Pseudoclefts have been divided into two types, specificational and predicational (Akmajian 1970; Higgins 1979). The two types differ in interpretive as well as syntactic characteristics. In this paper we argue that the availability of the specificational type depends on the particular lexical items that a language employs to form pseudoclefts. We discuss the significance of these findings for linguistic theory.

From Higgins (1973) to Iatridou and Varlokosta (1998), connectivity has been considered in the literature to be a defining characteristic of specificational pseudoclefts. This paper argues against this view based on an analysis of specificational pseudoclefts in Hebrew. Pseudoclefts in Hebrew are interesting in two ways. First, predicational and specificational pseudoclefts are distinguished lexically in the choice of the copula. Second, specificational pseudoclefts fall into two classes, each exhibiting a different set of connectivity effects. The connectivity pattern in Hebrew is (...) accounted for following Jacobson (1994) and Sharvit (1999), who assume that connectivity effects are independent of each other and derive them as a by-product of semantic equation. It is shown that this pattern cannot be obtained using any single grammatical operation, such as reconstruction or coping, which would necessarily derive all connectivity effects at once. (shrink)

A construction is found in American Sign Language that we call a Question–Answer Clause. It is made of two parts: the first part looks like an interrogative clause conveying a question, while the second part resembles a declarative clause answering that question. The very same signer has to sign both, the entire construction is interpreted as truth-conditionally equivalent to a declarative sentence, and it can be uttered only under certain discourse conditions. These and other properties of Question–Answer Clauses are discussed, (...) and a detailed syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic account is provided. Question–Answer Clauses are argued to be copular clauses consisting of a silent copula of identity connecting an interrogative clause in the precopular position with a declarative clause in the postcopular position. Pragmatically, they instantiate a topic/comment structure, with the first part expressing a sub-question under discussion and the second part expressing the answer to that sub-question. Broader implications of the analysis are discussed for the Question Under Discussion theory of discourse structuring, for the analysis of pseudoclefts in spoken languages, and for recent proposals about the need for answerhood operators and exhaustivity operators in the grammar and the consequences for the syntax/semantics/pragmatics interface. (shrink)

The availability in universal grammar of two separate copulas of predication & identity is supported by an analysis of pseudoclefts in Welsh. A single-copula analysis of the ambiguity between predicational & specificational interpretations of pseudoclefts in English cannot be extended to Welsh, where specificational interpretation (1) is permitted by only one of three copular paradigms, all of which may have a predicational interpretation, & (2) is possible with both of the D-structures used in the single-copula analysis to distinguish between the (...) two interpretations in English. It is argued that the differences between English & Welsh with respect to the interpretation of copular constructions can only be explained by positing a dual-copula analysis for Welsh & a single-copula one for English; the data confirm the existence of a type-shifting functor in English that is realized lexically as a copula in Welsh. 47 References. J. Hitchcock. (shrink)

Triggered Inversion (TI) in Hebrew has been previously analyzed as canonical A'-movement to the specificer position of a functional projection in the CP-layer (Doron & Shlonsky 1990, Shlonsky 1997). This article examines the semantic properties of TI constructions in Hebrew, specifically the cross-linguistic similarities between TI in Hebrew and pseudoclefts (PC) in English, as discussed in Heycock & Kroch (1999). A structure is proposed for Hebrew TI that parallels the structure given for equatives in Hebrew by Rothstein (1995), in which (...) the trigger is base-generated in the operator layer and the inverted surface word order is an artifact of subject movement to a position below that of the verb. Finally, TI is considered in the crosslinguistic typology of focus constructions outlined in Kiss (1998). (shrink)

This paper establishes the generalisation that whenever agreement with the finite verb is controlled by a constituent that is not in a Spec–Head relation with the inflectional head of the clause, this agreement cannot affect person. A syntactic representation for person inside the noun phrase and on the clausal spine is proposed which, in conjunction with the workings of agreement and concord, accommodates this empirical generalisation and derives Baker’s Structural Condition on Person Agreement (SCOPA). The proposal also provides an explanation (...) for the φ-feature agreement facts of specificational copular sentences. The paper places its findings on person vs number agreement in the context of recent psycho- and neurolinguistic investigation of number/person dissociation. (shrink)