It-clefts in English L1 and L2 academic writing
The case of Norwegian learners
This paper examines it-clefts in five corpora representing Norwegian learners of English, novice L1 writers of English and specialist L1 academic writing. The comparison also concerns general argumentative writing vs. discipline-specific writing. The frequency of it-clefts varies across the corpora. The learners underuse clefts, but the results of the register comparison are inconclusive. The types of clefted constituent and the choice of subordinator in the cleft clause vary more in L1 than in L2 writing. There are also differences as to the syntactic environments of clefts and their discourse functions. For example, the learners overuse clefts in interrogatives in argumentative writing. In discipline-specific writing, the learners underuse clefts in that-clauses, particularly with the function of reporting previous research.
References (33)
References
Baker, M. 1992. In other word: A coursebook on translation. London: Routledge.
Biber, D. & Conrad, S. 2009. Register, Genre, and Style. Cambridge: CUP.
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S. & Finegan, E. 1999. Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Longman.
Boström Aronsson, M. 2005. Themes in Swedish Advanced Learners’ Written English. PhD thesis, Göteborg University.
Chocholousova, B. 2008.
There and it in a cross-linguistic perspective. MA thesis, University of Oslo.
Collins, P.C. 1991. Cleft and Pseudo-cleft Constructions in English. London: Routledge.
Delin, J. & Oberlander, J. 1995. Syntactic constraints on discourse structure: the case of it-clefts. Linguistics 33: 465–500.
Ebeling, S.O. & Heuboeck, A. 2007. Encoding document information in a corpus of student writing: the British Academic Written English corpus. Corpora 2: 241–256.
Goldberg, A.E. 2006. Constructions at Work. Oxford: OUP.
Granger, S., Dagneaux, E., Meunier, F. & Paquot, M. (eds). 2009. International Corpus of Learner English, Version 2. Louvain-la-Neuve: UCL Presses Universitaires de Louvain.
Gundel, J.K. 2002. Information structure and the use of cleft sentences in English and Norwegian. In Information Structure in Cross-Linguistic Perspective, H. Hasselgård, S. Johansson, B. Behrens & C. Fabricius-Hansen (eds), 113–128. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Halliday, M.A.K. 1985. “Context of situation”, “Functions of language”, “Register variation”. In Language, Context and Text: Aspects of language in a social-semiotic perspective, M.A.K. Halliday & R. Hasan, 3–43, Geelong: Deakin University.
Halliday, M.A.K. 2004. An Introduction to Functional Grammar, 3rd edn, revised by Christian M.I.M. Matthiessen. London: Arnold.
Hasselgård, H. 2004. Adverbials in it-cleft constructions. In Advances in Corpus Linguistics, K. Aijmer & B. Altenberg (eds), 195–211. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Hedberg, N. 2000. The referential status of clefts. Language 76: 891–920.
Hoffmann, S. & Evert, S. 2006. BNCweb (CQP edition) - The marriage of two corpus tools. In Corpus Technology and Language Pedagogy? New Resources, New Tools, New Methods, S. Braun, K. Kohn & J. Mukherjee (eds), 177–195, 295–326. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
Johansson, M. 1996. Fronting in English and Swedish: A text-based contrastive analysis. In Synchronic Corpus Linguistics. Papers from the sixteenth international conference on English language research on computerized corpora (ICAME 16), C.A. Percy, C.F. Meyer & I. Lancashire (eds), 29–40. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Johansson, M. 2001. Clefts in contrast: A contrastive study of it clefts and wh clefts in English and Swedish texts and translations. Linguistics 39: 547–582.
Johansson, M. 2002. Clefts in English and Swedish. A Contrastive Study of IT-clefts and WH-clefts in Original Texts and Translations. PhD thesis, Lund University.
Lambrecht, K. 2001. A framework for the analysis of cleft constructions. Linguistics 39: 463–516.
Mojžíšová, K. 2009. Cleft sentences in English and Norwegian. MA thesis, Charles University, Prague.
Nelson, G. 1997. Cleft constructions in spoken and written English. Journal of English Linguistics 25: 340–348.
Nesi, H. & Gardner, S. 2012. Genres across the Disciplines. Student Writing in Higher Education. Cambridge: CUP.
Paquot, M., Hasselgård, H. & Ebeling, S.O. 2013. Writer/reader visibility in learner writing across genres: A comparison of the French and Norwegian components of the ICLE and VESPA learner corpora. In Twenty Years of Learner Corpus Research: Looking back, Moving ahead. “Corpora and Language in Use”, S. Granger, G. Gilquin & F. Meunier (eds), 377–387. Louvain-la-Neuve: Presses Universitaires de Louvain.
Prince, E.F. 1978. A comparison of wh-clefts and it-clefts in discourse. Language 54: 883–906.
Prince, E.F. 1981. Toward a taxonomy of given–new information. In Radical Pragmatics, P. Cole (ed.), 223–255. New York NY: Academic Press.
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G. & Svartvik, J. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.
Rørvik, S. 2012. Thematic progression in learner language. In English Corpus Linguistics: Looking back, Moving forward. Papers from the 30th International Conference on English Language Research on Computerized Corpora (ICAME 30), S. Hoffmann, P. Rayson & G. Leech (eds), 165–177. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 16 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.