The Focus in Cleft Constructions in Gbaya: A Cartographic Approach
- 1 Department of Cameroonian Languages and Cultures, Higher Teacher Training College of the University of Maroua, Cameroon
Abstract
Gbaya is a language featuring specific particles that warrant meticulous analysis. To analyze them, the linguistic data must undergo transformations that strengthen the morphological material. This is achievable through information transmission, in so far as the notion of the cleft is intrinsically linked to focus via its canonical ‘nɛ́.… a’ structure, which conveys new information and exhibits a cleft operator co-indexed with the focalized element. This cleft structure may undergo elision of the introductory element, unlike the exclusive marker of the cleft. Within this framework, Bago Kaptel (2022) distinguishes between relativization and clefting. The cleft formation process is based on the element marking the illocutionary force upon which the cleft rests, establishing a Cleft Phrase. Meanwhile, the introductory element ‘nɛ́’ identifies the focalized constituent among others, invoking a projection suggested here as the Designation Phrase (DesignP). These specificities of Gbaya clefting contribute to the refinement and enrichment of the theory while laying the groundwork for future research.
- Akmadjian, A. (1970). On Deriving Cleft Sentences from Pseudo-Cleft Sentences. Linguistic Inquiry , 1, 149-168.
- Bago Kaptel, D. (2022). La périphérie gauche propositionnelle du gbaya . Ph.D. Thesis, Université de Ngaoundéré.
- Bija’a, K. (2005). La dynamique des langues camerounaises en contact avec le français: Approche macrosociolinguistique . Thèse de Doctorat, Université de Yaoundé I.
- Biloa, E. (1995). Functional Categories and the Syntax of Focus in Tuki . LINCOM EUROPA.
- Büring, D., & Križ, M. (2013). It’s That, and That’s It! Exhaustivity and Homogeneity Presuppositions in Clefts (and Definites). Semantics and Pragmatics, 6, 1-29. https://doi.org/10.3765/sp.6.6
- Chomsky, N. (1977). On Wh-Movement. In P. Cullicover, T. Wasow, & A. Akmajian (Eds.), Formal Syntax (pp. 71-132). Academic Press.
- Chomsky, N. (1977). On Wh-Movement. In P. Cullicover, T. Wasow, & A. Akmajian (Eds.), Formal Syntax (pp. 71-132). Academic Press.
- De Stefani, E. (2008). De la malléabilité des structures syntaxiques dans l’interaction orale: Le cas de la clivée. In Congrès Mondial de Linguistique Française 2008 (pp. 703-720). EDP Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1051/cmlf08239
- Drubig, H. B. (2003). Toward a Typology of Focus and Focus Constructions. Linguistics, 41, 1-50. https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.2003.003
- Hedberg, N. (1999). The Referential Status of Clefts. Language, 76, 891-920. https://doi.org/10.2307/417203
- Horn, L. R. (1969). A Presuppositional Analysis of Only and Even. In The 5th Annual Meeting of Chicago Linguistic Society (pp. 98-107). Chicago Linguistic Society.
- Jespersen, O. (1937). Analytic Syntax. Allen and Unwin.
- Kiss, K. É. (1998). Identificational Focus versus Information Focus. Language, 74, 245-273. https://doi.org/10.2307/417867
- Lambrecht, K. (2001). A Framework for the Analysis of Cleft Constructions. Linguistics, 39, 463-516. https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.2001.021
- Meinunger, A. (1996). The Structure of Cleft and Pseudo-Cleft Sentences. Texas Linguistic Forum , 38, 235-246.
- Muller, C. (2002). Clivées, coréférence et relativation. In G. Kleiber, & N. Le Querler (Éds.), Traits d’union (pp. 17-32). Presses Universitaires de Caen.