Non-prototypical clefts: Formal, semantic and information-structural properties

Abstract In this article we present an overview of current debates in the analysis of cleft sentences. The types of sentences that are often seen as prototypical examples of the cleft category are introduced by it is or a cross-linguistic equivalent; in addition, they have specificational semantics and a focus-background information structure articulation. We argue here that other, less prototypical types of constructions, which have received less attention, also belong to the cleft category: sentences that are introduced by expressions such as there is and you’ve got (and their cross-linguistic equivalents), as well as sentences introduced by it is which do not have specificational semantics and which express other types of information structure articulations (e.g. all-focus or topic-comment). We argue that it is fruitful to analyse these ‘non-prototypical’ clefts in more depth, not only to come to a better understanding about these sentence types in their own right, but also to arrive at insights in the phenomenon of ‘clefts’ in general.

[1]  Stacey Katz,et al.  Categories of C’est-Cleft Constructions , 2000, Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique.

[2]  Karen Lahousse,et al.  The distribution of functional-pragmatic types of clefts in adverbial clauses , 2014 .

[3]  Karen Lahousse,et al.  There’s more to Italian c’è clefts than expressing all-focus , 2017 .

[4]  Béatrice Lamiroy,et al.  C'est ainsi que: grammaticalisation ou lexicalisation ou les deux à la fois ? , 2015, Journal of French Language Studies.

[5]  Andreas Dufter,et al.  On explaining the rise of c'est -clefts in French , 2008 .

[6]  Adriana Belletti,et al.  The CP of clefts , 2008 .

[7]  Karen Lahousse,et al.  Les clivées en voici / voilà , 2018, Lingvisticæ Investigationes. International Journal of Linguistics and Language Resources.

[8]  Judy L. Delin,et al.  Properties of It-Cleft Presupposition , 1992, J. Semant..

[9]  K. Lambrecht Prédication seconde et structure informationnelle: la relative de perception comme construction présentative , 2000 .

[10]  Nancy Hedberg,et al.  Topic-focus controversies , 2006 .

[11]  Karen Lahousse Specificational sentences and word order in Romance: A functional analysis , 2007 .

[12]  Christophe Benzitoun,et al.  Sur les relations entre syntaxe et discours : dispositifs de la rection et dispositifs macrosyntaxiques , 2013 .

[13]  Anna-Maria De Cesare,et al.  On the status of exhaustiveness in cleft sentences: An empirical and cross-linguistic study of English also-/only-clefts and Italian anche-/solo-clefts , 2015 .

[14]  André Meinunger,et al.  The architecture of it -clefts , 2014 .

[15]  Virginie Conti La construction en avoir SN qui SV (« j’ai ma copine qui habite à Paris ») : une forme de dispositif clivé ? , 2010 .

[16]  Nancy Hedberg,et al.  Discourse pragmatics and cleft sentences in English , 1990 .

[17]  M. Rothenberg Les propositions relatives prédicatives et attributives: problème de linguistique française , 1979 .

[18]  Kristin Davidse,et al.  Specificational there-clefts: functional structure and information structure , 2016 .

[19]  Renaat Declerck,et al.  The pragmatics of it-clefts and WH-clefts , 1984 .

[20]  Emilie Destruel The French c'est-cleft : empirical studies of its meaning and use , 2013 .

[21]  K. Davidse A constructional approach to clefts , 2000 .

[22]  Karen Lahousse,et al.  Specificational sentences and the influence of information structure on (anti-)connectivity effects , 2009 .

[23]  Jennifer A. Piotrowski,et al.  Information Structure of Clefts in Spoken English , 2009 .

[24]  Anna Maria de Cesare Riflessioni sulla diffusione delle costruzioni scisse nell'italiano giornalistico odierno a partire dalla loro manifestazione nei lanci di agenzia in italiano e in inglese , 2013 .

[25]  Harry J. Huang Essay Topic Writability Examined through a Statistical Approach from the College Writer's Perspective. , 2008 .

[26]  K. Lambrecht Topic, focus and secondary predication: The French presentational relative construction , 2002 .

[27]  Karen Lahousse,et al.  The information structure of French il y a clefts and c’est clefts: A corpus-based analysis , 2018, Linguistics.

[28]  K. Davidse The semantics of cardinal versus enumerative existential constructions , 2000 .

[29]  Peter Collins,et al.  Cleft and Pseudo-Cleft Constructions in English , 1991 .

[30]  Lena Karssenberg French il y a clefts, existential sentences and the Focus-Marking Hypothesis , 2016, Journal of French Language Studies.

[31]  K. Lambrecht When subjects behave like objects: An analysis of the merging of S and O in sentence-focus constructions across languages , 2000 .

[32]  Peter Collins,et al.  Cleft existentials in English , 1992 .

[33]  J. Hartmann Freezing in it-clefts , 2013, Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique.

[34]  K. Lambrecht A framework for the analysis of cleft constructions , 2001 .

[35]  C. Heycock Specification, equation, and agreement in copular sentences , 2012, Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique.

[36]  Knud Lambrecht,et al.  Information structure and sentence form , 1994 .

[37]  E. Prince A COMPARISON OF WH-CLEFTS AND IT-CLEFTS IN DISCOURSE , 1978 .

[38]  Karen Lahousse,et al.  Definite il y a-clefts in spoken French* , 2016, Journal of French Language Studies.

[39]  Jean-Marcel Léard Les gallicismes : étude syntaxique et sémantique , 1992 .

[40]  R. J. C. Smits Eurogrammar: The Relative and Cleft Constructions of the Germanic and Romance Languages , 1989 .

[41]  Karen Lahousse,et al.  Contrast and intervention at the periphery , 2014 .