Article published in:
Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2012: Selected papers from 'Going Romance' Leuven 2012
Edited by Karen Lahousse and Stefania Marzo
[Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 6] 2014
► pp. 65–90

The interpretation of clefting (a)symmetries between Italian and German

This paper proposes a comparative investigation of clefts in German and Italian. Assuming a specificational copular analysis, the properties of clefts in these languages are argued to rely on independent properties of relative clauses and nominal predicates. The major morpho-syntactic (a)symmetries are therefore discussed, and semantic, discourse and prosodic evidence supports a derivational analysis in which the clefted Focus is a predicate and the relative DP is a right-hand Topic connected with a non-expletive resumptive pronoun. As for post-copular agreement, the conditions on null subject licensing are considered: though they are very restricted in German and combine with V2 requirements, clefts represent a type of impersonal construction in which this option applies. Finally, data concerning quantifier scope and connectedness are discussed, providing further support for the present analysis.
Published online: 18 December 2014
https://doi.org/10.1075/rllt.6.03fra
References
Abraham, Werner
1991 “Null Subjects: From Gothic, Old High German and Middle High German to Modern German. From pro-drop to semi-pro-drop.” Groninger Arbeiten zur germanistischen Linguistik 34: 1–28.Google Scholar
Akmajian, Adrian
1970 Aspects of the Grammar of Focus in English. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Atlas, Jay David, and Stephen C. Levinson
1981 “It-Clefts, Informativeness, and Logical Form: Radical Pragmatics (Revised Standard Version).” In Radical Pragmatics, ed. by Peter Cole, 1–61. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Axel, Katrin, and Helmut Weiss
2005 “Pro-drop in the History of German. From Old High German to the Modern Dialects.” In Empty Pronouns, ed. by Peter Gallmann, and Melanie Wratil, 21–51. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Beerman, Dorothee, David LeBlanc, and Henk C. van Riemsdijk
(eds) 1997 Rightward Movement. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Belletti, Adriana
2005 “Answering with a ‘Cleft’: the Role of the Null Subject Parameter and the VP Periphery.” In Contributions to the Thirtieth Incontro di Grammatica Generativa, ed. by Laura Brugè, Giuliana Giusti, Nicola Munaro, Walter Schweikert, and Giuseppina Turano, 63–82. Venezia: Cafoscarina.Google Scholar
Biberauer, Theresa
2009 “Semi Null-Subject Languages, Expletives and Expletive pro Reconsidered.” In Parametric Variation. Null Subjects in Minimalist Theory, ed. by Theresa Biberauer, Anders Holmberg, Ian Roberts, and Michelle Sheehan, 153–199. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Büring, Daniel
2003 “On D-Trees, Beans, and B-Accents.” Linguistics & Philosophy 26 (5): 511–545. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cardinaletti, Anna
1990 “Subject/Object Asymmetries in German Null-Topic Constructions and the Status of SpecCP.” In Grammar in Progress, ed by. Joan Mascaró, and Marina Nespor, 75–84. Dordrecht: Foris. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2002 “Against Optional and Null Clitics. Right Dislocation vs. Marginalization.” Studia Linguistica 56 (1): 29–57. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Carnap, Rudolf
1958 Introduction to Symbolic Logic and its Applications. New York: Dover.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam
1977 “On Wh-Movement.” In Formal Syntax, ed. by Peter Culicover, Thomas Wasow, and Adrian Akmajian, 71–132. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
1986 Barriers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Delahunty, Gerald P
1982 Topics in the Syntax and Semantics of English Cleft Sentences. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Den Dikken, Marcel
2006 Relators and Linkers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Den Dikken, Marcel, André Meinunger, and Chris Wilder
2000 “Pseudoclefts and Ellipsis.” Studia Linguistica 54 (1): 41–89. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dufter, Andreas
2009 “Clefting and Discourse Organization: Comparing Germanic and Romance.” In Focus and Background in Romance Languages, ed. by Andreas Dufter, and Daniel Jacob, 83–121. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Embick, David, and Rolf Noyer
2007 “Distributed Morphology and the Syntax-Morphology Interface.” In The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Interfaces, ed. by Gilliand Ramchand, and Charles Reis, 289–324. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Emonds, Joseph
1976 A Transformational Approach to English Syntax. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Fiengo, Robert, and Robert May
1994 Indices and Identity. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Frascarelli, Mara
2000 “Frasi Scisse e ‘Small Clauses’: un’analisi dell’inglese [Cleft Sentences and Small Clauses: An analysis of English].” Lingua e Stile 35 (3): 417–446.Google Scholar
2007 “Subjects, Topics and the Interpretation of Referential pro. An Interface Approach to the Linking of (Null) Pronouns.” Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 25 (4): 691–734. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2010 “Narrow Focus, clefting and predicate inversion.” Lingua 120 (9): 2121–2147. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Frascarelli, Mara, and Roland Hinterhölzl
2007 “Types of Topics in German and Italian.” In On Information Structure, Meaning and Form, ed. by Kerstin Schwabe, and Susanne Winkler, 87–116. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Frascarelli, Mara, and Francesca Ramaglia
2013a “(Pseudo)clefts at the Syntax-Prosody-Discourse Interface.” In Cleft Structures, ed. by Katharina Hartmann, and Tonjes Veenstra, 97–137. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2013b “‘Phasing’ Contrast at the Interfaces: A Feature-compositional Approach to Topics.” In Information Structure and Agreement, ed. by Victoria Camacho-Taboada, Ángel Jiménez-Fernández, Javier Martín-González, and Mariano Reyes-Tejedor, 55–81. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gazdar, Gerald
1979 Pragmatics: Implicature, Presupposition, and Logical Form. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Grewendorf, Günter, and Cecilia Poletto
1989 “La costruzione scissa: un’analisi contrastiva. [The cleft construction: A contrastive analysis].” Rivista di Grammatica Generativa 14: 105–142.Google Scholar
Haider, Hubert
1991 “Null Subjects and Expletives in Romance and Germanic Languages.” In Issues in Germanic Syntax, ed. by Werner Abraham, Wim Kosmeijer, and Eric Reuland, 49–66. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Hasselgård, Hilde
2004 “Adverbials in it-cleft Constructions.” In Advances in Corpus Linguistics: Papers from the 23rd International Conference on English Language Research on Computerized Corpora, ed. by Karin Aijmer, and Bengt Altenberg, 195–211. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Hedberg, Nancy
1990 Discourse Pragmatics and Cleft Sentences in English. PhD dissertation, University of Minnesota.Google Scholar
2000 “The Referential Status of Clefts.” Language 76 (4): 891–920. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Heggie, Lorie
1993 “The Range of Null Operators: Evidence from Clefting.” Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 11 (1): 45–84. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Huber, Stefan
2002 Es-Clefts und det-Clefts: Zur Syntax, Semantik und Informationsstruktur von Spaltsätzen im Deutschen und Schwedischen. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell International.Google Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray
1983 Semantics and Cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kallulli, Dalina
2006 “Triggering Factivity: Prosodic Evidence for Syntactic Structure.” In Proceedings of 25th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, ed. by Donald Baumer, David Montero, and Michael Scanlon, 211–219. Sommerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar
Kiss, É. Katalin
1999 “The English Cleft Construction as a Focus Phrase.” In Boundaries of Morphology and Syntax, ed. by Lunella Mereu, 217–229. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Krifka, Manfred
2001 “Quantifying into Question Acts.” Natural Language Semantics 9: 1–40. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2007 “Basic Notions of Information Structure.” In Interdisciplinary Studies on Information Structure, Vol. 6, ed. by Caroline Féry, Gisbert Fanselow, and Manfred Krifka, 13–55. University of Potsdam.Google Scholar
Lenerz, Jürgen
1985 “Zur Theorie syntaktischen Wandels: Das expletive es in der Geschichte des Deutschen.” In Erklärende Syntax des Deutschen, ed. by Werner Abraham, 99–136. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Lutz, Uli, and Jürgen Pafel
(eds) 1996 On Extraction and Extraposition in German. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Moro, Andrea
1997 The Raising of Predicates. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Müller, Gereon
2006 “Pro-Drop and Impoverishment.” In Form, Structure, and Grammar. A Festschrift Presented to Günther Grewendorf on Occasion of his 60th Birthday, ed. by Patrick Brandt, and Eric Fuss, 93–115. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar
Partee, Barbara H
1987 “Noun Phrase Interpretation and Type-shifting Principles.” In Studies in Discourse Representation Theory and the Theory of Generalized Quantifiers, ed. by Jeroen Groenendijk, Dick de Jongh, and Martin Stokhof, 115–143. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Percus, Orin
1997 “Prying Open the Cleft.” In Proceedings of the 27th Annual Meeting of the North East Linguistics Society, ed. by Kiyomi Kusumoto, 337–351. Amherst, MA: GLSA.Google Scholar
Poletto, Cecilia, and Jean-Yves Pollock
2004 “On the Left Periphery of some Romance Wh-Questions.” In The Structure of CP and IP, ed. by Luigi Rizzi, 251–296. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Prince, Ellen F
1978 “A Comparison on Wh-Clefts and It-Clefts in Discourse.” Language 54 (4): 883–906. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Risa, Federica
2012 Sintassi e interpretazione della frase scissa in tedesco [ Syntax and interpretation of cleft sentences in German ]. MA dissertation, University of Roma Tre.Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi
1994 “Early Null Subjects and Root Null Subjects.” In Language Acquisition Studies in Generative Grammar, ed. by Teun Hoekstra, and Bonnie D. Schwartz, 151–176. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Safir, Ken
1999 “Vehicle Change and Reconstruction in A'-chains.” Linguistic Inquiry 30 (4): 587–620. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Samek-Lodovici, Vieri
2006 “When Right Dislocation Meets the Left-Periphery. A Unified Analysis of Italian Non-final Focus.” Lingua 116 (6): 836–873. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sigurðsson, Halldór Á
2011 “Conditions on Argument Drop.” Linguistic Inquiry 42 (2): 267–304. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Stowell, Timothy A
1981 Origins of Phrase Structure. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Trutkowski, Ewa
2011 “Referential Null Subjects in German.” In Proceedings of the Sixth Cambridge Postgraduate Conference in Linguistics (CamLing), ed by Chris Cummins, Chi-Hé Elder, Thomas Godard, Morgan Macleod, Elaine Schmidt, and George Walkden, 206–217. Cambridge: Cambridge Institute of Language Research.Google Scholar