Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T18:09:42.124Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The rise of it-clefting in English: areal-typological and contact-linguistic considerations1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2009

MARKKU FILPPULA
MARKKU FILPPULA*
Affiliation:
Foreign Languages & Translation Studies, University of Joensuu, PO Box 111, 80101 Joensuu, Finlandmarkku.filppula@joensuu.fi
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Recent areal and typological research has brought to light several syntactic features which English shares with the Celtic languages as well as some of its neighbouring western European languages, but not with (all of) its Germanic sister languages, especially German. This study focuses on one of them, viz. the so-called it-cleft construction. What makes the it-cleft construction particularly interesting from an areal and typological point of view is the fact that, although it does not belong to the defining features of so-called Standard Average European (SAE), it has a strong presence in French, which is in the ‘nucleus’ of languages forming SAE alongside Dutch, German, and (northern dialects of) Italian. In German, however, clefting has remained a marginal option, not to mention most of the eastern European languages which hardly make use of clefting at all. This division in itself prompts the question of some kind of a historical-linguistic connection between the Celtic languages (both Insular and Continental), English, and French (or, more widely, Romance languages). Before tackling that question, one has to establish whether it-clefting is part of Old (and Middle) English grammar, and if so, to what extent it is used in these periods. In the first part of this article (sections 2 and 3), I trace the emergence of it-clefts on the basis of data from The York–Toronto–Helsinki Corpus of Old English Prose and The Penn–Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Middle English, second edition. Having established the gradually increasing use of it-clefts from OE to ME, I move on to discuss the areal distribution of clefting among European languages and its typological implications (section 4). This paves the way for a discussion of the possible role played by language contacts, and especially those with the Celtic languages, in the emergence of it-clefting in English (section 5). It is argued that contacts with the Celtic languages provide the most plausible explanation for the development of this feature of English. This conclusion is supported by the chronological precedence of the cleft construction in the Celtic languages, its prominence in modern-period ‘Celtic Englishes’, and close parallels between English and the Celtic languages with respect to several other syntactic features.

Type
Research Article
Information
English Language & Linguistics , Volume 13 , Issue 2: Re-evaluating the Celtic hypothesis , July 2009 , pp. 267 - 293
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

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

Ahlqvist, Anders. 1977. Typological notes on Irish word-order. In Hopper, Paul J. (ed.), Studies in descriptive and historical linguistics: Festschrift for Winfred P. Lehmann, 267–81. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ahlqvist, Anders. 2002. Cleft sentences in Irish and other languages. In Filppula, Klemola & Pitkänen (eds.), 271–81.Google Scholar
Ball, Catherine N. 1990. Word order and frequency of clefts: Cross-linguistic and diachronic data. Presented at the Penn Linguistics Colloquium, 9–10 February, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Ball, Catherine N. 1991. The historical development of the it-cleft. University of Pennsylvania Dissertation in Linguistics, Ann Arbor, MI: University Microfilms International.Google Scholar
Ball, Catherine N. 1994a. Relative pronouns in it-clefts: The last seven centuries. Language Variation and Change 6, 179–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ball, Catherine N. 1994b. The origins of the informative-presupposition it-cleft. Journal of Pragmatics 22, 603–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beckman, Natanael. 1934. Västeuropeisk syntax. Några nybildningar i nordiska och andra västeuropeiska språk. Göteborgs Högskolas årsskrift 40, 3–44.Google Scholar
Belletti, Adriana. 2006. Clefts and wh in situ: Some notes. Presented at COST-meeting, Lisbon, 6–8 July 2006.Google Scholar
Evans, D. Ellis. 1990. Insular Celtic and the emergence of the Welsh language. In Bammesberger, Alfred & Wollmann, Alfred (eds.), Britain 400–600: Language and history, 149–77. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.Google Scholar
Evans, D. Simon. 1964/1994. A grammar of Middle Welsh. Dublin: Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies.Google Scholar
Filppula, Markku. 1986. Some aspects of Hiberno-English in a functional sentence perspective (University of Joensuu Publications in the Humanities 7). Joensuu: University of Joensuu.Google Scholar
Filppula, Markku. 1999. The grammar of Irish English: Language in Hibernian style (Routledge Studies in Germanic Linguistics 5). London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Filppula, Markku, Klemola, Juhani & Paulasto, Heli. 2008. English and Celtic in contact. London and New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Filppula, Markku, Klemola, Juhani & Pitkänen, Heli (eds.). 2002 The Celtic roots of English (Studies in Languages 37). Joensuu: University of Joensuu.Google Scholar
German, Gary D. 2003. The French of Western Brittany in light of the Celtic Englishes. In Tristram, Hildegard L. C. (ed.), The Celtic Englishes III, 390–412. Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag C. Winter.Google Scholar
Gillies, William. 1993 Scottish Gaelic. In Ball, Martin J. (ed.), The Celtic languages, 145–227. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Gregor, Douglas B. 1980. Celtic: A comparative study. New York: The Oleander Press.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 1998. How young is Standard Average European? Language Sciences 20, 271–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin, Dryer, Matthew S., Gil, David & Comrie, Bernard (eds.). 2008. The world atlas of language structures online. Munich: Max Planck Digital Library, chapter 39. Available online at http://wals.info/feature/39. Accessed on 17 November 2008.Google Scholar
Hatcher, Anne Granville. 1948. From Ce suis je to C'est moi (the ego as subject and as predicative in Old French). PMLA, 63 (4), 1053–1100.Google Scholar
Holm, John. 1988. Pidgins and creoles, vol. 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Jespersen, Otto. 1937. Analytic syntax. London: George Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Junghanns, Uwe. 1997. On the so-called èto-cleft construction. In Lindseth, Martina & Franks, Steven (eds.), Formal approaches to [Slavic] linguistics: The Indiana meeting 1996, 166–90. Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publications.Google Scholar
Kellner, Leon. 1892/1905. Historical outlines of English syntax. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Valentin. 1969. Gibt es ein finnougrisches Substrat im Slavischen? Helsinki: The Finnish Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
Koch, John, T. 1985. Movement and emphasis in the Gaulish sentence. Bulletin of the Board of Celtic Studies 32, 1–37. Cardiff: University of Wales Press.Google Scholar
Lamb, William. 2001. Scottish Gaelic. Munich: LINCOM EUROPA.Google Scholar
Lambert, Pierre-Yves. 1987. A restatement on the Gaulish tablet from Chamalières. Bulletin of the Board of Celtic Studies 34, 10–17. Cardiff: University of Wales Press.Google Scholar
Lambert, Pierre-Yves. 2003. La langue gauloise. Description linguistique, commentaire d'inscriptions choisies. Édition revue et augmentée. Paris: Editions Errance.Google Scholar
Löfstedt, Bengt. 1966. Die Konstruktion c'est lui qui l'a fait in Lateinischen. Indogermanische Forschungen 71, 253–77.Google Scholar
Mac Cana, Proinsias. 1973. On Celtic word order and the Welsh ‘abnormal sentence’. Ériu 24, 90–120.Google Scholar
Mac Coisdealbha, Pádraig. 1998. The syntax of the sentence in Old Irish: Selected studies from a descriptive, historical and comparative point of view. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Mac Cone, Kim. 1979. Pretonic preverbs and the absolute verbal endings in Old Irish. Ériu 30, 1–34.Google Scholar
Mac Eoin, Gearoid. 1993. Irish. In Ball, Martin J. (ed.), The Celtic languages, 101–44. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Miller, Jim. 1996. Clefts, particles and word order in languages of Europe. Language Sciences 18, 111–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, Thomas. 1891/1959. The Old English version of Bede's ecclesiastical history of the English people. Edited with a translation and introduction by Thomas Miller. Part I, 2. Early English Text Society, Original Series no. 96. London, New York, and Toronto: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mitchell, Bruce. 1985. Old English syntax, vol. 1, Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morris, Richard (ed.). 1874–80. The Blickling homilies of the tenth century. EETS OS 58, 63, 73. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Odlin, Terence. 1997. Bilingualism and substrate influence: a look at clefts and reflexives. In Kallen, Jeffrey L. (ed.), Focus on Ireland, 35–50. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ó Siadhail, Mícheál. 1989. Modern Irish: Grammatical structure and dialectal variation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paul, Hermann. 1919. Deutsche Grammatik, vol. III. Halle A. S.: Max Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Paulasto, Heli. 2006. Welsh English syntax: Contact and variation. Joensuu: Joensuu University Press.Google Scholar
Pedersen, Holger. 1913. Vergleichende Grammatik der keltischen Sprachen, vol. II. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht.Google Scholar
Pinedo, Alicia. 2000. English clefts as discourse-pragmatic equivalents of Spanish postverbal subjects. Estudios Ingleses de la Universidad Complutense 8, 127–51.Google Scholar
Prince, Ellen F. 1978. A comparison of WH-clefts and it-clefts in discourse. Language 54, 883–906.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quirk, Randolf, Greenbaum, Sidney, Leech, Geoffrey & Svartvik, Jan. 1985. A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Sebba, Mark. 1997. Contact languages: Pidgins and creoles. Basingstoke: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skeat, Walter W. 1881–1900. Ælfric's lives of saints. EETS 76, 82, 94, 119. London: Trübner & Co.Google Scholar
Steinberger, Ralf G. W. 1994. A study of word order variation in German, with special reference to modifier placement. PhD dissertation, University of Manchester, Institute of Science and Technology.Google Scholar
Stenson, Nancy. 1981. Studies in Irish syntax. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Thomason, Sarah G. & Kaufman, Terrence. 1988. Language contact, creolization, and genetic linguistics. Los Angeles: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thurneysen, Rudolf. 1975. A grammar of Old Irish, rev. and enlarged edn, Dublin: Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies.Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth C. 1992. Syntax. In Hogg, Richard M. (ed.), The Cambridge history of the English language, vol. 1: The beginnings to 1066, 168–289. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trépos, Pierre. 1980. Grammaire bretonne. Rennes: Simon.Google Scholar
Tristram, Hildegard L. C. 1999. How Celtic is Standard English? ([Publications of the] Institut lingvističeskich issledovanij, Rossijskoj akademii nauk). St Petersburg: Nauka.Google Scholar
Tristram, Hildegard L. C. 2002. Attrition of inflections in English and Welsh. In Filppula, Klemola & Pitkänen (eds.), 111–49.Google Scholar
van der Auwera, Johan & Genee, Inge. 2002. English do: On the convergence of languages and linguists. English Language and Linguistics 6 (2), 283–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vennemann, Theo. 2001. Atlantis Semitica: Structural contact features in Celtic and English. In Brinton, Laurel (ed.), Historical Linguistics 1999: Selected papers from the 14th International Conference on Historical Linguistics (Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 215), 351–69. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vennemann, Theo. 2002. On the rise of ‘Celtic’ syntax in Middle English. In Lucas, Peter J. & Lucas, Angela M. (eds.), Middle English from tongue to text: Selected papers from the Third International Conference on Middle English: Language and Text, held at Dublin, Ireland, 1–4 July 1999 (Studies in English Medieval Language and Literature, 4), 203–34. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Visser, Frederick Th. 1963–1973. An historical syntax of the English language. 4 vols, Leiden: E. J. Brill.Google Scholar
Wagner, Heinrich. 1959. Das Verbum in den Sprachen der Britischen Inseln: Ein Beitrag zur geographischen Typologie des Verbums, Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Watkins, T. Arwyn. 1991. The function of the cleft and non-cleft constituent orders in modern Welsh. In Fife, James & Poppe, Erich (eds.), Studies in Brythonic word order, 329–51. Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watkins, T. Arwyn. 1993. Welsh. In Martin, J. Ball (ed.), The Celtic languages, 289–348. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Wehr, Barbara. 2001. Ein westlich-atlantischer Sprachbund: Irisch, Französisch, Portugiesisch. In Eichner, H., Mumm, P.-A., Panagl, O. & Winkler, E. (eds.), Fremd und Eigen. Untersuchungen zu Grammatik und Wortschatz des Uralischen und Indogermanischen in memoriam Hartmut Katz, 253–78. Vienna: Edition Praesens.Google Scholar
Wehr, Barbara 2005. Focusing strategies in Old French and Old Irish. In Skaffari, Janne, Peikola, Matti, Carroll, Ruth, Hiltunen, Risto & Wårvik, Brita (eds.), Opening windows on texts and discourses of the past, 353–80. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, David L. 2002. Explaining the innovations of Middle English: What, where, and why. In Filppula, Klemola & Pitkänen (eds.), 153–74.Google Scholar
Whitelock, Dorothy (ed.). 1930. Anglo-Saxon wills. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Williams, Malcolm. 2000. The pragmatics of predicate fronting in Welsh English. In Tristram, Hildegard L. C. (ed.), The Celtic Englishes II, 210–30. Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag C. Winter.Google Scholar
Willis, David W. E. 1998. Syntactic change in Welsh: A study of the loss of verb-second. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar