In:Perspectives on Linguistic Structure and Context: Studies in honor of Knud Lambrecht
Edited by Stacey Katz Bourns and Lindsy L. Myers
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 244] 2014
► pp. 199–222
Contrasting c'est -clefts and it-clefts in discourse
Published online: 5 March 2014
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.244.10kat
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.244.10kat
Although the French c’est-cleft and the English it-cleft appear at first glance to share similar syntactic and pragmatic properties (they are both what Lambrecht 1994 calls “argument focus” constructions), their use in discourse is not always the same. One finds a number of situations in which the c’est-cleft is required but the it-cleft is pragmatically odd. The reason for this discrepancy has to do with French prosodic restrictions that do not exist in English, thus creating a motivation for the cleft in French that is not found in English. In addition, various c’est-cleft types and c’est-cleft “lookalikes” in French correspond to different types of constructions in English, demonstrating the importance of analyzing naturally occurring discourse to determine pragmatic well-formedness.
References (27)
Bley-Vroman, Robert. 1986. “Hypothesis Testing in Second-Language A cquisition Theory.”
Language Learning
36: 353–76. .
Carter-Thomas, Shirley. 2009. “The French C’est-cleft: Functional and Formal Motivations.” In
La linguistique systémique fonctionelle et la langue française
, ed. by David Banks, Simon Eason, and Janet Ormrod, 127–156. Paris: L’Harmattan.
Collins, Peter C. 1991.
Cleft and Pseudo-cleft Constructions in English
. London and New York: Routledge. .
Declerck, Renaat. 1988.
Studies in Copular Sentences, Clefts, and Pseudo-clefts
. Leuven: University Press. .
Delin, Judy. 1995. “Presupposition and shared knowledge in it-clefts.”
Language and Cognitive Processes
, 10 (2):97–120. .
Destruel Johnson, Emilie. 2012.
“An Empirical Study on the Meaning and Use of the French C’est-Cleft.”
Doctoral Dissertation, University of Texas, Austin.
Donaldson, Bryan. 2012. “Syntax and Discourse in Near-Native F rench: Clefts and Focus.”
Language Learning
62 (3):902–930. .
Fillmore, Charles J. and Paul Kay. 1995.
Construction Grammar Coursebook
. Ms. University of California, Berkeley.
Hagen, L. Kirk, and Jean DeWitt. 1993. “Teaching French Cleft Constructions to English Speakers.”
Canadian Modern Language Review
49: 550–66.
Katz, Stacey L. 1997. “The Syntactic and Pragmatic Properties of the C’est-Cleft Construction.” PhD diss., University of Texas, Austin.
Katz, Stacey. 2000a. “A Functional Approach to the Teaching of the French C’est-Cleft.”
French Review
74 (2):248–262.
. 2000b. “Categories of C’est-Cleft Constructions.”
Revue Canadienne de Linguistique,
45 (3/4):1001–1021.
Katz, Stacey L., and Carl Blyth. 2007.
Teaching French Grammar in Context: Theory and Practice
. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Kerr, Betsy. 1983. Minnesota Corpus. Available by request from the creator.
Lambrecht, Knud. 1988. “Presentational Cleft Constructions in Spoken French.” In
Clause Combining in Grammar and Discourse
, ed. by John Haiman, and Sandra A. Thompson, 135–179. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
. 1994.
Information Structure and Sentence form. Topic, Focus, and the Mental Representations of Discourse Referents
. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. .
. 2010. “Constraints on Subject-Focus Mapping: A Contrastive Analysis.” In
Comparative and Contrastive Studies of Information Structure
, ed. by Carsten Breul, and Edward Göbbel, 77–100. Amsterdam: Johns Benjamins.
Prince, Ellen F. 1978. A Comparison of Wh-clefts and It-Clefts in Discourse.
Language
54: 883–906. .
Roubaud, Marie-Noëlle. 1994. “Le sujet dans les énoncés pseudo-clivées.”
Recherches sur le français parlé
14: 147–171.
Cited by (4)
Cited by four other publications
Destruel, Emilie
Garassino, Davide
2022. Translation as a source of pragmatic interference?. In When Data Challenges Theory [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 273], ► pp. 271 ff.
Renans, Agata
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 november 2025. 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.
