Synonyms

Old information is not necessarily a matter of repeated words. We can also repeat old information using synonyms, in which we express with different words a concept already mentioned. Such synonyms, too, are usually deaccented:

To do the laundry has the same meaning as wash the clothes. To go on foot is the same as to walk.

Alternatively, the speaker can preserve a degree of accenting on the repeated item or idea, while relegating it to secondary (minor) status by placing it in a separate IP, typically with a rising tone (see

). So these examples might alternatively have a fall-plus-rise pattern: (See also

3.32

and

5.12

)

If a word or phrase is a hyponym of a word or phrase already mentioned (= has a broader meaning), then it counts as given, and the nucleus goes elsewhere. We usually do not say:

but rather This is because the idea of 'tropical disease' was already present in the word malaria, just mentioned. Card games is a hyponym of whist.

But if a word or phrase is a hyponym of a word or phrase already mentioned (= has a narrower meaning), then it counts as new. In consequence, it is accented and attracts the nucleus:

Here, football is one of various ball games. But by mentioning it explicitly the speaker adds new information, making the notion more specific: not basketball or baseball, but football.

New information merits accenting. This principle applies even in many cases where the 'new' information maybe highly predictable:

The semantic content of the word o'clock is so small that we could omit it without any loss of meaning (It's 'five). Yet if present, o'clock receives the nucleus. It may be obvious from the context that the concert could not have lasted three minutes or three days. It may be clear that the price could not be fifty cents or fifty euros. Yet the nucleus still goes on hours and dollars respectively. This is the normal pattern even if we assume that both speakers already know Brenda, and must therefore be aware that she is a woman. The fact that information is 'given' by the context - by the set of assumptions shared by both speakers in an interaction - does not force us to deaccent a lexical item that is new as such. If the sun is shining, we know that it is day rather than night: so why accent day? After you finish eating, you know you've had a meal: so why accent meal? Presumably, because the lexical items day and meal respectively have not previously been mentioned: they are not part of the linguistic context.