Relative Clauses and Cleft Sentences

Capitulo de Libro

Resumen *

The study of RCs and Clefts is enlightening in different ways and at different levels. In a very abstract perspective, RC is a primary example of the need of phrases in any grammatical theory. It is a structure -not just a mere concatenation- that results from a meaningful combination of symbols. The relative clause in RC is semantically and syntactically independent from the matrix clause because it is embedded within a noun phrase. The RP is an enclosure that fosters relations among the symbols inside, preventing them from having certain relations with symbols outside. In addition, RC reveals the structural richness of human languages. As defined here, relative clauses are embedded into noun phrases as peripheral modifiers of the nucleus. It turns out that different subordinations are possible even in a single language, through a relative pronoun or no subordinator at all. Furthermore, a typological perspective instructs us about different structural condition for the antecedent-pronoun coindexation relation. In the typologically more frequent Externally Headed Relative Clauses (EHRC) (Van Valin 2005; Comrie 1998), the antecedent noun is in the matrix clause whereas the referentially dependent form or argument slot belongs to the dependent clause. In Internally Headed Relative Clauses (IHRC) the situation is the opposite, in that the full noun is part of the dependent clause whereas the argument slot that takes its value from that noun is in the matrix clause. Clefts too illustrate very general properties of linguistic systems. The perspective I have taken here to describe Clefts bears on the question: how deep does information structure carve into the grammatical system? In other words, the issue is whether a system that is designed to satisfy communicative needs operates at the grammatical core. A functionalist linguist would predict that information structure goes all the way down to the center of the grammatical system and this is precisely what it-clefts show. The matrix clause does not carry the semantically rich content of the sentence, which is in fact contributed by the embedded clause. This embedded clause determines even the morphosyntactic realization of the attributive expression (typically a noun phrase but also a prepositional phrase) in the matrix clause. This is what, in this chapter, has been called ?inverted? linking. However, the matrix clause conveys the focal element of the assertion, that is, it provides the salient information structure content. In short, information structure reverses the dependency relation that would be predicted from mere semantic consideration.The contrast between Clefts and RCs highlights how two structures that share striking similarities can be at the same time extremely different. Both Clefts and RCs contain an embedded clause that can be introduced by a relative pronoun. Both of them hold a coindexation relation between an element in the matrix clause and another in the embedded clause. However, the relative clause in RC is a modifier of the antecedent noun, whereas Clefts involve an interclausal relation so that the cleft clause is dependent on the matrix clause, it is in the periphery of the matrix core. This analysis explains among other facts the different scope of quantifiers in the matrix clause. Their different structural shape is systematically tied to their different communicative function. The function of RCs revolves around the identity of the participant expressed by the head noun. The listener has to identify it with the help of the information carried by the embedded clause, information that qualifies as a presupposition. The function of Clefts is centered on information structure. The matrix clause conveys a participant whose identity, together with the role it plays in the event introduced by the embedded clause, constitute the focus of the sentence. In this sense, the embedded clauses in RCs and Clefts both carry open propositions but the one in RC counts as a plain presupposition while the one in Clefts is an operative presupposition, which means that part of it is in focus. Información suministrada por el agente en SIGEVA