Cover not available
Part of
Structures, Strategies and Beyond: Studies in honour of Adriana Belletti
Edited by Elisa Di Domenico, Cornelia Hamann and Simona Matteini
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 223] 2015
► pp. 181–208

Some notes on clefting and fronting

ORCID logo
In this paper I test the predictions of a conjecture formulated in Belletti (2008), according to which the distinction between subject and non-subject clefts as answering strategies should not hold in languages in which information focus and contrastive focus are both realized in the left periphery of the sentence. I discuss the results of an experiment on Sicilian, specifically designed to test the acceptability of the cleft construction in relation to fronting. The analysis of the results confirms an interesting correlation between fronting and clefting, whereby languages resorting to FF as a generalized focus strategy only marginally admit clefts. At the same time, it endorses the necessity, at the basis of Belletti’s analysis, of distinguishing between subject and non-subject clefts.
Keywords: cleft construction, contrastive focus, focus fronting, information focus, Sicilian
Published online: 27 August 2015
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.223.09cru
References (75)
References
Abeillé, Anne, Godard, Danièle & Sabio, Frédéric. 2008. Two types of NP preposing in French. In Proceedings of the 15th HPSG Conference, Stefan Müller (ed.), 306–324. Stanford CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
Aboh, Enoch Olade. 2004. The Morphosyntax of Complement-Head Sequences. Clause Structure and Word Order Patterns in Kwa. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Akmajian, Adrian. 1970. On deriving cleft sentences from pseudo-cleft sentences. Linguistic Inquiry 1: 149–168.Google Scholar
Alboiu, Gabriela. 2002. The Features of Movement in Romanian. Bucharest: University of Bucharest Press.Google Scholar
Bearth, Thomas. 1999. The contribution of African linguistics towards a general theory of focus. Update and critical review. Journal of African Languages and Linguistics, 126–156. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Belletti, Adriana. 2004. Aspects of the low IP area. In The Structure of CP and IP. The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, Vol. 2, Luigi Rizzi (ed.), 16–51. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2005. Answering with a “cleft”: The role of the null subject parameter and the VP periphery. In Proceedings of the XXX Incontro di Grammatica Generativa, Laura Brugè, Giuliana Giusti, Nicola Munaro, Walter Schweikert & Giuseppina Turano (eds), 63–82. Venice: Cafoscarina.Google Scholar
. 2008. The CP of clefts. Rivista di Grammatica Generativa 33: 191–204.Google Scholar
. 2009. Answering strategies: New information subjects and the nature of clefts. In Structures and Strategies, Ch. 10. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
. 2012. Revisting the CP of clefts. In Discourse and Grammar. From Sentence Types to Lexical Categories, Ede Zimmermann & Günther Grewendorf (eds), 91–114. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013. On fin: Italian che, Japanese no, and the selective properties of the copula in clefts. In Deep Insights, Broad Perspectives. Essays in Honor of Mamoru Saito,Yoichi Miyamoto, Daiko Takahashi, Hideki Maki, Masao Ochi, Koji Sugisaki & Asako Uchibori (eds), 41–55. Tokyo: Kaitakusha.Google Scholar
. 2015. The focus map of clefts: Extraposition and Predication. In Beyond Functional Sequence. The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, Vol. 7, Ur Shlonky (ed.), 42–59. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Benincà, Paola & Poletto, Cecilia. 2004. Topic, Focus, and V2. Defining the CP sublayers. In The Structure of CP and IP. The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, Vol. 2, Luigi Rizzi (ed.), 52–75. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Bianchi, Valentina & Bocci, Giuliano. 2012. Should I stay or should I go? Optional focus movement in Italian. In Empirical Issues in Syntax and Semantics 9, Christopher Piñon (ed.), 1–18. <[URL]>Google Scholar
Bianchi, Valentina, Bocci, Giuliano & Cruschina, Silvio. In press a. Focus fronting and its implicatures. To appear in Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2013 Selected papers from ‘Going Romance’ Amsterdam 2013, Enoch Aboh, Aafke Hulk, Jeannette Schaeffer & Petra Sleeman (eds). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logo
. In press b. Focus fronting, unexpectedness, and evaluative implicatures. Semantics & Pragmatics.
Bianchi, Valentina. 2013. On focus movement in Italian. In Information Structure and Agreement [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 197], María Victoria Camacho-Taboada, Ángel Jiménez-Fernández, Javier Martín-Gonzáles & Mariano Reyes-Tejedor (eds), 193–216. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bocci, Giuliano. 2013. The Syntax–Prosody Interface. A Cartographic Perspective with Evidence from Italian [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 204], Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight. 1972. A look at equations and cleft sentences. In Studies for Einar Haugen Presented by his Friends and Colleagues, Evelyn Scherabon Firchow, Kaaren Grimstad, Nils Hasselmo & Wayne O’Neill (eds), 96–114. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Brunetti, Lisa. 2004. A Unification of Focus. Padua: Unipress.Google Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo & Rizzi, Luigi. 2010. The cartography of syntactic structures. In The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Analysis, Bernd Heine & Heiko Narrog (eds), 51–66. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Collins, Peter. 1991. Cleft and Pseudo-cleft Constructions in English. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cruschina, Silvio. 2006. Informational focus in Sicilian and the left periphery. In Phases of Interpretation, Mara Frascarelli (ed.), 363–385. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2010. Fronting as Focalization in Sicilian. In Syntactic Variation: The Dialects of Italy. Roberta D’Alessandro, Adam Ledgeway & Ian Roberts (eds), 247–260. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
. 2011. Fronting, dislocation, and the syntactic role of discourse-related features. Linguistic Variation 11(1): 1–34. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012. Discourse-Related Features and Functional Projections. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. Forthcoming. Information and discourse structure. In The Oxford Guide to the Romance Languages, Adam Ledgeway & Martin Maiden (eds). Oxford: OUP.
Declerck, Renaat. 1988. Studies on Copular Sentences, Clefts and Pseudo-Clefts. Leuven: Leuven University Press & Foris. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Delin, Judy & Oberlander, Jon. 2005. Cleft constructions in context: Some Suggestions for research methodology. Ms, University of Stirling.
Den Dikken, Marcel. 2005. Specificational copular sentences and pseudoclefts. In The Blackwell Companion to Syntax, Vol. IV, Henk van Riemsdijk & Martin Everaert (eds), 292–409. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Den Dikken, Marcel, Meinunger, André & Wilder, Chris. 2000. Pseudoclefts and ellipsis. Studia Linguistica 54: 49–89. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
É. Kiss, Katalin. 1998. Identificational focus versus information focus. Language 74: 245–273. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1999. The English cleft construction as a focus phrase. In Boundaries of Morphology and Syntax [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 180], Lunella Mereu (ed.), 217–229. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fischer, Klaus. 2009. Cleft sentences: Form, function, and translation. Journal of Germanic Linguistics 21(2): 167–191. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Frascarelli, Mara. 2000a. Frasi Scisse e ‘Small Clauses’: Un’analisi dell’inglese. Lingua e Stile 35: 417–446.Google Scholar
. 2000b. The Syntax-Phonology Interface in Focus and Topic Constructions in Italian. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Frascarelli, Mara & Puglielli, Annarita. 2008. Focus in the Force-Fin System. Information structure in Cushitic languages. In Focus Strategies: Evidence from African languages, Enoch Aboh, Katharina Hartmann & Malte Zimmermann (eds), 161–184. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Frascarelli, Mara & Ramaglia, Francesca. 2013. (Pseudo)clefts at the syntax-prosody-discourse interface. In Cleft Structures [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 208], Katharina Hartmann & Tonjes Veenstra (eds), 97–138. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Guesser, Simone. 2011. La sintassi delle frasi cleft in portoghese brasiliano. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Siena.
Haegeman, Liliane, Meinunger, André & Vercauteren, Aleksandra. 2014. The architecture of it-clefts. Journal of Linguistics 50: 269–296. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hartmann, Katharina & Veenstra, Tonjes. 2013. Introduction. In Cleft Structures [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 208], Katharina Hartmann & Tonjes Veenstra (eds), 1–32. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hedberg, Nancy. 1990. Discourse Pragmatics and Cleft Sentences in English. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Minnesota.
. 2000. The referential status of clefts. Language 76: 891–920. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013. Multiple focus and cleft sentences. In Cleft Structures [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 208], Katharina Hartmann & Tonjes Veenstra (eds), 227–250. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heggie, Lorie A. 1988. The Syntax of Copular Structures. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
. 1993. The range of null operators: Evidence from clefting. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 11: 45–84. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heycock, Caroline & Kroch, Anthony. 1999. Pseudocleft connectedness: Implications for the LF interface level. Linguistic Inquiry 30: 365–398. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Horvath, Julia. 2010. ‘Discourse-features’, syntactic displacement and the status of contrast. Lingua 120(6): 1346–1369. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jespersen, Otto. 1937. Analytic Syntax. London: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
. 1949. A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles, Part VII: Syntax. Copenhagen: Ejnar Munksgaard & London: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Jones, Michael Allan. 2013. Focus, fronting and illocutionary force in Sardinian. Lingua 134: 75–101. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krifka, Manfred. 2007. Basic notions of information structure. In Interdisciplinary Studies on Information Structure 6, Caroline Fery & Manfred Krifka (eds), 13–56. Potsdam: Universitätsverlag. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lambrecht, Knud. 1994. Information Structure and Sentence Form: Topic, Focus, and the Mental Representation of Discourse Referents. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2001. A framework for the analysis of cleft constructions. Linguistics 39(3): 463–516. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
López, Luís. 2009. A Derivational Syntax for Information Structure. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lusini, Sara. 2013. Yes-no Question/Marking in Italian Dialects: A Typological, Theoretical and Experimental Approach. Utrecht: LOT Dissertation Series.Google Scholar
Mioto, Carlos & Negrão, Esmeralda V. 2007. As sentenças clivadas não contêm uma relativa. In Descrição, história e aquisição do português brasileiro, Ataliba T. de Castilho, Maria Aparecida Torres Morais, Ruth E. Vasconcellos Lopes & Sônia Maria Lazzarini Cyrino (eds), 159–183. São Paulo, FAPESP; Campinas: Pontes.Google Scholar
Motapanyane, Virginia. 1998. Focus, checking theory and fronting strategies in Romanian. Studia Linguistica 55(3): 227–243. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Prince, Ellen F. 1978. A comparison of wh-clefts and it-clefts in discourse. Language 54: 883–906. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quer, Josep. 2002. Edging quantifiers: On QP-Fronting in Western Romance. In Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2000, Claire Beyssade, Reineke Bok-Bennema, Frank Drijkoningen & Paola Monachesi (eds), 253–270. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Reeve, Matthew. 2011. The syntactic structure of English clefts. Lingua 121: 142–171. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012. Clefts and their Relatives [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 185]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Remberger, Eva-Maria. 2014. A comparative look at Focus Fronting in Romance. In Left Sentence Peripheries in Spanish. Diachronic, Variationist & Comparative Perspectives [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 214], Andreas Dufter & Àlvaro Octavio Toledo (eds), 383–418. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 1997. The fine structure of the left periphery. In Elements of Grammar, Liliane Haegeman (ed.), 281–337. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013. Notes on cartography and further explanation. Probus 25: 197–226.Google Scholar
Rooth, Mats. 1985. Association with Focus. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
. 1992. A theory of focus interpretation. Natural Language Semantics 1: 75–116. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schlenker, Philippe. 2003. Clausal equations: A note on the connectivity problem. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory21(1): 157–214. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shlonsky, Ur. 2012. Notes on wh in situ in French. In Functional Heads. The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, Vol. 7, Laura Brugé, Anna Cardinaletti, Giuliana Giusti, Nicola Munaro & Cecilia Poletto (eds), 242–252. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Smits, Roel J.C. 1989. Eurogrammar. The Relative and Cleft Constructions of the Germanic and Romance Languages. Dordrecht: Foris. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wedgwood, Daniel. 2007. Identifying inferences in focus. In On Information Structure, Meaning and Form [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 100], Susanne Winkler & Kerstin Schwabe (eds), 207–227. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zafiu, Rodica. 2013. Information structure. In The Grammar of Romanian, Gabriela Pană Dindelegan (ed.), 568–575. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Zagona, Karen. 2002. The Syntax of Spanish. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zubizarreta, María-Luisa. 1998. Prosody, Focus, and Word Order. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
. 1999. Las funciones informativas: Tema y foco. In Gramática descriptiva de la lengua española, Ignacio Bosque & Violeta Demonte (eds), 4215–4244. Madrid: Real Academia Española–Espasa.Google Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Calabrese, Rita
2023. Expanding the English as an International Language paradigm from different native language perspectives. Translation and Translanguaging in Multilingual Contexts 9:1 ► pp. 95 ff. DOI logo
Cruschina, Silvio
2018. Setting the boundaries. Belgian Journal of Linguistics 32 ► pp. 53 ff. DOI logo
Karssenberg, Lena, Karen Lahousse, Béatrice Lamiroy, Stefania Marzo & Ana Drobnjakovic
2018. Non-prototypical clefts. Belgian Journal of Linguistics 32 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.