Prominence is a key notion in our understanding of language as a flexible system. It plays a major role in building linguistic structures and in organizing the information communicated into coherent and continually updated discourse representations. In phase I, we developed and tested the following tripartite definition of prominence: Def1: Prominence is a relational property that singles out one element from a set of elements of equal type and structure; Def2: Prominent elements are structural attractors, i.e. they serve as anchors for the larger structures they are constituents of, and they may license more operations than their competitors; Def3: Prominence status shifts over time (as discourse unfolds). Our research has shown that this definition provides a reliable and distinctive approach to prominence in language and allows us to compare prominence-related phenomena with different methodologies and across different linguistic subdisciplines (typology, phonology and phonetics, morphosyntax, semantics, discourse pragmatics, psycho- and neurolinguistics).

... imply hierarchical ordering of units, as in the case of stressed syllables within words, or of accented words within utterances. In addition to this structural sense, the notion of prominence has often been used with respect to why and how a particular unit “stands out”, acoustically or perceptually, among its neighbours in a given domain. This definition conflates both relatively context-free language-specific phenomena (e.g. BLACKbird vs. black BIRD) and devices manipulated by speakers in order to package information in a contextually appropriate way (e.g. I’m only CHATTING with Martha vs. I’m only chatting with MARTHA). In both cases, prosodically prominent units are often highlighted through a language-specific interplay of articulatory, acoustic and perceptual features.

The encoding and decoding of prominence involves context-derived expectations, phonological form-based expectations, and phonetic substance reflected in the speech signal. The relation between phonetic substance and meaning is intrinsically linked to phonological form, the latter building structural expectations and at the same time integrating information from the phonetic substance. The goal of Area A is to investigate prosodic expressions of prominence by focusing on how its encoding and decoding is employed in communication.

... are the prime examples of linguistic units susceptible to prominence relations of different kinds. For this reason, argument structure and argument structure alternations will be our first and main object of investigation.

Prominence asymmetries in this domain have been described by means of hierarchical orders at different levels of representation, i.e. the well-known Semantic Role Hierarchy, the Animacy Hierarchy, the Referentiality Hierarchy, and the Grammatical Relations Hierarchy. We will explore the possibility of whether and to what extent prominence relations pertaining to verbal arguments can productively be reanalysed by using more fine-grained distinctions than the ones usually used in these hierarchies.

Prominence relations between verbal arguments are not determined by a single prominence-lending property, for instance, by properties related to agentivity, animacy or subjecthood. Instead, they involve the dynamic interaction of a number of such properties that is dependent on the choice of construction and the discourse context. Also of interest are interactions of prominence related structures with non-linguistic cognitive factors such as visual attention.

... individuals, eventualities and propositions referred to in discourse by various linguistic means. The general assumption is that there is an inverse relation between the explicitness of an anaphoric expression (in terms of descriptive, lexical, and phonological material) and the prominence of the associated discourse entity in the mental model of the interlocutors: More elaborate types of anaphoric expressions, like full noun phrases, are associated with referents that are less prominent at the discourse level; formally reduced types of anaphoric expressions, like zero pronouns, are associated with referents that are more prominent.

One of the core questions addressed by Area C projects is what makes an entity more prominent within a set of entities of equal type. The contribution and interaction of various prominence-lending features is investigated, including syntactic function, thematic role properties, aspectual properties and topicality, among others. Furthermore, the construction of prominence structure is an ongoing process and prominence structure is dynamically updating as a conversation unfolds. The prominence status of semantic entities changes as interlocutors shift their attention from one entity to another in the course of a conversation. Area C projects therefore investigate which cues are used to indicate upcoming changes or maintenance of the current prominence structure and how this affects discourse processes.

... in the areas information infrastructure (INF) and central services (Z). An important contact point is the helpdesk in the „House of Prominence“ (Luxemburger Str. 299).