IJAESsince 2000 International Journal of Arabic-English Studies

A Corpus-based Study of the Pragmatic and Syntactic Functions of Cleft Constructions in Newspaper Editorials

Abstract

The aim of this corpus-based study is to analyze the frequency in the use of three types of cleft constructions (it-clefts, wh-clefts, and reversed wh-clefts) in newspaper editorials of three English dailies in the United Arab Emirates. More specifically, the paper is concerned with the syntactic distribution of clefts in this journalistic corpus and the extent to which this distribution might have a bearing on the pragmatic functions of clefts in editorial discourse. These cleft constructions are not only different in giving prominence to different elements, they also differ in the way they organize information and in the kind of prominence they give to the highlighted elements. The choice of one rather than another of these three clefts is determined by various syntactic and pragmatic factors. The results obtained from the analysis show that the relatively high frequency of it-clefts in this journalistic corpus can be keyed to two factors. First, it-clefts create persuasive discourse, a typical feature of newspaper editorials. Second, since stress-marking is absent in written discourse, writers use it-clefts to direct the reader into a particular reading of the information structure. Reversed wh-clefts including those introduced by a demonstrative have a low distribution in this journalistic corpus. This is not unduly surprising since both clefts are more popular in spoken English.

Authors

Najib Ismail Jarad

DOI

Keywords

Full Text :

ijaes.net/article/fulltext/view?volume=14&issue=1&id=8

References

  1. Akmajian, Adrian. (1970). ‘On deriving cleft sentences from pseudo-cleft sentences’. Linguistic Inquiry, 1 (2): 147-168.
  2. Biber, Douglas., Stig Johansson, Geoffrey Leech, Susan Conrad and Edward Finegan. (1999). Longman Grammar of spoken and Written English. England: Longman.
  3. Bolinger, Dwight. (1989). Intonation and its Uses. Melody in Grammar and Discourse. London: Arnold.
  4. Calude, Andreea. (2008). ‘Demonstrative clefts and double cleft constructions in spontaneous Spoken English’. Studia Linguistica, 62 (1): 78–118
  5. Chomsky, Noam. (1972). ‘Deep structure, surface structure and semantic interpretation’. In Noam Chomsky (ed.), Studies on Semantics in Generative Grammar. 62-119. The Hague: Mouton.
  6. Collins, Peter. (1991). Cleft and Pseudo-Cleft Constructions in English. London: Routledge.
  7. Collins, Peter. (2006). ‘It-clefts and wh-clefts: Prosody and pragmatics’. Journal of Pragmatics, 38: 1706-1720.
  8. Connor, Ulla. (1996). Contrastive Rhetoric: Cross-cultural Aspects of Second- Language Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  9. Crystal, David. (2008). A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics. 6th edition. Oxford: Blackwell.
  10. Davidse, Kristin. (2000). ‘A constructional approach to clefts’. Linguistics, 38 (6): 1101-1131.
  11. Declerk, Renaat. (1984). ‘The pragmatics of it-clefts and wh-clefts’. Lingua, 64: 251–289.
  12. DeClerck, Renaat. (1988). Studies on Copular Sentences, Clefts and Pseudoclefts. Holland: Foris.
  13. Delin, Judy. (1995) ‘Presuppositions and shared knowledge in it-clefts’. Language and Cognitive Processes, 10 (2): 97–120.
  14. Delin, Judy and Jon Oberlander. (1995). ‘Syntactic constraints on discourse structure: The case of it-clefts’. Linguistics. 33 (3): 465–500.
  15. Dryer, Matthew. (1996). ‘Focus, pragmatic presupposition and activated propositions’. Journal of Pragmatics, 26: 473-523.
  16. Erdmann, Peter. (1988). ‘On the principle of ‘weight’ in English.’ In Caroline Duncan-Rose and Theo Vennemann (Eds.), On Language: Rhetorica, Phonologica, Syntactica. Festschrift for Robert P. Stockwell from His Friends & Colleague. 325–339. London: Routledge.
  17. Geluykens, Ronald. (2000). ‘Non-canonical word order in English: Variation across discourse types’. In Peter Lucko and Jurgen Schlaeger (Eds.), Anglistentag 2000 Berlin. pp. 43–50. Trier: WVT.
  18. Givón, Talmy. (2001). Syntax. Volume II. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
  19. Gundel, Jeanette. (1977). ‘Where do cleft sentences come from?’ Language, 53 (3): 542-559.
  20. Gundel, Jeanette. (1985). ‘Shared knowledge and topicality’. Journal of Pragmatics, 9: 83- 107.
  21. Gundel, Jeanette. (1988). ‘Universals of topic-comment structure’. In Michael Hammond, Edith Moravczik and Jessica Wirth, (eds.), Studies in Syntactic Typology, 209-39. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  22. Han, Chung-Hye and Nancy Hedberg. (2008). ‘Syntax and semantics of itclefts: A tree adjoining grammar analysis’. Journal of Semantics, 25: 345-380.
  23. Hedberg, Nancy. (2000). 'The referential status of clefts'. Language, 76 ( 4): 891-920.
  24. Hedberg, Nancy and Lorna fadden. ( 2007). ‘The Information structure of itclefts, wh-clefts and reverse wh-clefts in English’. In Nancy Hedberg and Ron Zacharski, (eds.), The Grammar-Pragmatics Interface, 49-77. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Bejamins.
  25. Heycock, Caroline and Anthony Kroch. (2002). ‘Topic, focus, and syntactic representations.’ In Line Mikkelsen and Christopher Potts (eds.), WCCFL 21 Proceedings. 141-165. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
  26. Huddleston, Rodney. (1984). Introduction to the Grammar of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  27. Huddleston, Rodney and Geoffrey Pullum. (2002). The Cambridge Grammarof the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  28. Jackendoff, Ray. (1972). Semantic Interpretation in Generative Grammar. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
  29. Jespersen, Otto. (1949). A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles, III. London and Copenhagen: George Allen and Unwin Ltd/Ejnar Munksgaard.
  30. Lambrecht, Knud. (2001). ‘A framework for the analysis of cleft constructions’. Linguistics. 39 (3): 463-516.
  31. Oberlander, Jon & Delin Judy (1996). ‘The function and interpretation of reverse wh-clefts in spoken discourse’. Language and Speech, 39 (2–3): 185–227.
  32. Pavey, Emma.(2004). The English it-cleft Construction: A Role and Reference Grammar Analysis. PhD dissertation, University of Sussex. Retrieved from http://linguistics.buffalo.edu/people/faculty/vanvalin/rrg/PAVEY%2020 04.pdf
  33. Prince, Ellen .F. (1978). ‘A comparison of WH-clefts and it-clefts in discourse’. Language, 54: 883-907.
  34. Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech, and Jan Svartvik. (1985). A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. Longman: London & New York.
  35. Selkirk, Elizabeth. (1984). Phonology and Syntax: The Relation between Sound and Structure. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
  36. Selkirk, Elizabeth. (1995). ‘Sentence prosody: intonation, stress, and phrasing’. In John A. Goldsmith (ed.), The Handbook of Phonological Theory. 550-569. Oxford: Blackwell.
  37. Sornicola, Rosanna. (1988). ‘It-clefts and wh-clefts: Two awkward sentence types’. Journal of Linguistics, 24 (2): 343-379.
  38. Visser, Fredericus Theodorus. (1963) (1970) A Historical Syntax of the English Language, Part One: Syntactical Units with One Verb, Brill, Leiden.
  39. Ward, Gregory, Betty Birner and Rodney Huddleston. (2002). ‘Information packaging’. In Rodney Huddleston and Geoffrey Pullum (Eds.), The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. 1363–1443. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  40. Weinert, Regina. (1995). ‘Focusing constructions in spoken language: Clefts, Y-movement, thematization and deixis in English and German’. Linguistische Berichte, 159: 341–369.
  41. Weinert, Regina and Jim Miller. (1996). ‘Cleft constructions in spoken l anguage’. Journal of Pragmatics, 25: 173–206.