Boston University Libraries OpenBU
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.
    View Item 
    •   OpenBU
    • BU Open Access Articles
    • BU Open Access Articles
    • View Item
    •   OpenBU
    • BU Open Access Articles
    • BU Open Access Articles
    • View Item

    It's not what you expected! The surprising nature of cleft alternatives in French and English

    Thumbnail
    License
    Copyright © 2019 Destruel, Beaver and Coppock. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
    Date Issued
    2019-06-18
    Publisher Version
    10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01400
    Author(s)
    Destruel, Emilie
    Coppock, Elizabeth
    Beaver, David
    Share to FacebookShare to TwitterShare by Email
    Export Citation
    Download to BibTex
    Download to EndNote/RefMan (RIS)
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Permanent Link
    https://hdl.handle.net/2144/40332
    Version
    Published version
    Citation (published version)
    Emilie Destruel, Elizabeth Coppock, David Beaver. 2019. "It's not what you expected! The surprising nature of cleft alternatives in French and English." Frontiers in Psychology: Language Sciences, pp. 1 - 15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01400
    Abstract
    While much prior literature on the meaning of clefts—such as the English form “it is X who Z-ed”—concentrates on the nature and status of the exhaustivity inference (“nobody/nothing other than X Z”), we report on experiments examining the role of the doxastic status of alternatives on the naturalness of c'est-clefts in French and it-clefts in English. Specifically, we study the hypothesis that clefts indicate a conflict with a doxastic commitment held by some discourse participant. Results from naturalness tasks suggest that clefts are improved by a property we term “contrariness” (along the lines of Zimmermann, 2008). This property has a gradient effect on felicity judgments: the more strongly interlocutors appear committed to an apparently false notion, the better it is to repudiate them with a cleft.
    Rights
    Copyright © 2019 Destruel, Beaver and Coppock. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
    Collections
    • CAS: Linguistics: Scholarly Papers [51]
    • BU Open Access Articles [3730]


    Boston University
    Contact Us | Send Feedback | Help
     

     

    Browse

    All of OpenBUCommunities & CollectionsIssue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsThis CollectionIssue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjects

    Deposit Materials

    LoginNon-BU Registration

    Statistics

    Most Popular ItemsStatistics by CountryMost Popular Authors

    Boston University
    Contact Us | Send Feedback | Help