(Pseudo)cleft constructions in old Romanian

Mihaela Gheorghe

doi:10.17684/i6a91en

Abstract

The article examines the syntactic and semantic features of cleft sentences in Old Romanian (OR) as compared to Modern Romanian (MR). The clefting strategy in MR can only produce pseudo-cleft constructions (identifying structures with free relative clauses headed by ce, or relative clauses with an antecedent; the focalized constituent follows the relative clause and the copula; the reversed pattern is also possible: the focalized constituent is placed before the copula and the relative clause). The analysis of an OR corpus showed that cleft constructions were quite frequent, but the patterns were more diverse than in MR: besides cleft and pseudo-cleft constructions, OR also employed hybrid constructions, that amalgamate the features of the prototypical clefts.

Highlights

Since Jespersen (1937/1984), an extensive literature deals with the description of cleft sentences
Most descriptions of Romanian clefts (Șerbănescu, 1996; Pană Dindelegan, 2013, p. 488) show that the clefting strategy in Modern Romanian (MR) can only produce pseudo-clefts; they are either identification structures ([relative clause + copula + focalized XP]) with free relative clauses headed by ce (3a), or relative structures with an antecedent that has the properties mentioned by Collins (1991; see supra): a noun with generalizing value (3b,c) or the universal quantifier tot (3d); this structure matches the pattern: [antecedent + relative clause + copula + focalized XP]
The corpus revealed the existence of cleft patterns that are similar to the prototypical ones, and they are organized under the pattern [copula + focalized XP +

Summary

Introduction

Since Jespersen (1937/1984), an extensive literature deals with the description of cleft sentences. 488) show that the clefting strategy in MR can only produce pseudo-clefts; they are either identification structures ([relative clause + copula + focalized XP]) with free relative clauses headed by ce (3a), or relative structures with an antecedent that has the properties mentioned by Collins (1991; see supra): a noun with generalizing value (3b,c) or the universal quantifier tot (3d); this structure matches the pattern: [antecedent + relative clause + copula + focalized XP]. B. Ceea [ce mă supără cel mai tare] este că nu ai that what cl.acc.1sg upsets most hard is that not have răbdare. A. Că nu ai răbdare este ceea [ce mă supără that not have patience is that what cl.acc.1sg upsets cel mai tare]. The pattern favours ce as the head of the relative clause, and the focalized constituent is usually an object Both cleft constructions are in free variation with the variant in which the relative clause has the pronominal antecedent ceea. For further detail regarding the distribution of (ceea) ce in MR relative clauses, see Gheorghe (2004, p. 140–148)

Cleft patterns in Old Romanian

Cleft sentences

Prototypical pseudo-clefts

Reversed pseudo-clefts

Hybrid pseudo-clefts

Conclusions