Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T12:43:51.165Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Relative pronouns in it-clefts: The last seven centuries

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Catherine N. Ball
Catherine N. Ball
Affiliation:
Georgetown University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

It has often been claimed that it-cleft complements differ syntactically from restrictive relative clauses. Alleged differences in the distribution and relative frequency of wh-forms in the two clause types are generally offered to support this view, but such claims have not been empirically verified. In this study, we examine synchronic and diachronic data for clefts and relative clauses and show that the major claims are unsupported. The diachronic data further show that cleft complements and restrictive relative clauses have changed together over time and at the same rate. On the constant rate hypothesis, the evidence supports the position that the two clause types are not syntactically distinct.

Type
Research Article
Information
Language Variation and Change , Volume 6 , Issue 2 , July 1994 , pp. 179 - 200
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1994

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allen, C. L. (1980). Topics in diachronic English syntax. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Ayer, A. J. (1952). Language, truth and logic. New York: Dover.Google Scholar
Ball, C. N. (1991). The historical development of the it-cleft. Doctoral dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Bayne, R. (ed.). (1925). Of the laws of ecclesiastical polity by Richard Hooker. New York: Dutton.Google Scholar
Beeching, J. (ed.). (1985). Hakluyt: Voyages and discoveries. London: Penguin. (Original work published 1972)Google Scholar
Biber, D. (1986). Spoken and written textual dimensions in English. Language 62:384–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biber, D. (1988). Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biber, D., & Finegan, E. (1988). Historical drift in three English genres. In Walsh, T. (ed.), Georgetown University Round Table on Language and Linguistics 1988. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press. 22–36.Google Scholar
Declerck, R. (1988). Studies on copular sentences, clefts and pseudo-clefts. Leuven: Leuven University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delahunty, G. P. (1982). Topics in the syntax and semantics of English cleft sentences. Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Delin, J. L. (1989). Cleft constructions in discourse. Doctoral dissertation, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Donno, E. S. (ed.). (1962). Sir John Harington's A new discourse of a stale subject, called the metamorphosis of Ajax. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Evans, M. (ed.). (1987). Sir Philip Sidney: The Countess of Pembroke's arcadia. London: Penguin. (Original work published 1977)Google Scholar
Fowler, H. W., & Fowler, F. G. (1973). The King's English. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Görlach, M. (1991). Introduction to Early Modern English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hedberg, N. A. (1990). Discourse pragmatics and cleft sentences in English. Doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota.Google Scholar
Heltzel, V. B. (ed.). (1954). The Kayes of Counsaile: A newe discourse of morall philosophie [1579]. Liverpool: University Press of Liverpool.Google Scholar
Horsman, E. A. (ed.). (1956). The pinder of Wakefield. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press.Google Scholar
Jespersen, O. (1969). Analytic syntax. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. (Original work published 1937)Google Scholar
Kroch, A. (1989). Reflexes of grammar in patterns of language change. Language Variation and Change 1:199–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LaRouche, L. H. (1984). Imperialism: The final stage of Bolshevism. New York: New Benjamin Franklin House.Google Scholar
Lee, S. L. (ed.). (1973). The Boke of Huon of Burdeux. Millwood, NY: Kraus Reprint. (Original work published 1882)Google Scholar
Macaulay, G. C. (ed.). (1979). The English works of John Gower, Vol. 1. Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1900)Google Scholar
MacKinnon, F. D. (ed.). (1930). Evelina, or the history of a young lady's entrance into the world. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
Massingham, H. J. (1942). The English downland. London: B. T. Batsford.Google Scholar
McKerrow, R. B. (ed.). (1958). The works of Thomas Nashe, Vol. 2. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Monk, S. H. (ed.). (1971). The works of John Dryden, Vol. 17. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Mustanoja, T. F. (1960). A Middle English syntax: Part I. Parts of speech. Helsinki: Mémoirs de la Société Néophilologique de Helsinki 23.Google Scholar
Pintzuk, S. (1991). Phrase structures in competition: Variation and change in Old English word order. Doctoral dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Poussa, P. (1985). Historical implications of the distribution of the zero-pronoun relative in Modern English dialects: Looking backwards towards OE from Map S5 of The Linguistic Atlas of England. In Jacobson, S. (ed.), Papers from the Third Scandinavian Symposium on Syntactic Variation, Stockholm, May 11–12, 1985. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell International. 99–117.Google Scholar
Prince, E. (1981). Toward a taxonomy of given-new information. In Cole, P. (ed.), Radical pragmatics. New York: Academic. 223–255.Google Scholar
Quirk, R. (1957). Relative clauses in educated spoken English. English Studies 38:97–109. Reprinted in Quirk (1968).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quirk, R. (1968). Essays on the English language, medieval and modern. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J. (1985). A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Rochemont, M. S. (1985). A theory of stylistic rules in English. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Rochemont, M. S. (1986). Focus in generative grammar. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Romaine, S. (1980). The relative marker in Scots English. Language in Society 9:221–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Russell, B. (1950). Unpopular essays. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
Rydén, M. (1966). Relative constructions in early sixteenth century English. Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksells.Google Scholar
Smith, N. (ed.). (1983). A collection of Ranter writings from the 17th century. London: Junction.Google Scholar
Sornicola, R. (1988). It-clefts and wh-clefts: Two awkward sentence types. Journal of Linguistics 24:343–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spingarn, J. E. (ed.). (1957). Critical essays of the seventeenth century, Vol. 2. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Summers, M. (ed.). (1967). The works of Aphra Behn, Vol. 5. New York: Benjamin Blom.Google Scholar
Svartvik, J., & Quirk, R. (eds.). (1980). A corpus of English conversation. Lund: Liber-Läromedel.Google Scholar
Tolkien, J. R. R. (1982). The hobbit. New York: Ballantine.Google Scholar
Thompson, R. (ed.). (1977). Samuel Pepys' penny merriments. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Visser, F. Th. (1963). An historical syntax of the English language, Volume I. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Walter, H. (ed.). (1848). Doctrinal treatises and introductions to different portions of the Holy Scriptures by William Tyndale. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar