of
the ways in which speech achieves its communicative effects is through
information organization embedded in syntactic structure. Whether language is
spoken or written, it has structure and a structure is not included in itself a
hotchpotch of randomly distributed elements. I cannot string words in a sentence
randomly but arrange them in accordance with a set of syntactic, semantic and
pragmatic rules. There is a whole range of both canonical and non-canonical
syntactic structures used in writing and speaking, which aid language users in
conveying messages successfully. The question is that the speaker has to make a
right choice among these structures which will explicitly signal the writer’s

-2-

intention to the reader. The reader as a result will be warned about the sort of
interactional effects the writer intends. Their communication is successful only
when the reader gets the writer’s intention.
English, like any other foreign language, is very complicated to Vietnamese
learners. English and Vietnamese are of different language types belonging to
distant language families. Also, there are quite a lot of differences in way of
thinking, lifestyle and literature between the Vietnamese people and the English
native speakers. These differences themselves cause many difficulties for
Vietnamese learners of English.
As an important modern concept, Information Focus is a very important issue
in the Information theory of language communication, especially when we want
to express our intended meaning to the hearer. It is the speaker who decides how
to cut up his message into pieces of information, each of which is called an
information unit. In each information unit, there is one part that is made
outstanding from the other by processing in different ways. Consider, for
example:
(1.1a) John kissed Mary.
(1.1b) Mary was kissed by John.
(1.1c) It was John who kissed Mary.
(1.1d) What John did was kiss Mary.
(1.1e) Mary, John kissed her.

[42, p.127]

What we want to identify in each of these sentences is focus of information
– the propositional content. In each case, it is asserted that kissing went on, John
did the kissing and Mary was the one who was kissed. However, these sentences
differ from one another in terms of the order of the elements and emphasized

elements. (1a) is considered to be the most neutral or unmarked word order. The
other sentences are marked in one way or another with the focus laid on different
elements.


-3-

The study of how information focus is organized and realized is the study of
syntactic devices to assign information focus. These devices are marked by
variations of basic simple structures such as: extraposition, cleft structures,
passive voice, etc. that are largely guided by some discourse and pragmatic
factors.
The learner is usually provided with syntactic structures or patterns but he is
not fully aware of which one will be used in which situation and how to organize
the message in accordance with information focus. This paper is intended to
raise the importance of teaching and learning syntactic structures to assign focus
information.
English and Vietnamese are two different languages. Devices of focusing
information in these languages are certainly very different though there do exist
some similarities. Learning these differences and similarities genuinely aids us in
both using our native language accurately and improving our English teaching.
1.2 SCOPE OF THE STUDY
There are several different ways of showing Information Focus in English
and Vietnamese.
To begin with, phonologically Focus can be shown by changes in stress and
intonation. Words as Focus are usually spoken with higher intonation and a
lower voice than normal and vowel may be longer.
(1.2) The bulldozer destroyed the cottage.
The bulldozer destroyed the cottage.

[58, p.176]

Secondly, lexically Information Focus can be shown by using special words
or phrases, such as “really” (thật sự là), “certainly”(chắc chắn là),
“definitely”(dứt khoát) ect. For example, the following sentence:
‘I enjoyed it’.
will be more emphatic if we add the adverb “ really” to intensify the meaning of
“enjoyed”. So we have:


-4-

(1.3) I really enjoyed it

[82, p.183]

Similarly, owing to the presence of the word “definitely”, the meaning of the
sentence:
(1.4) Certainly, several women loved him, and he was married twice.
[82, p.152]
is stronger than that of the sentence:
‘Several women loved him, and he was married twice’.
Finally, syntactically (through marked word order or special focus
constructions), different parts of a sentence can be given more importance by
using special grammatical constructions. For instance, part of a sentence can be
moved to front. Instead of “Tôi đã biết điều này” ( I knew this.)
we can say: Điều này, tôi đã biết.(This I knew) as in this sentence:
(1.5) When they scented my fear, they would attack. This I knew. [79, p.429]
“điều này” or “This”is placed at the beginning of the sentence for focus.
One more way to focus information is using the structure of cleft sentence.

The following two sentences:
(1.6) It is his callousness that I shall ignore.

[79, p.1383]

and
(1.7) What I shall ignore is his callousness.

[79, p.1383]

The Focus “his callousness” is stronger than the sentence:
‘I shall ignore his callousness’.
Due to the limitation of time as well as the lack of material, our thesis
focuses on Syntactic Devices used to mark Information Focus in English and
Vietnamese sentences.
Besides, in this study, I also figure out how Information Focus is arranged in
these syntactic devices. I also try to find out some major problem that
Vietnamese learners of English face in the identification and performance of


-5-

Information Focus in English to help them make a systematic and detailed
investigation so as to produce an adequate and plausible explanation of the topic.
1.3 PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
Our thesis aims at finding out all possible means of focusing information in
English and Vietnamese equivalents. In particular, I make a special effort to
describe and classify grammatical constructions employed for assigning focus.
The intended readers of the thesis are therefore English learners and teachers,
who need to understand the major syntactic devices that are used to make more

prominent the information they want to communicate. Such an understanding
will help the teacher to present language material in details, and the learner to
make individual choices without any serious risk of error. It will help to guide
him towards confidence in personal expression as well.
What is more, the thesis will offer some suggestions for preparing and
teaching language material involving means of assigning information focus.
As determined by its purpose, the study attempts to find out the answers to
the following main questions:
1. What syntactic devices are commonly used to assign Information Focus in
English sentences?
2. What are Vietnamese equivalent devices used to assign Information Focus in
sentence?
3. Which sentence elements are Focuses in English and Vietnamese?
4. What are the pragmatic factors (information status) that trigger in these
devices?
5. What are the implications of learning and teaching English constructions?
However, at the comparatively advanced level at which this thesis is aimed,
it is necessary to present the information systematically, and how it is used in
language communication. At lower levels of study, one is concerned simply with


-6-

how to form grammatical sentence to convey their idea, therefore they need to
grasp all possible grammatical construction for marking information focus.
The theorical material presented in this thesis is necessary for anyone who
needs to understand the principles regulating the use of devices, mainly syntactic
devices to mark Information Focus in English and Vietnamese.
1.4 ORGANIZATION OF THE STUDY
The study is divided into five chapters as follow:

- Chapter 1 is Introduction. In this section, the rationale of the study is presented. It
also contains the purpose, the scope of the study, and the organization of the study.
- Chapter 2 consists of 2 parts. The first part is a review of previous studies
related to the problems under investigation. The second is concerned with the
theoretical background which includes the concepts of information, information
structure, focus, classification of focus. All of the syntactic devices to mark
information Focus are introduced and classified depend on the principle of endfocus or thematisation. In this chapter I also introduce basic sentence patterns in
both languages because it is necessary to analyse the sentence construction
during the study.
- Chapter 3 is methodology and procedures of the study. Here I focus on the
aims and objectives of the study. The questions raise in this chapter are answered
and analyzed in the next one. The reseach methods and research procedures are
also included in this chapter.
- Chapter 4 is findings and discussion. In this chapter, I analyze, describe and
illustrate the syntactic devices to assign information focus in English and the
Vietnamese equivalents. From these analyses, I find out the pragmatic factors
trigger in these devices.
- Chapter 5 is conclusion and implications. I summarize the results of the tasks
done in chapter 4 and suggest some implication for teaching and learning
grammatical constructions to mark information focus as well as present the
suggestion for further research in this chapter.


-7-

CHAPTER 2

REVIEW OF LITERATURE
2.1 REVIEW OF PREVIOUS STUDIES
Information structure was first studied by the linguists of the Prague School.

Their studies is concerned with “Communicative Dynamism”. “Communicative
Dynamism” is the extent of the contribution which the sentence elements make
the push forward the development of communication. The theory of
Communicative Dynamism that was devised by Czech linguists lays a
foundation for the analysis of sentences in term of the information they contain.
Adopting the Prague School view, M.A.K. Halliday (1991) with: “An
Introduction to Functional Grammar” affirmed the notion of Theme and Rheme
in which Theme responded to Known and Rheme responded to Unknown.
Halliday delimited the categories of these elements: the given, the new and
described their organization in an information unit. Halliday also gave the role of
information and stress in expressing information unit, especially new
information. Halliday assumed that each information segment contains one
information focus and this focus was realized by stress.
After that, a lot of linguistics assumed that there may be more than one
information focus in a discourse. The information status was identified by
speakers who used intonation to mark off the focus on any segment of
information. The focus can be on not only New information but also Given
information where the speakers make the listeners pay much attention on the
focus element as the emphasis or the contrast of what was said in the
presupposition.
K. Lambrecht (1994), “Information Structure and Sentence Form”,
interested much on focus structure and types of focus structure in sentences. He


-8-

distinguished Old information from New information base on Pragmatic
Presupposition and Focus.
All of these previous works help me a lot in gaining background knowledge
to penetrate to the domain of information structure concerning the issue.

In examing devices marking information which is the main part in my thesis
there were many other linguists:
VanVallin & Lapolla (1997), “Syntax: Structure, Meaning and Function”,
suggested that all languages have some grammatical systems for marking which
type of information is which within the utterance; it may involve intonation,
morphological marking, word order or some combination theory of information.
In “An Introduction to English Transformational Syntax” by Rodney
Huddleston (1979), only one kind of extraposition is mentioned in the
viewpoint of a transformationalist. He transformed a sentence with clausal
subject, called deep structure, into the sentence introduced with an introductory
subject “it”, call surface structure. This transformation shows the relation
between syntax and semantics.
E.K Brown and J.E Miller in “A Linguistic Introduction to Sentence
Structure” (1986) generally mention end-focus and end-weight principles. The
language phenomenon occurs when language users want to place focus on
“heavy” constituents at the end of the sentence. In this book, they mainly discuss
extraposition of subject and object.
“A University Course in English grammar” by Agenla Downing and Phillip
Locke (1992) discusses syntactic strategies in assigning focus, three of which
are postponement devices: extraposition, discontinuity of sentence elements, and
dative movement.
In general, all English linguists succeed in giving out some types of devices
in marking information.


-9-

Dang Phuong Ha (2000) examined the phonological and syntactic features
of Information Structure in the light of discourse analysis. It is concerned with
both spoken and written English used in the functional style of everyday – life

discourse. However, the syntactic features that are presented in this thesis are
studied in English sources only
Tran Huu Manh (10/2004) applied the modern concepts that are raised by
Lambrecht(1994) and Van Vallin & Lapolla(1997) to the study of sentences and
Information Structure in Journal of Linguistics.
Phan Thi Linh Giang (2002) investigated the postponement devices in
English and Vietnamese. The devices she mentioned in her thesis are
extraposition, discontinuity of sentence elements and existence construction.
These devices are based on principle of end-focus and end-weight. Therefore,
the devices based on thematization have not been presented.
Huynh Thi Bich Ngoc (2005) presented, described and analyzed
Information Structure at the level of sentences and paragraphs as well. In this
thesis, she tried to present different kinds of Focus, Focus Domain, Topic
sentences in paragraphs. No devices are investigated. Moreover, the resources
used in her thesis is in English language only.
In Vietnamese, Diệp Quang Ban (1998) in “Một Số Vấn Đề về Câu Tồn Tại
Trong Tiếng Việt” has paid special attention to existence constructions in
Vietnamese. He groups types of existential constructions and generalizes
syntactic forms, lexical constraints and semantic feature of existential
constructions. Yet, few pragmatic characteristics have been discussed.
“Thành Phần Câu” (1998) and “Tiếng Việt Thực Hành” (1999) by Nguyễn
Minh Thuyết and Nguyễn Văn Hiệp describe rules of movement of Subject
and object on syntactic and pragmatic ground. Syntactically, they mention
syntactic constraints on sentence element movement. Pragmatically, they state


- 10 -

that the purpose of the movement is to meet the principle of information
structure, and to place a topic for the next sentence.

“Phong Cách Học và Đặc Điểm Tu Từ” (1983) by Cù Đình Tú and “Phong
Cách Học Tiếng Việt (1997) and “99 Phương Tiện và Biện Pháp Tu từ Tiếng
Việt (2001) by Đinh Trọng Lạc have studied pragmatic features of variations
of Vietnamese basic structures. The linguistic phenomenon of movement of
sentence elements is considered one of the syntactic devices. They say that the
constituent that is moved out of its normal position to the end of sentence is the
one the writer intends to emphasize most and give some specific information.
Briefly, all of linguists in both languages discussed information structure
through syntactic devices to mark information focus. However, no one have a
full picture of these devices in English and Vietnamese equivalence. The study
of syntactic devices to mark information focus in both English and Vietnamese
is still open.
As the background mentioned above, it is worthwhile analyzing information
structure, information focus to contrast and distinguish information focus by
investigating the syntactic devices to assign the information focus in English and
Vietnamese sentences.
2.2 THEORICAL BACKGROUND
2.2.1 INFORMATION
When we talk about a situation, we can usually organize the information in
various ways; for example, by choosing different elements of the situation as the
subject of a clause or sentence.
(2.1a) Last night, the C.I.A arrested the attorney general of the United States
(2.2b) The attorney general of the United States was arrested last night by the
C.I.A.
(2.3c) The attorney general of the United States was arrested by the C.I.A. last
night.

[64, p.175]

- 11 -

The way we choose to organize information in a clause or sentence can
depend on what has been said before, on what the listener already knows, or on
what we want to take the focus off.
2.2.1.1 Given and New information
Information, as M.A.K. Halliday defines, is “a process of interaction between
what is already know or predictable and what is new or unpredictable”. It is the
interplay of what is new and what is old or given that generates information in
the linguistic sense. As a result, it can be said that an information unit is a
structure which is made up of the new and the given.
Given information is something which the speaker assumes the hearer knows
about already; and new information is something unknown or unpredictable. In
the following dialogue:
(2.4) “What did John say to Mary?
“He was speaking to me (not to Mary).

[60, p.172]

“He was speaking” is given information: it is already given by the preceding
clause.
He was speaking to me
GIVEN

NEW

As new information is obviously what is most important in a message, it
receives the information focus, whereas given information does not. That is to
say, the focus, signaled by the nucleus, indicates where the new information lies,
and the unit carrying such information has the nucleus in final position. In the

dialogue:
(2.5a) “What’s on today?”

[67, p.408]

“We’re going to the races”
NEW
The whole clause is new information. But in
(2.5b) “What are we doing today?”

[67, p.408]


- 12 -

“We’re going to the races.
NEW
The new information is “going to the race”. And the final adverbial is new
information as in:
(2.5c) “Where are we going today?”

[67, p.408]

“We’re going to the races
NEW
2.2.1.2 Topic and Comment
Sentences can be organized in such a way that one part represents what the
speaker wants the sentence to be about, and the other part contains the major
information asserted about what is presented in the first part. The first part of
sentence is called the topic, the second part the comment.

Consider the following statements:
(2.6) This steak is terrible.

(in a restaurant)

[70, p.96]

(2.7) I want a couple of books.

(at a bookshop)

[70, p.104]

(2.8) The next train is at haft past nine.

(at a railway station)[70, p.93]

Each of these sentences starts with a topic phrase. The topic is known or
expected in the situation: “steak” is what we are eating; “I” am in the shop; “the
next train” is what we are going to catch.
The new information about the topic is presented in the comment which
usually comes at or near the end of the sentences.
This steak is terrible.
I want a couple of books.
The next train is at haft past nine.
The point of interest, the important part of the message, is “terrible”, “a
couple of books” and “half past nine”. It is also the part of the sentence where
the voice rises or falls.

- 13 -

Each of the statement starts with something known, the topic, and ends with
something new, the comment.
To sum up, I want to resort to R. A. Jacobs’ viewpoint on the connection
between what was said before and what is said after within a sentence: “The old
information is referred to and is clearly the topic about which the speaker intends
to communicate something. The new information is being asserted as the main
thrust of the sentence, the comment about the topic.”
2.2.1.3 Theme and Rheme
We base our explanation of “theme” and “rheme” on M.A.K. Halliday’s
point of view.
He assumes that “in all languages the clause has the character of a message”.
It has some form of organization which gives it the status of a communicative
event. In English, and in other language as well, the clause is organized as a
message by having a special function assigned to one part of it. One part of a
clause is called the theme; it then combines with another part, the rheme, so that
the two parts together make a message.
The theme is indicated by position in the clause: it is put in initial position.
The theme is considered to be the element which serves as the point of departure
of the message. The remainder of the message is named the rheme. Therefore, a
clause, as information structure, consists of a theme followed by a rheme. In the
following sentences:
(2.9a) The duke has given my aunt that teapot.
(2.9b) My aunt has been given that teapot by the duke.
(2.9c) That teapot the duke has given to my aunt.

[57, p.38]

“the duke”, “my aunt”, and “that teapot” are the themes and the rest of each

sentence is rheme.
As a general guide, the theme can be identified as an element which comes
first in the clause. The theme is element in a particular structure which organizes


- 14 -

the clause as a message. A clause, therefore, is organized as a rheme-theme
structure. If in any language, the information is organized as a rheme-theme
structure, it is natural that the position for theme should be at the beginning of
the clause or sentence, rather than at the end or in the middle.
The theme is not necessarily a noun phrase like those in the above sentences.
It can also be an adverb phrase, or a prepositional phrase as in the following
examples.
(2.10) Once I was a real turtle.

[57, p.39]

(2.11) Very carefully she put him back on his feet again.

[57, p.39]

(2.12) On Friday night I go backwards to bed.

[57, p.39]

“Once”, “very carefully”, and “on Friday night” as adverb phrases and a
prepositional phrase respectively are the themes.
2.2.2 INFORMATION STRUCTURE
2.2.2.1 Information Structure in English

The questions that the theory of information structure is supposed to answer
are what people do when they focalize and what and in which way focalization
contributes to the construction of meaning. When sentences are considered in
terms of communicative functions, they include in themselves information units.
These units can be organized in different ways so as to be as much informative
as desired. Pragmatically, there exist some factors having influence on the
ordering of information units in sentences.
Firbas (1964), a functionalist linguist of the Prague School, argues that
information structure is a communicative dynamism (CD), which Firbas defines
as ‘the extent to which the sentence element contributes to the development of
the communication’. Information in a sentence is distributed in accordance with
the scale of CD, that is, progress from left low to right high information value.
Information with the lowest degree of CD is called old (given) information,
which is considered the least relevant type of information. Information with the


- 15 -

highest CD is named new information, which conveys the most important
information. Therefore, according to the principle of CD, sentences are
organized so that old information precedes what is new in the discourse context
and this presentation is preferable.
The study of sentence grammar from an information structure perspective is
understanding of such phenomena: cleft construction, postponement, dislocation,
etc. According to the principle of CD, the constituents that carries old
information is put at the initial position and the one that carries new information
stands at the final position of the clause. Hence, the beginning and the end of the
sentence are two focal points in English and as a matter of fact, there is indeed a
correlation between word order and information structure of sentences and that
pragmatic consideration is reflected in the syntactic composition of English

utterances. In any language, there exist a variety of constructions that allow the
speakers to structure the discourse so that new information is focalized.
Following Prince (1992), we shall refer to entities that are new to the
discourse as discourse-new and those that are new to the hearer as hearer-new;
likewise, entities that have been evoked in the prior discourse will be called
discourse-old, and those that are assumed to be known to the hearer as hearerold. The distinction between discourse-familiarity will result in four possible
information statuses, of which only three normally occur in natural discourse:
1. Hearer-old, discourse-old: this refers to information which has previously
been evoked in the current discourse, and which the speaker therefore believes is
known to the hearer.
(2.13) When somebody says to me, ‘you’re great, how come you just a
waitress? Just a waitress’ I’d say, ‘Why don’t you think you deserve to be served
by me?’

[47, p.112]

2. Hearer-old, discourse-new: this is a kind of information which has not
been evoked in the current discourse, but which the speaker believes is known to


- 16 -

the hearer. Both the hearer and speaker are supposed to share the same
knowledge of information. In the following instance, they are assumed to know
who Chelsea Clinton is.
Eg:

There is a new hotel in Verona. In this hotel, Chelsea Clinton works.
3. Hearer-new, discourse-new: information which has not been evoked in the

current discourse, and which the speaker does not believe is known to the hearer.
4. Hearer-new, discourse-old: theoretically, information which has been
evoked in the current discourse, but which the speaker believes is not known to
the hearer.
2.2.2.2 Information Structure in Vietnamese
Like English, the theory of information structure in Vietnamese language is
also based on the theory of actual division of the sentence by the Praha. The
authors of the grammar book ‘Ngữ Pháp Tiếng Viet’ are the first linguists to
discuss possibility of existence of the structure giveness-newness in Vietnamese
language and devices presenting this structure. Then, Panfilov described various
ways of presenting old and new information in Vietnamese sentences in an
article entitled Sự Phân Đoạn Thực Tại Của Câu Tiếng Việt (1980). Lý Toàn
Thắng (1981) and Diệp Quang Ban(1989) applied dichotomous opposition
(Theme-Rheme) of the theory of actual division of sentences in respect to a new
way that theme is what will be talked about or explain and rheme is what the
speaker talks about or explains theme. Theoretically, all above linguists
generally intend to distinguish functional sentence perspective (ESP, also known
as actual division of sentence), (theme-rheme or topic-comment) from syntactic
division of sentence (subject-predicate). However, practically it is complicated
and hard work to make a distinction and establish corelations between functions
on these two grounds. The reason is that there are no appropriate surface signs
marking dichotomous structures (theme-rheme, subject-predicate). Cao Xuân
Hạo [12, p.425-426] states that correlation between information structure and


- 17 -

thematic structure can only be found in languages accepting difference between
theme and subject but no difference between theme and giveness. Yet, in some
languages like Vietnamese, Chinese… basic syntactic structures directly reflect

logical structure of discourse; there is an absolute difference between
information structure and thematic structure. Thematic structure considered as
syntactic structure always divides a sentence into two parts: theme-rheme.
Information structure – that is – a sentence is studied on pragmatic ground –
may consider the whole sentence or any sentence constituent (object,
postmodifier…) as new information or information focus. Cao Xuân Hao’s view
has been shared by many Vietnamese linguists like Lưu Văn Lăng, Nguyễn Thị
Ảnh,… Recently, Nguyễn Thị Thúy states in her article [33] there exists two
different opinions of Vietnamese linguists to information structure:
(1) Information structure and thematic structure (theme-rheme) are completely
different from each other. The thematic structure is studied on syntactic ground
and information structure on pragmatic ground. The case in which thematic
structure correlates with information structure is not popular in Vietnamese.
Sometimes new information is the whole structure Theme-rheme of it can
correlate with Theme but not Rheme and vice versa. The second explanation is
that

new and old information can only be found in context and hearers’

knowledge and is marked by stress in speech, while

thematic structure is

marked by word order and the position of ‘thì’ and 'là’[10].
(2) The thematic structure and the structure of old and new information are
integrated in information structure. They are the two basic elements of
information structure of utterances.
So far few Vietnamese linguists have spent time studying profound
relationship between information structure and sentence word order and effects
of information structure on sentence word order.

- 18 -

2.2.3 INFORMATION FOCUS
2.2.3.1 Definition of Focus
Knud Lambecht in “Information Structure and Sentence Form” assumes that
the Focus of a sentence, or, more precisely, the Focus of proposition expressed
by a sentence in a given utterance context, is seen as the element of information
whereby the presupposition and the assertion differ from each other. The Focus
is that portion of a proposition which can not be taken for granted at time of
speech. It is the unpredictable or pragmatically non-recoverable element in an
utterance. The Focus is what makes an utterance into an assertion. [66, p.207]
More explicitly the notion is expressed in Halliday’s (1967) definition of
Focus:
“Information focus is one kind of emphasis, that whereby the speaker marks
out a part (which may be the whole) of a message block as that which he wishes
to be interpreted as informative. What is focus is “new” information; not in the
sense that it cannot have been previously mentioned, although it is often the case
that it has not been, but in the sense that the speaker presents as not being
recoverable from the preceding discourse… The focus of the message, it is
suggested, is that which is represented by the speaker as being new, textually
(and situationally) non-derivable information”.
The concept of Focus is the element of information in a sentence whereby
shared and not-yet-shared knowledge differing from each other.
Let’s look at the example:
(2.14) Q: Where did you go last night?
A: I went to the movies.

[66, p.209]

In some intuitive sense, we are no doubt justified in saying, that the word
movies, or perhaps the phrase the movies, in the answer indicates the point
“where there is the greatest concentration of information”, or that this word is


- 19 -

the element “whereby the speaker marks out [the] part… of [the] message block
which he wishes to be interpreted as informative”.
2.2.3.2 Types of focus
a. New Information Focus
Constituents of information unit in an utterance are organized into principled
order: old –new. Old information precedes New information, thus new
information focus often stands in the last-portion of a sentence. In English this
order is end-focus. This is similar to Vietnamese:
Look at the example:
(2.15) Lão ấy lại đến.

[17, p.29]

In this sentence, information is divided into two portions, the known
information “Lão ấy”, is one which the speaker and the hearer have already
known, takes the initial position; the new information, is one which the speaker
believes the hearer doesn’t know, and which the speaker presents it as the most
important of information, takes the last position: “Lại đến”. Therefore
information focus in this sentence is new information focus.
b. End-Focus and Contrastive Information Focus
The neutral and usual position of focus is end-focus, the chief prominence on
the last open-class item or proper noun in the clause.

(2.16) Dylan Thomas was born in SWÀNsea.

[73, p.938]

Contrastive focus, however, may be placed at earlier points, and so may fall
on any of the non-final elements of the clause. For example:
- Focus at S:
(2.17) [Who was born in Swansea?] Dylan THÒmas was (born in Swansea)
[73, p.938]
- Focus at V:
(2.18) [Dylan Thomas was married in Swansea, wasn’t he?] NO, he was BÒRN
in Swansea

[73, p.938]


- 20 -

- Focus at Od:
(2.19) [I hear you’re painting the bathroom blue.] NÒ, I’m painting the
LÌvingroom blue.

[73, p.938]

- Focus at A:
(2.20) [Have you ever driven a Cadillac?] YÈS, I’ve ÒFten driven one.
[73,

p.939]

Contrastive focus can also be given to final positioned closed-class items like
pronouns and prepositions subsequent to the one on which the nuclear would
normally fall according to the rule of end-focus:
(2.21) Who are you working FÒR (not with)?

[73, p.939]

(2.22) He was talking to me (not to you)

[73, p.939]

c. Contrastive Focus on Words and Syllables
The example presented above shows that any element, for contrastive
purpose, can receive nuclear prominence on its last fully stressed syllable.
Intonation can also focus more specifically on a particular word of a phrase,
rather than a phrase of a clause:
(2.23) DỲlan Thomas was born in 1914 (not EDWARD Thomas).
[73, p.939]
(2.24) We live in THÌS house (not THAT one).

[73, p.939]

(2.25) I put them ÒN the bed (not UNDER it).

[73, p.939]

Or the normal stress pattern of a word maybe distorted by means of focus to
show a contrastive point:
(2.26) I’m afraid that BÙreaucracy can be worse than AÙtocracy.
[73, p.938]

(The normal stress patterns of the words are /bu’reaucracy/ and /au’tocracy/.)


- 21 -

2.2.4 PRINCIPLE OF END-FOCUS, END-WEIGHT, THEMATIZATION
2.2.4.1 Principle of End-focus
There are two ways of assigning focus in a sentence: preverbal focus
position, i.e. focused information precedes verbs, normally in initial-clause
position and post-verbal focus position (known as end-focus), i.e. focused
information follows verbs, usually in final-clause position. Quirk et al. [74] calls
the end-focus the old –before- new principle since the principle is related to the
tendency of recoverable (old) information to precede irrecoverable (new)
information. So, there exists one-to-one correlation between new information
and end-focus. This focus tends to come towards the end of the sentence, which
is unmarked, whereas the focus falls on the initial position of the sentence, it is
marked. With English and Vietnamese postponement devices, focused
information stands at the final sentence position where it is believed to easily
attract the listener’s attention.
2.2.4.2 Principle of End-weight
What follows closely related to the end –focus principle is the principle of
end-weight [74, p.189] which stipulates that longer, heavier structures tend to
come in the final position of sentence. This is hardly surprising since new
information which usually comes at the end often needs to be stated fully, and
since it takes more assembly time for heavy information than light one. The
weight of a constituent is a matter of its length and syntactic and morphological
complexity. Probably the most widely accepted of proposed. In English and
many languages, it has been recognized that there is a preference for placing
heavy constituents towards the right of the sentence to alleviate the complexity
or heaviness. Therefore, the weight of a constituent may affect its position in the

clause. Both speaker’s and hearer’s interests have put forward as reasons why
weight may have an effect on word order. The fact that heavier constituents
simply take longer to formulate may help to explain the preference for heavy


- 22 -

constituents to appear ate in many languages. The following example will show
the influence of end-weight on the ordering of sentence constituents:
Instead of this unaccepted sentence:
* I have hated the man who wallowed on them while I was wallowing in mud and
blood too much.
The English say:
(2.27) I have hated too much the man who wallowed on them while I was
wallowing in mud and blood.

[53, p.56]

In this example, the object, long and complex new information, is shifted to
the end of the sentence to satisfy the principle of end-focus and end-weight,
which helps avoid front-heavy sentences as Quirk et al [74, p.426] stated ‘there
is a feeling that the predicate of a clause should where possible be longer than
the subject’
2.2.4.3 Thematization
In English, the Theme can generally be identified as an element which comes
in first position in the clause. As Cao Xuan Hao mentions, the Vietnamese
language is a Theme prominent language.
When any constituent other than the Subject functions as Theme, it is
regarded as a marked Theme. Such a constituent may be thought of as in some
way having been moved from its unmarked position to the front of the clause.

Technically, we can say that it has been thematized. Thus, in sentence:
(2.28) At around 5000 B.C., man learns to smelt and shape copper.
[56, p.223]
We can say that the circumstantial Adjunct at around 5000 B.C. has been
thematized. Similarly in the clause:
(2.29) This example I invented.
We can say that the Object this example has been thematized.

[56, p.223]


- 23 -

To understand the possible motivation for selecting the constituent other than
Subject to begin the clause, that is, to understand why thematization occurs, it is
necessary to look at the relationship between a clause and its context.
Objects in the initial position of a clause are highly marked. They are
common in English, particularly in written English. However, they do occur in
certain contexts.
If we try to reconstruct a context in which the thematized object in clause
such as this example I invented would seem natural and appropriate, we might
come up with something like:
(2.29) Most of the examples come from the texts, but this example I invented, as
I couldn’t find an authentic one.

[56, p.224]

In this example, the marked theme highlights a contrast between most of
examples and this example. As thematized object are highly marked, it often
have this kind of contrastive effect.

Basing on the principle of end-focus, there are devices marking information
focus include passive, existential sentences and extraposition whereas

the

postponing is based on the principle of end weight. The others are preposing and
clefting are based on the principle of thematization.
2.2.5 DEVICES IN ASSIGNING INFORMATION FOCUS
2.2.5.1 Phonological devices
Speakers divide their messages into one or more chunks which are
information units. Each information unit is realized, not directly by a
grammatical unit, but by a phonological unit called a tone unit.
A tone unit consists of a series of stressed and unstressed syllables and
always contains one syllable which is marked by a jump in pitch (“pitch
prominence’) which is accompanied by increased duration and tonic stress. This
is the intonation nucleus. The syllable on which the nucleus falls is the focus of
information.


- 24 -

Speaker use their voice to stress the the focus information. The following
sentence could be said in many different ways:
(2.30a) My brother has sold his motorbike to the VET.
(2.30b) My brother has sold his MOTORbike to the vet. (not his car)
(2.30c) My brother has SOLD his motorbike to the vet. (not given it)
(2.30d) My BROther has sold his motorbike to the vet. (not my cousin)
[42, p.245]
Generally, the main stress in a sentence is on the last word. In declarative
sentences and wh-question the stress is accompanied by a falling tone. Therefore

the first example (15a) has unmarked focus, the stress falls on VET. But stress
can also be used contrastively to focus on new information that the speaker want
to assert, such as in (15b, 15c, 15d). Contrastive stress is usually marked by a
rising tone. The speaker’s focus, then, is on asserting what the addressee is
assumed not to know, or at least not to have in mind at that moment.
Pronounce the following sentence aloud:
(2.31a) The bulldozer destroyed the COTTAGE.

[64, p.176]

(2.31b) The BULLDOZER destroyed the cottage.
In (2.31a) the main stress is where we would expect it to be - on the last
constituent of the verb phrase. The verb phrase contains the major new
information. In (2.31b), contrastive stress has been placed on the last constituent
of the subject noun phrase. The subject is most typically old information;
contrastive stress identifies this constituent as containing the major new
information.
2.2.5.2

Lexical devices

Apart from stress and intonation, special words can be used to assign focus to
some part of a sentence, or to the whole sentence.
Words used to assign focus can be classified into: (1) focusing adjuncts; (2)
Intensifiers; (3) swearwords; (4) Interjections; (5) Others.


- 25 -

(1) Focusing adjuncts

Focusing adjuncts indicate that what is being communicated is limited to a
part that is focused. Focusing adjuncts can be divided into:
(a)Limiters:
- Exclusives restrict what is said to the part focused, e.g. alone, just, merely,
only, purely, simply,
(2.32) I just love the way she talks

[82,183]

- Particularizers restrict what is said particularly or mainly to the part
focused, e.g. chiefly, especially, mainly, mostly, in particularly,…
(2.33) My friends are mostly non-smokers.

[82, p.18]

(2.34) It rains a lot, especially in the north.

[82, p.187]

(b) Additives: also, either, even, neither, nor, too, as well as, in addition.
(2.35) Everybody helped with the packing, even the dog.

[82, p.188]

(2.36) Other people have meetings on Sunday, and we have meeting on
Sundays as well.

[82, p.39]

(2.37) The peasants are desperately short of food. In addition, they

urgently need

doctors and medical supplies.

[82, p.154]

(2) Intensifiers:
Intensifiers are not limited to indicating an increase in intensity; they indicate
a point on the intensity scale which may be high or low. Most of the common
intensifiers are adverbs, but they also include some adjectives, noun phrases, and
a few prepositional phrases.
Intensifiers can be divided into three semantic classes: emphasizers;
amplifiers; and downtoners.
(a) Emphasizers have a general heightening effect. Common emphasizers
are:
- actually, certainly, clearly, definitely, indeed, obviously, plainly, really,
surely, for certain, for sure, of course.