From language to language, there are different alternatives in which a speaker can structure information. Information structure deals with the highlighting of pieces of information in sentences. Even though there are a variety of ways in which the same basic informational content can be conveyed, the preference for a particular way reveals how the speaker’s semantic representation is transposed into syntactical data. Moreover, the speaker’s choice for structuring information into a particular linguistic form shows the coherent way in which utterances are connected in sequences, revealing thus the importance of discourse.
There are several syntactic devices that are able to encode the pragmatic information of a preferred alternative. One type of such devices used to mark information structure is cleft constructions. There are two major types of clefts: it-clefts and WH-clefts, also called pseudo-clefts.
There has been claimed in the literature for a long time that cleft constructions are interchangeable. Clefts present a series of syntactic similarities, but they behave differently in discourse. The purpose of this paper is to prove that it-clefts and WH-clefts are not interchangeable. In doing so, data will be analyzed by comparing clefts as far as form, structure, and discourse functions are concerned, and eventually, in the light of given and known information, I will show the essential differences between them.
Although the grammatical forms are in direct relation and determine to some degree the information structure in a cleft, apart from the syntactical level, of significant importance is the analysis of cleft constructions as integrated components of a discourse. One should take into account the natural flow of language in a discourse, the surrounding information and the linguistic context in which clefts occur.
This paper will present a parallelism in form, structure, and discourse functions between it-clefts and WH-clefts, and show that despite the symmetry in form and structure, the different discourse functions reveal clefts as autonomous and distinct syntactic devices.
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. Form and Structure of Clefts
II.1. Focus
II.2. Agreement
III. Types of Clefts
III.1. It-clefts
III.2. WH-clefts
III.3. Distribution
IV. Discourse Function of Clefts. Given vs. Known
IV.1. Functions of it-clefts
IV.2. Functions of WH-clefts
V. Conclusions
Research Objective and Scope
The paper explores the syntactic and pragmatic differences between it-clefts and WH-clefts, challenging the long-held assumption that these constructions are interchangeable. By analyzing form, structure, and discourse functions in the context of given and known information, the author demonstrates that these cleft types operate as distinct linguistic devices.
- Comparison of syntactic form and structural symmetry between it-clefts and WH-clefts.
- Examination of focal flexibility and grammatical agreement constraints.
- Analysis of discourse functions, including contrast, the known fact effect, and temporal subordination.
- Evaluation of register distribution across academic prose and conversational speech.
Excerpt from the Book
II. Form and structure of clefts
Similar to dislocation, cleft sentences present information that could normally be given in a single clause in two clauses with their own verb. In this way, particular elements of the sentence are brought into focus. Cleft constructions mark information structure, and combine a presupposed clause with a focused element.
It-clefts consist of the pronoun it, a form of the verb to be, the focused element, and a relative-like dependant clause introduced by that, who/which or zero. Ex: It was a book that Mary bought. In the example above, the focused element is "a book", and the dependant clause is “that Mary bought a book”.
WH-clefts consist of a clause introduced by a wh-word, a form of the verb to be, and the focused element. In the example below, the underlined clause is the WH-clause, and “ a book” represents the focused element of the cleft. Ex: What Mary bought was a book.
As the examples show, both cleft constructions contain a dependent clause and an element that is focused. They consist of the same type of elements, with the difference that the focused element appears early in it-clefts and late in WH-clefts.
Summary of Chapters
I. Introduction: Outlines the research focus on information structure and the intention to distinguish it-clefts from WH-clefts as non-interchangeable syntactic devices.
II. Form and Structure of Clefts: Compares the syntactical composition, focusing constraints, and agreement patterns of both cleft types.
III. Types of Clefts: Categorizes various sub-types of clefts, such as stressed focus it-clefts and demonstrative WH-clefts, while discussing their register distribution.
IV. Discourse Function of Clefts. Given vs. Known: Explores how these constructions function within a discourse, particularly regarding contrast, factual presentation, and subordination.
V. Conclusions: Reaffirms that clefts are distinct autonomous devices that appear similar only when removed from their natural discourse context.
Keywords
Information structure, it-clefts, WH-clefts, pseudo-clefts, syntax, discourse function, focus, presupposition, given information, known fact, syntactic integration, linguistic context, contrast, pragmatics, communicative dynamism.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this academic paper?
The paper examines the differences between two types of cleft constructions—it-clefts and WH-clefts—specifically regarding their form, structure, and functional roles in discourse.
Are it-clefts and WH-clefts interchangeable?
No, the author argues that despite surface-level similarities in syntax, they are not interchangeable as they exhibit distinct behaviors and functions within discourse.
What research methodology does the author employ?
The author uses a comparative linguistic analysis, examining how these structures handle focal elements, agreement constraints, and their usage in various communicative contexts.
What are the key thematic areas covered in the main body?
The work covers syntactic composition, the flexibility of focus placement, discourse-specific functions like "known fact" vs. "given" information, and the distribution across registers.
How is information structure defined in this text?
Information structure is described as the way speakers highlight specific elements within sentences to organize their semantic representation into coherent discourse.
What are the key characteristics that define the cleft types?
It-clefts are noted for their flexibility in formal writing, while WH-clefts are more frequently associated with conversational discourse and specific inferential dependencies.
What is the "known fact effect" mentioned in the text?
It refers to the capacity of it-clefts to present information as a fact, often serving a subordinating function that backgrounds certain information within the discourse flow.
Why are WH-clefts more common in conversation?
The author suggests this is because the WH-clause typically contains lower information content that is assumed to be already present in the hearer's mind.
- Quote paper
- Gabriela Bara (Author), 2005, Comparison between It-clefts and WH-Clefts: Similarities and Differences, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/144318
