Cover not available
Part of
When Data Challenges Theory: Unexpected and paradoxical evidence in information structure
Edited by Davide Garassino and Daniel Jacob
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 273] 2022
► pp. 147–182

Is focus a root phenomenon?

| KU Leuven

This article argues that some types of syntactically marked focus are root (main clause) phenomena in French. We show that c’est (‘it is’) clefts, which explicitly mark narrow new information focus, are root phenomena, in contrast with il y a (‘there is’) clefts marking broad new information focus and contrastive focus c’est-clefts. Nominal inversion in French behaves in the opposite way and is argued to be an ‘inverse root phenomenon’. These observations are explained by Krifka’s (2017) notion of a ‘judge’, its relation to epistemic modality and the distinction between assertive embedded clauses (in which root phenomena occur) and non-assertive embedded clauses (in which root phenomena do not occur).

Keywords: root phenomena, main clause phenomena, clefts, word order, information structure, epistemic modality
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Background
    • 2.1Assertion and epistemic modality
    • 2.2The concept of a judge
    • 2.3Topics as root phenomena
      • 2.3.1Different types of topics
      • 2.3.2Predictions for focus
    • 2.4Focus as a root phenomenon: Previous research and the goal of this paper
  • 3.The distribution of three information-structural types of c’est-clefts in French
    • 3.1Three information-structural types of clefts
    • 3.2Distribution of c’est-clefts in adverbial clauses
    • 3.3Discussion: Contrastive focus and the concept of a judge
  • 4.The distribution of il y a ‘there is’ clefts in embedded clauses
    • 4.1Introduction
    • 4.2Information-structural types of il y a-clefts
    • 4.3All-focus il y a-clefts inside embedded clauses: New data
    • 4.4Broad vs narrow new information focus and the concept of a judge
  • 5.Verb-subject word order in French: An inverse root phenomenon
    • 5.1Introduction
    • 5.2The distribution of VS in embedded clauses
    • 5.3VS and the concept of a judge
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgments
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 22 February 2022
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.273.05lah
References
Aelbrecht, Lobke, Haegeman, Liliane & Nye, Rachel
2012 Main clause phenomena and the privilege of the root. In Main Clause Phenomena: New Horizons, Lobke Aelbrecht, Liliane Haegeman & Rachel Nye (eds), 1–19. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Authier, Jean-Marc & Haegeman, Liliane
2012 An intervention account of the distribution of main clause phenomena: Evidence from ellipsis. Iberia: An International Journal of Theoretical Linguistics, 4(1): 61–91.Google Scholar
Belligh, Thomas
2020a Dutch thetic and sentence-focus constructions on the semantics-pragmatics interface: A case study. Studies in Language, 44(4): 831–878. DOI logo
2020b Are theticity and sentence-focus encoded grammatical categories of Dutch? In Thetics and Categoricals, Werner Abraham, Elisabeth Leiss & Yasuhiro Fujinawa (eds), 34–68. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logo
2021 Alternating Constructions on the Semantics-Pragmatics Interface: Theticity and Sentence-focus in Dutch and Italian. PhD dissertation, UGent.
Bentley, Delia & Cruschina, Silvio
2018 The silent argument of broad focus: Typology and predictions. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics 3(1): 118. DOI logo
Bianchi, Valentina
2013 On ‘focus movement’ in Italian. In Information Structure and Agreement, Victoria Camacho-Taboada, Ángel L. Jiménez-Fernández, Javier Martín-González & Mariano Reyes-Tejedor (eds), 193–216. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2015 Focus fronting and the syntax-semantics interface. In Beyond the Functional Sequence, Ur Shlonsky (ed), 60–72. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle 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 Piñón (ed), 1–18. DOI logo
Bianchi, Valentina & Frascarelli, Mara
2010 Is topic a root phenomenon? Iberia 2: 43–88.Google Scholar
Bianchi, Valentina, Bocci, Giuliano & Cruschina, Silvio
2015 Focus fronting and its implicatures. In Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2013: Selected Papers from ‘Going Romance’ Amsterdam 2013, Enoch O. Aboh, Jeannette C. Schaeffer & Petra Sleeman (eds), 1–20. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logo
2016 Focus fronting, unexpectedness, and the evaluative dimension. Semantics and Pragmatics 9: 1–54.Google Scholar
Blanche-Benveniste, Claire
2006 Les clivées françaises de type: C’est comme ça que, C’est pour ça que, C’est là que tout a commencé. Moderna Språk 100(2): 273–287.Google Scholar
Bres, Jacques & Nowakowska, Aleksandra
2005 Dis-moi avec qui tu “dialogues”, je te dirai qui tu es… De la pertinence de la notion de dialogisme pour l’analyse du discours. Marges Linguistiques 9. [URL]> (17 April 2021).
Brunetti, Lisa
2009 On links and tails in Italian. Lingua 119: 756–781. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Büring, Daniel
2012 Focus and intonation. In The Routledge Companion to the Philosophy of Language, Gillian Russel & Delia Graff Fara (eds), 103–115. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Choi-Jonin, Injoo & Lagae, Véronique
2005 Il y a des gens ils ont mauvais caractère. A propos du rôle de il y a. In Sens et références. Mélanges Georges Kleiber, Adolfo Murguía (ed), 39–66. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Clech-Darbon, Anne, Rebuschi, Georges & Rialland, Annie
1999 Are there cleft sentences in French? In The Grammar of Focus, Laurice Tuller & Georges Rebuschi (eds), 83–118. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Collins, Peter C.
1991 Cleft and Pseudo-cleft Constructions in English. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Cruschina, Silvio
2012 Discourse-Related Features and Functional Projections. New York: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2015 Focus structure. In Existentials and Locatives in Romance Dialects of Italy, Delia Bentley, Francesco Maria Ciconte & Silvio Cruschina (eds), 43–98. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davidse, Kristin & Kimps, Ditte
2016 Specificational there-clefts. Functional structure and information structure. English Text Construction 9(1): 115–142. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Cat, Cécile
2012 Towards an interface definition of root phenomena. In Main Clause Phenomena: New Horizons, Lobke Aelbrecht, Liliane Haegeman & Rachel Nye (eds), 135–158. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Cesare, Anna-Maria
2014 Cleft constructions in a contrastive perspective. Towards an operational taxonomy. In Frequency, Forms and Functions of Cleft Constructions in Romance and Germanic. Contrastive, Corpus-Based Studies, Anna-Maria De Cesare (ed), 9–48. Berlin-New York: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2016 Les phrases clivées de l’italien en contact avec le français. Une analyse basée sur les textes diffusés sur le portail swissinfo.ch. In Zwischen den Texten: die Übersetzung an der Schnittstelle von Sprach- und Kulturwissenschaft [Romanische Sprachen und ihre Didaktik 57], Christina Ossenkop & Georgia Veldre-Gerner (eds), 121–136. Stuttgart: ibidem-Verlag.Google Scholar
2017 Cleft constructions. In Manual of Romance Morphosyntax and Syntax, Andreas Dufter & Elisabeth Stark (eds), 536–568. Berlin-New York: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Cesare, Anna-Maria & Garassino, Davide
2018 Adverbial cleft sentences in Italian, French and English. A comparative perspective. In Focus Realization in Romance and Beyond, Marco García García & Melanie Uth (eds), 255–286. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Declerck, Renaat
1988 Studies on Copular Sentences, Clefts and Pseudo-clefts. Dordrecht: Foris Publications. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Delin, Judy & Oberlander, Jon
1995 Syntactic constraints on discourse structure. The case of it-clefts. Linguistics 33(3): 465–500. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Destruel, Emilie & De Veaugh-Geiss, Joseph P.
2018 On the interpretation and processing of exhaustivity: Evidence of variation in English and French clefts. Journal of Pragmatics 138: 1–16. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Doetjes, Jenny, Rebuschi, Georges & Rialland, Annie
2004 Cleft sentences. In Handbook of French semantics, Francis Corblin & Henriëtte De Swart (eds), 529–552. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Ducrot, Oswald
1984 Le dire et le dit. Minuit: Paris.Google Scholar
Dufter, Andreas
2008 On explaining the rise of c’est-clefts in French. In The Paradox of Grammatical Change: Perspectives from Romance, Ulrich Detges & Richard Waltereit (eds), 31–56. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009 Clefting and discourse organization: Comparing Germanic and Romance. In Focus and Background in Romance Languages, Andreas Dufter & Daniel Jacob (eds), 83–121. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Emonds, Joseph
1970 Root and Structure Preserving Transformations. PhD Dissertation, MIT.
1976 A Transformational Approach to English Syntax. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Erteshik-Shir, Nomi
1997 The Dynamics of Focus Structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fournier, Nathalie
1997 La place du sujet nominal dans les phrases à complément prépositionnel initial. In La place du sujet en français contemporain, Catherine Fuchs (ed), 97–132. Louvain-la-Neuve: Duculot.Google Scholar
Frey, Werner & Meinunger, André
2019 Topic marking and illocutionary force. In Architecture of Topic, Valéria Molnár, Verner Egerland & Susanne Winkler (eds), 95–138. Berlin-New York: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fuchs, Catherine
(ed) 1997 La place du sujet en français contemporain. Louvain-la-Neuve: Duculot.Google Scholar
Garassino, Davide
2014 Cleft sentences in Italian and English. In Frequency, Forms and Functions of Cleft Constructions in Romance and Germanic. Contrastive, Corpus-based Studies, Anna-Maria De Cesare (ed), 101–138. Berlin-New York: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2016 Using cleft sentences in Italian and English: A multifactorial analysis. In Current Issues in Italian, Romance and Germanic Non-canonical Word Orders: Syntax – Information Structure – Discourse Organization, Anna-Maria De Cesare & Davide Garassino (eds), 181–204. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
This volume. Translation as a source of pragmatic interference? An empirical investigation of French and Italian cleft sentences. In When Data Challenges Theory. Unexpected and Paradoxical Evidence in Information Structure, Davide Garassino & Daniel Jacob eds Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logo
Green, Georgia
1976 Main clause phenomena in subordinate clauses. Language 52: 387–397. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane
2004a Topicalisation, CLLD and the left periphery. In Proceedings of the Dislocated Elements Workshop, ZAS Berlin, November 2003, Benjamin Shaer, Werner Frey & Claudia Maienborn (eds), 157–192. Berlin: Universitätsbibliothek Johann Christian Senckenberg.Google Scholar
2004b The syntax of adverbial clauses and its consequences for topicalisation. In Current Studies in Comparative Romance Linguistics: Proceedings of the International Conference Held at the Antwerp University (19–21 September 2002) to Honor Liliane Tasmowski, Martine Coene, Gretel De Cuyper & Yves D’Hulst (eds), 61–90. Antwerpen: Universiteit Antwerpen.Google Scholar
2006 Argument fronting in English, Romance CLLD and the left periphery. In Negation, Tense and Clausal Architecture: Cross-linguistic Investigations, Raffaella Zanuttini, Hector Campos, Elena Herburger & Paul Portner (eds), 27–52. Georgetown: University Press.Google Scholar
2007 Operator movement and topicalisation in adverbial clauses. Folia Linguistica 41: 279–326. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haegeman Liliane
2009 The movement analysis of temporal adverbial clauses. English Language and Linguistics 13: 385–408. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane
2010 The internal syntax of adverbial clauses. Lingua 120(3): 628–648. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012 Adverbial clauses, Main Clause Phenomena, and Composition of the Left Periphery: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures 8. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane & Ürögdi, Barbara
2010a Referential CPs and DPs: An operator movement account. Theoretical Linguistics 36(2–3), 111–152. DOI logo
2010b Operator movement, referentiality and intervention. Theoretical Linguistics 36: 233–246. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane, Meinunger, André & Vercauteren, Aleksandra
2014 The architecture of it-clefts. Journal of Linguistics, 50(2): 269–296. DOI logo
2015 The syntax of it-clefts and the left periphery of the clause. In Beyond Functional Sequence 10, Ur Shlonsky (ed), 73–90. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hedberg, Nancy Ann
2000 The referential status of clefts. Language 76(4): 891–920. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heycock, Caroline
2006 Embedded root phenomena. In The Blackwell Companion to Syntax 2, Martin Everaert & Henk van Riemsdijk (eds), 174–209. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hooper, Joan B. & Thompson, Sandra A.
1973 On the applicability of root transformations. Linguistic Inquiry 4(4): 465–497.Google Scholar
Jacob, Daniel
2015 Anaphorische Spaltsätze im Französischen: Grammatik – Text – Rhetorik. In Informationsstrukturen in Kontrast: Strukturen, Kompositionen und Strategien, Séverine Adam, Daniel Jacob & Michael Schecker (eds), 101–122. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Jullien, Stéphane
2007 Prosodic, syntactic and semantico-pragmatic parameters as clues for projection: The case of “il y a”. Nouveaux cahiers de linguistique française 28: 283–297.Google Scholar
Karssenberg, Lena
2016 French il y a clefts, existential sentences and the focus-marking hypothesis. Journal of French Language Studies 27(3): 405–430. DOI logo
2018 Non-prototypical Clefts in French: A Corpus Analysis of “il y a” Clefts. Berlin-New York: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Karssenberg, Lena & Lahousse, Karen
2017 Les SN définis et indéfinis dans les clivées en il y a. In Contraintes linguistiques. À propos de la complémentation nominale, Caroline Lachet, Luis Meneses-Lerín & Audrey Roig (eds), 197–210. Brussels: PIE Peter Lang.Google Scholar
2018 The information structure of French il y a clefts and c’est clefts: A corpus-based analysis. Linguistics, 56(3): 513–548. DOI logo
Katz, Stacy
2000 Categories of c’est-cleft constructions. Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique 45(3–4): 253–273. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krifka, Manfred
2007 Basic notions of information structure. In Interdisciplinary Studies on Information Structure 6, Caroline Féry, Gisbert Fanselow & Manfred Krifka (eds), 13–55. Potsdam: Universitätsverlag Potsdam.Google Scholar
2017 Assertions and judgments, epistemics and evidentials. Handout for the workshop Speech acts: Meanings, Uses, Syntactic and Prosodic Realization, 1–16. Berlin: ZAS.Google Scholar
Kuroda, Sige-Yuki
1972 The categorical and the thetic judgment. Foundations of Language 9: 153–185.Google Scholar
1992 Japanese Syntax and Semantics. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lagae, Véronique & Rouget, Christine
1998 Quelques réflexions sur les relatives prédicatives. In Analyse linguistique et approches de l’oral. Recueil d’études offert en hommage à Claire Blanche-Benveniste, Mireille Bilger, Karel Van den Eynde & Françoise Gadet (eds), 313–325. Leuven & Paris: Peeters.Google Scholar
Lahousse, Karen
2003 Le sujet nominal postverbal en français moderne. PhD dissertation, KU Leuven.
2006a NP subject inversion in French: Two types, two configurations. Lingua 116: 424–461. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2006b L’assertion et l’inversion du sujet nominal dans les subordonnées adverbiales. Linguisticae Investigationes 29(1): 13–124. DOI logo
2010 Information structure and epistemic modality in adverbial clauses in French. Studies in Language 34(2): 298–326. DOI logo
2011 Quand passent les cigognes: Le sujet nominal postverbal en français moderne. Paris: Presses Universitaires de Vincennes.Google Scholar
2015 A case of focal adverb preposing in French. In Structures, Strategies and Beyond: Studies in Honour of Adriana Belletti, Elisa Di Domenico, Cornelia Hamann & Simona Matteini (eds), 209–236. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lahousse, Karen & Borremans, Marijke
2014 The distribution of functional-pragmatic types of clefts in adverbial clauses. Linguistics 52(3): 793–836. DOI logo
Lahousse, Karen & Lamiroy, Béatrice
2012 Word order in French, Spanish and Italian: A grammaticalization account. Folia Linguistica 46(2): 387–415. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2017 C’est ainsi que: Grammaticalisation ou lexicalisation ou les deux à la fois? Journal of French Language Studies 27(2): 161–185. DOI logo
Lahousse, Karen, Laenzlinger, Christopher & Soare, Gabriela
2014 Contrast and intervention at the periphery. Lingua 14(3): 56–85. DOI logo
Lambrecht, Knud
1986 Pragmatically motivated syntax. Presentational cleft constructions in spoken French. In 22nd Conference of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Papers from the Parasession on Pragmatics and Grammatical Theory, Anne M. Farley, Peter T. Farley & Karl-Eric McCullough (eds), 115–126. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
1988 Presentational cleft constructions in spoken French. In Clause Combining in Grammar and Discourse, John Haiman & Sandra A. Thompson (eds), 135–179. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logo
1994 Information Structure and Sentence Form: Topic, Focus and the Mental Representations of Discourse Referents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2001 A framework for the analysis of cleft constructions. Linguistics 39(3): 463–516. DOI logo
Larrivée, Pierre
2020 Le focus initial en français vernaculaire. Scolia 34: 33–50. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
This volume. The curious case of the rare Focus movement in French. In When Data Challenges Theory. Unexpected and Paradoxical Evidence in Information Structure, Davide Garassino, Daniel Jacob eds Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logo
Léard, Jean.-Marcel
1992 Les gallicismes. Étude syntaxique et sémantique. Paris & Leuven: Duculot. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Legendre, Géraldine
2001 Focalization in French stylistic inversion. In Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 1999, Yves D’Hulst, Johan Rooryck & Jan Schroten (eds), 143–166. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Leonetti, Manuel
2013 Information structure and the distribution of Spanish bare plurals. In New Perspectives on Bare Noun Phrases in Romance and Beyond, Johannes Kabatek & Albert Wall (eds), 121–155. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leonetti, Manuel & Escandell-Vidal, Victoria
2021 Focus structure and assertion in relative clauses: Evidence from Spanish. In Cartography and Explanatory Adequacy, Dennis Ott & Ángel Gallego (eds). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Le Querler, Nathalie
1997 La place du sujet nominal dans les subordonnées percontatives. In La place du sujet en français contemporain, Catherine Fuchs (ed), 179–203. Louvain-la-Neuve: Duculot.Google Scholar
Lombardi Vallauri, Edoardo
This volume. Distinguishing psychological Given/New from linguistic Topic/Focus makes things clearer. In When Data Challenges Theory. Unexpected and Paradoxical Evidence in Information Structure, Davide Garassino & Daniel Jacob eds Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logo
Masia, Viviana
This volume. Remarks on Information Structure marking asymmetries: The epistemological view on the micropragmatic profile of utterances. In When Data Challenges Theory. Unexpected and Paradoxical Evidence in Information Structure, Davide Garassino & Daniel Jacob eds Amsterdam-Philadelphia John Benjamins DOI logo
Matić, Dejan, Van Gijn, Rik & Van Valin Jr., Robert D.
2014 Information structure and reference tracking in complex sentences. An overview. In Information Structure and Reference Tracking in Complex Sentences, Rik Van Gijn, Jeremy Hammond, Dejan Matić, Saskia van Putten, & Ana Vilacy Galucio (eds), 1–42. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mertens, Piet
2011 Prosodie, syntaxe, discours: autour d’une approche prédicative. In Actes d’IDP 2009, Paris, Septembre 2009, Hi-Yon Yoo & Elisabeth Delais-Roussarie (eds), 19–32. Paris.Google Scholar
Miyagawa, Shigeru
2012 Agreements that occur only in the main clause. In Main Clause Phenomena: New Horizons, Lobke Aelbrecht, Liliane Haegeman & Rachel Nye (eds), 79–112. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nølke, Henning
1994 Linguistique modulaire: De la forme au sens. Leuven: Peeters.Google Scholar
2006 Pour une théorie linguistique de la polyphonie. Langue française 4(164): 3–9.Google Scholar
Prince, Ellen F.
1978 A comparison of wh-clefts and it-clefts in discourse. Language 54(4): 883–906. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Reinhart, Tanya
1981 Pragmatics and linguistics: An analysis of sentence topics. Philosophica 27: 53–94.Google Scholar
Riester, Arndt & Baumann, Stefan
2013 Focus triggers and focus types from a corpus perspective. Dialogue & Discourse 4(2): 215–248. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Roggia, Carlo Enrico
2008 Frasi scisse in italiano e francese orale: evidenze dal C-ORAL-ROM. Cuadernos de filología italiana 15: 9–29.Google Scholar
Rosemeyer, Malte, Jacob, Daniel & Konieczny, Lars
This volume. How alternatives are created: Specialized background knowledge affects the interpretation of clefts in discourse. In When Data Challenges Theory. Unexpected and Paradoxical Evidence in Information Structure, Davide Garassino & Daniel Jacob eds Amsterdam-Philadelphia John Benjamins DOI logo
Scappini, Sophie
2014 La construction clivée: focus étroit ou focus large. Fiche Fracov. [URL]> (17 April 2021).
Tasmowski, Liliane & Willems, Dominique
1987 Les phrases à première position actancielle vide: Par la porte ouverte (il) entrait une odeur de nuit et de fleurs. Travaux de linguistique 14/15: 177–191.Google Scholar
Verstraete, Jean-Christophe
2007 Rethinking the Coordinate-Subordinate Dichotomy. Interpersonal Grammar and the Analysis of Adverbial Clauses in English. Berlin-New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Verwimp, Lyan & Lahousse, Karen
2017 Definite il y a ­clefts in spoken French. Journal of French Language Studies 27(3): 263–290. DOI logo
Ward, Gregory L.
1988 The Semantics and Pragmatics of Preposing. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 2 other publications

Lombardi Vallauri, Edoardo
2022. Distinguishing psychological Given/New from linguistic Topic/Focus makes things clearer. In When Data Challenges Theory [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 273], ► pp. 40 ff. DOI logo
Masia, Viviana
2022. Remarks on information structure marking asymmetries. In When Data Challenges Theory [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 273], ► pp. 58 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 20 march 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.