Pseudo-clefts in Italian talk-in-interaction and in interaction-as-represented

This article examines Italian pseudo-clefts (PCs) as documented in diverse settings of interaction (ordinary, institutional, multiparty, etc.), as well as in interactions reported by daily newspapers. After an overview of the grammatical and semantic properties of PCs, mainly based on the literature...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: De Cesare, Anna-Maria (Author) , De Stefani, Elwys (Author)
Format: Article (Journal)
Language:English
Published: 9 April 2022
In: Lingua
Year: 2022, Volume: 271, Pages: 1-32
ISSN:0024-3841
DOI:10.1016/j.lingua.2021.103227
Online Access:Verlag, lizenzpflichtig, Volltext: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2021.103227
Verlag, lizenzpflichtig, Volltext: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0024384121001996
Get full text
Author Notes:Anna-Maria De Cesare, Elwys De Stefani
Description
Summary:This article examines Italian pseudo-clefts (PCs) as documented in diverse settings of interaction (ordinary, institutional, multiparty, etc.), as well as in interactions reported by daily newspapers. After an overview of the grammatical and semantic properties of PCs, mainly based on the literature and Italian grammars, the article empirically analyzes attested PCs from two different vantage points, interactional linguistics and text linguistics. By focusing on two different kinds of data, it (i) provides a fine-grained description of PCs in present-day Italian, and, more specifically, (ii) highlights the differences in PCs occurring in talk-in-interaction vs. journalistic texts, in particular in reported speech. It shows that the way in which linguists conceptualize PCs is largely informed by the specific features of the data considered, such as temporality, sequentiality, and embodiment for talk-in-interaction, and spatiality, hierarchy and textual structures for newspaper articles. Finally, the article provides an overview of the most significant properties of PCs as they appear in both sets of data. It highlights the theoretical and empirical differences between the two frameworks chosen to analyze PCs, and reflects on the heuristic benefits and difficulties in combining different research traditions.
Item Description:Gesehen am 03.05.2022
Physical Description:Online Resource
ISSN:0024-3841
DOI:10.1016/j.lingua.2021.103227