Inverted Specificational Pseudoclefts as Last Resort for Specificational Afterthoughts

• Published in: Korea Journal of English Language and Linguistics Vol. 25; pp. 390 - 414
• Main Author: Kim, Okgi
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: 한국영어학회 01.03.2025
• Subjects: 영어와문학
• ISSN: 1598-1398; 2586-7474
• DOI: 10.15738/kjell.25..202503.390

Like languages like German and Dutch (Ott and de Vries 2016), English employs so-called specificational afterthoughts (SAs) (e.g., John met someone: Mary), where the appendix (i.e., Mary) appears at the right periphery of the host clause (i.e., John met someone) and is in a cataphoric relation with the correlate (i.e., someone). Under a bi-clausal approach, I assume two different underlying structures for the appendix: one that is syntactically parallel to the host clause (SPC) and the other that is an inverted specificational pseudocleft. Adopting van Craenenbroeck’s (2010) Last Resort logic for sluicing, I propose that English SAs are derived from SPCs as the first option and from inverted specificational pseudoclefts as a Last Resort option when the corresponding SPC is independently unavailable. In the analysis of English SAs, I provide a movement-and-deletion approach, according to which the construction is derived by focus movement and PF-deletion regardless of which of the two possible underlying structures for the appendix is involved. KCI Citation Count: 0