Jennifer Herriman

Identifying relations: The semantic functions of wh-clefts in English

Abstract This study compares the semantic relations represented by the wh-clauses of basic and reversed wh-clefts in the Freiburg corpus of written British English (FLOB). In both types of wh-clefts, there is a skewing of certain types of processes (mental, verbal, and relational) and circumstances (location, matter, and extent circumstances). This is related to the fact that the semantic function of the wh-clauses of wh-clefts is to represent a variable in a value–variable relation. There are also some differences in the distribution of these relations in basic and reversed wh-clefts. These differences can be explained by the different communicative functions of basic and reversed wh-clefts. Basic wh-clefts, where the wh-clauses are thematic, are often used to present newsworthy information from, for example, an evaluative perspective. Reversed wh-clefts, on the other hand, where the wh-clauses are rhematic, are often used to negotiate the validity of information already conveyed in the text or to highlight, for example, modal meanings.

Extraposed Subjects vs. Postverbal Complements: On the So-Called Obligatory Extraposition

The transformation which derived the b-variants of our sentences from the more basic avariants was normally conceived as an optional rule, but some cases were noted, both by Jespersen and other older grammarians and by the transformationalists, in which the avariant was not available and which might therefore be handled by specifying that the rule was sometimes obligatory. The cases in question seemed to fall into two rather different types, the first of which is illustrated in the following examples: