Cover not available

In:The Interpersonal Level in Functional Discourse Grammar
Edited by Monielly Serafim, Matthias Mittendorfer and Kees Hengeveld
[Studies in Language Companion Series 241] 2027
► pp. 190–223

It’s just that they’re ambiguous

An FDG account of it BE (not) that and fragmentary not that

 | University of Graz
This content is being prepared for publication; it may be subject to changes.
Abstract
This paper analyzes the construction it be (not) that-clause, which has received conflicting analyses regarding its categorization and interpretation, and its corresponding fragment not that-clause. Drawing on corpus data, I argue that both constructions are semantically ambiguous between an inferential/specificational reading (Declerck 1992; Delahunty 1995) and an existential (Bolinger 2018[1972]; Hurford 1973) reading, and show that the not that-clause fragment displays formal and functional properties that set them apart from its full correspondence. In addition, it’s just is shown to function as a discourse marker. Adopting a Functional Discourse Grammar framework, I account for the contrasts between the two forms, as well as their interpretation, in terms of differences in their interpersonal and representational formulations.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The ambiguous it BE that-clause
    • 2.1The specificational reading
    • 2.2The ‘existential’ reading
    • 2.3The discourse marker use
  • 3.Not that-clauses
    • 3.1Meaning and function
    • 3.2Comparing the two forms: Previous studies
    • 3.3A corpus-based comparison
      • 3.3.1Data and methodology
      • 3.3.2Results
  • 4.A Functional Discourse Grammar analysis
    • 4.1Specificational IBTs
    • 4.2Existential and discourse marker IBTs
    • 4.3NTCs
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Author queries
  • Notes
  • References
References (75)
References
Aijmer, Karin. 2002. English discourse particles: evidence from a corpus. [Studies in Corpus Linguistics, 10]. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Amagawa, Toyoko. 1995. “The not that-construction”. Tsukuba English Studies 14: 221–243.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Atayan, Vahram, and Ursula Wienen. 2014. “Inferential cleft constructions in translation: French c’est que in political texts”. In Frequency, forms and functions of cleft constructions in Romance and Germanic: contrastive, corpus-based studies [Trends in Linguistics. Studies and Monographs, 281], edited by De Ceasare, and Anna-Maria, 345–376. Berlin, Munich, and Boston: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bearth, Thomas. 1999. “The inferential gap construction”. Pragmatics 9 (2): 249–280.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight. 2018[1972]. That’s that. [Janua Linguarum. Series Minor 155]. The Hague & Paris: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Calude, Andreea S., and Gerald P. Delahunty. 2011. “Inferentials in spoken English”. Pragmatics 21 (3): 307–340.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2012. “Inferentials: fixed or not?”. Token: A Journal of English Linguistics 1: 59–83.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carlson, Lauri. 1983. Dialogue games: an approach to discourse analysis. [Texts and Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy, 17]. Dordrecht, Boston, among others: D. Reidel Publishing Company.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cook, Walter A. 1979. Case Grammar: development of the matrix model. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Curme, George O. 1931. A grammar of the English language. Vol. III: Syntax. Boston, New York, among others: D. C. Heath and Company.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Davies, Mark. 2008–. The Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA). Available online at [URL]
. 2016–. Corpus of News on the Web (NOW). Available online at [URL]
Declerck, Renaat. 1992. “The inferential it is that-construction and its congeners”. Lingua 87: 203–230. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Delahunty, Gerald. P. 1990. “Inferentials: The story of a forgotten evidential”. Kansas Working Papers in Linguistics 15: 1–28. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Delahunty, Gerald P. 1991. “The powerful pleonasm: a defense of expletive it is”. Written Communication 8 (2): 213–239. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1995. “The inferential construction”. Pragmatics 5 (3): 341–364.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1997. “‘Oh, it’s I’m not pretty enough’: expletive structure and relevance”. In Dán do Oide: essays in memory of Conn R. Ó Cléirigh, edited by A. Ahlqvist, and V. Čapková, 113–122. Dublin: Institiúid Teangeolaíochta Éireann.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2001. “Discourse functions of inferential sentences”. Linguistics 39 (3): 517–545. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2006. “A relevance theoretic analysis of not that sentences: ‘Not that there is anything wrong with that’”. Pragmatics 16 (2/3): 213–245.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Delahunty, Gerald P., and Laura Gatzkiewicz. 2000. “On the Spanish inferential construction ser que”. Pragmatics 10 (3): 301–322.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Giomi, Riccardo, and Evelien Keizer. 2020. “Extra-clausal constituents in Functional Discourse Grammar: Function and form”. Revista da Abralin 19 (2): 159–185. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haugland, Karl E. 1992. “On the use of cleft and pseudo-cleft sentences in English. [Review article of Peter C. Collins (1991): Cleft and pseudo-cleft constructions in English]”. ICAME Journal 16: 51–69.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hedberg, Nancy. 1990. Discourse pragmatics and cleft sentence in English. PhD dissertation, University of Minnesota.
Heggie, Lorie A. 1988. The syntax of copular structures. PhD dissertation, University of Southern California.
Hengeveld, Kees, and J. Lachlan Mackenzie. 2008. Functional Discourse Grammar: A typologically-based theory of language structure. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2018. “Negation in Functional Discourse Grammar”. In Recent Developments in Functional Discourse Grammar, edited by Evelien Keizer, and Hella Olbertz, 17–45. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hengeveld, Kees., and Evelien Keizer. 2025. General principles of linearization in Functional Discourse Grammar. In Linearization in Functional Discourse Grammar [Trends in Linguistics — Studies and Monographs], edited by Elnora ten Wolde, Riccardo Giomi, and Kees Hengeveld, 43–84. Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hengeveld, Kees, Evelien Keizer, and Riccardo Giomi. In prep. The Oxford Reference Guide to Functional Discourse Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hoeksema, Jack. 2017. “Not that I know of: a polarity-sensitive construction”. Linguistics 55 (6): 1281–1310. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Horn, Laurence R. 2001[1989]. A natural history of English [The David Hume Series on Philosophy and Cognitive Science Reissues]. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney D., and Geoffrey Pullum. 2002. The Cambridge grammar of the English language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hundt, Marianne. 2022. “Constructional variation and change in N-is focaliser constructions”. In English Noun Phrases from a functional cognitive perspective: Current issues [Studies in Language Companion Series, 221], edited by Lotte Sommerer, and Evelien Keizer, 205–234. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hurford, James R. 1973. “Deriving S from S + IS”. In Syntax and semantics. Volume 2, edited by John P. Kimball, 247–299. New York and London: Seminar Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ikarashi, Keita. 2012. “The discourse function of the it is that-construction: from the perspective of reasoning process behind discourse flow”. Tsukuba English Studies 31: 65–84.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2015. A functional approach to English constructions related to evidentiality. PhD dissertation, University of Tsukuba.
Jespersen, Otto. 1917. Negation in English and other languages. Copenhagen: Andr. Fred. Høst & Søn.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kaltenböck, Gunther. 2004. It-extraposition and non-extraposition in English: a study of syntax in spoken and written texts [Austrian Studies in English, 90]. Vienna: Braumüller.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2014. Processibility. In Carpus Pragmatic: A handbook, edited by Karin Aijmer, and Christopher Rühlemann, 117–141. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kato, Masahiro. 2011. “Review: Otake, Y. (2009) ‘No (da)’ ni Taiosuru Eigo no Kubun (The Japanese no da-construction and the corresponding English Constructions)”. English Linguistics 28 (2): 334–343. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Keizer, Evelien. 1992. Reference, predication, and (in)definiteness in Functional Grammar: A functional approach to English copular sentences. PhD dissertation, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
. 2013. “The X is (is) construction: An FDG account”. In Casebook in Functional Discourse Grammar [Studies in Language Companion Series, 137], edited by J. Lachlan Mackenzie, and Hella Olbertz, 213–248. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2016. “The (the) fact is (that) construction in English and Dutch”. In Outside the clause: form and function of extra-clausal constituents [Studies in Language Companion Series, 178], edited by Gunther Kaltenböck, Evelien Keizer, and Arne Lohmann, 59–96. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2018a. “Modal adverbs in FDG: putting the theory to the test”. Open Linguistics 4: 356–390. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2018b. “Pragmatic function assignment and grammatical expression in FDG”. In Linguistique et discours: description, typologie et théorisation, edited by Mohammed Jadir, 59–84. Berlin, Bern, Bruxelles, New York, Oxford, Warszawa, Wien: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2020. “The placement of extra-clausal constituents in Functional Discourse Grammar”. Revista Canaria de Estudios Ingleses 80: 89–121. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kempson, Ruth M. 1984. “Negation, ambiguity and semantics-pragmatics distinction”. 언어 9 (2): 361–380.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1986. “Ambiguity and the semantics-pragmatics distinction”. In Meaning and interpretation, edited by Charles Travis, 77–103. New York, NY: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kim, Jong-Bok, and Gabriela Bîlbîie. 2023. “English inferential cleft construction: a non-expletive approach”. Presented at the 56th Annual meeting of the Societas Linguistica Europaea (SLE2023), 26 August-01 September 2023. Athens, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens.
Kim, Jong-Bok, and Peter Sells. 2011. “On the Korean inferential cleft construction”. Studies in Modern Grammar [현대문법연구] 64: 45–72.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kojadinović, Zlatan. 2022. “Variation in the prosody of illocutionary adverbs”. Open Linguistics 8 (1): 593–617. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Koops, Christian. 2007. “Constraints on inferential constructions”. In Aspects of meaning construction, edited by Günter Radden, Klaus-Michael Köpcke, Thomas Berg, and Peter Siemund, 207–224. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 207–224. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kursa, Miron B., and Witold R. Rudnicki. 2010. “Feature selection with the Boruta Package”. Journal of Statistical Software 36 (11), 1–13. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lambrecht, Knud. 2001. “A framework for the analysis of cleft construction”. Linguistics 39 (3): 463–516. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mackenzie, J. Lachlan. 2019. “The Functional Discourse Grammar approach to syntax”. In Current approaches to syntax: a comparative handbook, edited by András Kertész, Edith Moravcsik, and Csilla Rákosi, 291–316. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Michaelis, Laura A. 2017. “Meaning of constructions”. In Oxford research encyclopedia of Linguistics, edited by Mark Aronoff, Yiya Chen, Cecelia Cutler, Antje Dammel, Sebastian Kürschner, Gary Libben, Michele Loporcaro, Haihua Pan, Sandra Quarezemin, online publication 〈[URL]〉 (last accessed 20.02.2024).
Mittendorfer, Matthias. 2025. “Discourse functions, placement and prosody: An FDG analysis of left and right dislocation in British English”. In Linearization in Functional Discourse Grammar [Trends in Linguistics — Studies and Monographs], edited by Elnora ten Wolde, Riccardo Giomi, and Kees Hengeveld, 193–223. Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mori, Y. 1980. Eigo no goyooron [‘the pragmatics of English’]. Tokyo: Taishukan.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mustafa, Ozan. 2025a. “(Not) to my knowledge: form, function and placement of epistemic expressions in English”. In Linearization in Functional Discourse Grammar [Trends in Linguistics — Studies and Monographs], edited by Elnora ten Wolde, Riccardo Giomi, and Kees Hengeveld, 159–192. Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2025b). Fragments under negation: inferential, existential and semi-fixed not expression. PhD thesis, University of Graz.
‘not that — ’ in that, conj., sense II.4.b.. Oxford English Dictionary [online]. Oxford University Press, December 2023. (last accessed 22.02.2024).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Olbertz, Hella, and Victoria Vázquez Rozas. 2022. Asymmetrical pseudoclefts in Spanish: towards an FDG account. Presented at 7th IC-FDG, Schoorl, Netherlands.
Otake, Yoshio. 2002. “Semantics and functions of the it is that-construction and the Japanese no da-construction”. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 43: 143–157.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2009). ‘No (da)’ ni Taiosuru Eigo no Kubun (The Japanese no da-construction and the corresponding English Constructions). Tokyo: Kurosio.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pennec, Blandine. 2018. Discourse Readjustment(s) in Contemporary English. Volume 1 [Cognitive Science Series: Interaction of syntax and semantic in discourse set]. London & Hoboken, NJ: ISTE Ltd.; John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pijpops, Dirk, and Freek Van de Velde. 2016. “Constructional contamination: How does it work and how do we measure it?”. Folia Linguistica 50 (2): 543–581. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech, and Jan Svartvik. 1985. A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London, New York: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
R Core Team. 2020. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R foundation for statical computing. Version 4.3.1. Vienna, Austria. [URL]
Schmid, Hans-Jörg. 2000. English abstract nouns as conceptual shells: from corpus to cognition [Topics in English Linguistics 34]. Berlin & New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2011. “Tracing Paths of Conventionalization from the Bible to the BNC: A Concise Corpus-based History of the not that Construction”. In More than words: English lexicography and lexicology past and present. Essays presented to Hans Sauer on the occasion of his 65th birthday. Part I, edited by Renate Bauer & Ulrike Krischke, 299 Frankfurt am Main, Berlin, and others: Peter Lang, 299–316.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2013. “Is usage more than usage after all? The case of English not that”. Linguistics 51 (1): 75–116. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schweinberger, Marin. 2023. Tree-based models in R. Brisbane: The University of Queensland. 〈[URL]〉 version 05.04.2023.
Silvennoinen, Olli O. 2023. “Not just contrastive: constructions with negated restrictives in English”. Journal of English Linguistics 51 (4): 346–374. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Smit, Niels. 2010. FYI: Theory and Typology of Information Packaging. Zutphen: NWO.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Praet, Wout. 2022. Specificational and precative clauses: a functional-cognitive account [Topics in English Linguistics 112]. Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Visser, Frederik T. 2002[1963]. An historical syntax of the English language. Part one: syntactical units with one verb (4th ed.). Leiden, Boston & Köln: Brill.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 jbe-platform.quadraat-sans-bold jbe-platform.quadraat-sans-bold-dark jbe-platform.quadraat-sans-bold-light jbe-platform.quadraat-sans-bold prag Twitter_Logo_Blue