\documentclass[a4paper]{article}

\usepackage[top=2cm]{geometry}
\usepackage[hidelinks]{hyperref}
\usepackage{tikz}
\usepackage[font=small]{caption}

\usepackage{polyglossia}
\setdefaultlanguage{british}
\setotherlanguage{hebrew}
\newfontfamily\dutchfont[Mapping=tex-text]{Latin Modern Roman}
\newfontfamily\hebrewfont[Scale=MatchLowercase]{Ezra SIL}
\DeclareTextFontCommand{\ez}{\hebrewfont}

\usepackage{handouts}

\usepackage{stfloats}

\title{\Large Handout of ``Transitivity in Grammar and Discourse''\footnote{Paul J. Hopper and Sandra A. Thompson (1980).}}
\author{Camil Staps}

\begin{document}

\maketitle

\summary{
	Transitivity is traditionally understood as a global property of an entire clause,
	but in this paper the authors look at different transitivity features that lower level clause elements are marked for\pagenr{251}.
	\parnote{%
		These features are
			\term{participants} (2+, A and O --- 1),
			\term{kinesis} (action --- non-action),
			\term{aspect} (telic --- atelic),
			\term{punctuality},
			\term{volitionality},
			\term{affirmation},
			\term{mode} (realis --- irrealis),
			\term{agency},
			\term{affectedness of O},
			\term{individuation of O}.
	}

	The hypothesis is that when two phrases are marked for any of these features,
		their markings are at the same end of the transitivity scale\pagenr{255}.
	This does not predict whether a phrase is marked or not.
	Transitivity features may be manifested both morphosyntactically and semantically.

	The hypothesis itself is supported by a lot of data,
		but this data only shows correlation, no causation\pagenr{280}.
	In other words, we are looking for a communicative reason why all the transitivity features would correlate.
	This reason is the concept of grounding:
		\term{background} is that part of discourse which does not vitally contribute to the speaker's goal,
		as opposed to \term{foreground}.
	All the transitivity features correlate logically with this concept.

	The hypothesis supports the traditional understanding that transitivity is a feature of a clause\pagenr{294}.

	When a particular feature is foregrounded depends on the distinction between foregrounded and backgrounded discourse.
	Hence, properties that are irrelevant to foregrounding are also irrelevant to transitivity.
}

\end{document}
