Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
  1. Home
  2. Publications
  3. Journals
  4. Content listing

Refine listing

Refine listing

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

2112110 results in Journals

Page 42 of 105606

  • The Referential Status of Clefts

  • Nancy Hedberg
  • Journal:
    Language / Volume 76 / Issue 4-1 / December 2000
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    19 February 2026, pp. 891-920

  • This article has two main parts. In the first, the subject pronoun in a cleft sentence together with the cleft clause is shown to function pragmatically as a discontinuous definite description. Applying the givenness hierarchy (Gundel et al. 1993) makes it possible to explain the distribution of this-clefts and that-clefts in discourse, and predicts the more frequent occurrence of it-clefts. Clefts also semantically share existential and exhaustiveness conditions with definite descriptions. The second part presents a new syntactic analysis of clefts, which treats the cleft clause as an extraposed complement of the cleft subject pronoun, adjoined to the clefted constituent.

  • Discussion Note: Response to Aoun and Li

  • Susumu Kuno, Ken-ichi Takami, Yuru Wu
  • Journal:
    Language / Volume 77 / Issue 1 / March 2001
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    19 February 2026, pp. 134-143

  • Kuno, Takami, and Wu (1999) showed that Aoun and Li's (1993) syntactic analysis of quantifier scope interpretation in English, Chinese, and Japanese makes incorrect predictions about the grammaticality and ambiguity of certain types of sentences. They proposed instead an expert system based on the interaction of syntactic and other principles that ranks the relative strengths of the potential scope interpretations of a given sentence. Aoun and Li (2000) replied to Kuno et al. with a number of criticisms, which are refuted here.

Page 42 of 105606