REFERENTIALITY OF THE PRONOUNS IT AND THAT IN COPULAR SENTENCES

Vol.5,No.2(2012)

Chiaki Kumamoto

https://doi.org/10.5817/DI2012-2-35

PDF
Abstract
The aim of this paper is to clarify the referential status of it and that used as the subject of specificational sentences. Whether considered to be referential or non-referential, these pronouns are often treated similarly in the literature, their functional differences being hardly recognized. After a brief survey of recent literature, it will be argued that both pronouns are connected with the notion of a noun phrase involving a variable, as proposed by Nishiyama (2003), and are considered to be non-referential. It will then be suggested that a specificational sentence with it as its subject assigns the value for a variable, while a specificational sentence with that as its subject confirms the identity of the value which has already been assigned.

Keywords:
copular sentences; cleft constructions; pronouns; referential/non-referential distinction; noun phrases involving a variable
References

Baker, C. L. (1968) Indirect Questions in English. (Doctoral dissertation). University of
Illinois.


Birner, B. J., Kaplan, J. P. and Ward, G. (2007) ‘Functional compositionality and the
interaction of discourse constraints.’ Language 83, 317-343. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2007.0056


Declerck, R. (1988) Studies on Copular Sentences, Clefts and Pseudo-Clefts. Leuven:
Leuven University Press.


Fauconnier, G. (1985) Mental Spaces. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.


Gundel, J. K., Hedberg, N. and Zacharski, R. (1993) ‘Cognitive status and the form of
referring expressions in discourse.’ Language 69, 274-307. https://doi.org/10.2307/416535


Hartmann, M. J. (2011) ‘Focus, predication and specification: The case of it-clefts.’
Invited Talk: CRISSP Seminar, November 28, 2011, Brussels University. http://
www.uni-tuebingen.de/en/research/forschungsschwerpunkte/collaborative-researchcenters/
sfb-833/section-a-context/a7-winkler/talks.html


Hedberg, N. (2000) ‘The referential status of clefts.’ Language 76, 891-919. https://doi.org/10.2307/417203


Hedberg, N. (2012) ‘Multiple focus and cleft sentences.’ In: Haida, A., Veenstra, T. and
Hartmann, K. (eds) The Structure of Clefts. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. http://www.
sfu.ca/~hedberg/Cleft_Hedberg_NH_single_spaced.pdf


Higgins, F. R. (1979) The Pseudo-Cleft Construction in English. New York: Garland.


Mikkelsen, L. (2005) Copular Clauses: Specification, Predication, and Equation.
Amsterdam: John Benjamins.


Nishiyama, Y. (2003) Nihongo Meishiku no Imiron to Goyooron (Semantics and Pragmatics
of Noun Phrases in Japanese). Tokyo: Hitsuji Shoboo.


Prince, E. (1986) ‘On the syntactic marking of presupposed open presuppositions.’ CLS
22, 208-222.


Reeve, M. (2012) Clefts and Their Relatives. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John
Benjamins.

Metrics

0

Crossref logo

0

301

Views

170

PDF views

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Copyright © 2017 Discourse and Interaction

PDF