i
ASOGWA AGATHA .C
A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF CLEFT FORMATION IN THE
SYNTAX OF NSUKKA AND STANDARD IGBO
LIGUISTICS
Chukwuma Ugwuoke
Digitally Signed by: Content manager’s Name DN : CN = Webmaster’s name O= University of Nigeria, Nsukka OU = Innovation Centre
ii
TITLE PAGE
A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF CLEFT FORMATION IN THE
SYNTAX OF NSUKKA AND STANDARD IGBO
iii
APPROVAL PAGE
This project has been approved for the Department of Linguistics,
Igbo and other Nigerian Languages University of Nigeria, Nsukka
By
____________________ ______________________ DR. B. M. MBAH PROF. C.N. OKEBALAMA SUPERVISOR HEAD OF DEPARTMENT
____________________ ___________________ INTERNAL EXAMINER EXTERNAL EXAMINER
____________________________ DEAN OF FACULTY
iv
CERTIFICATION
This is to certify that the work embodied in this project report is
original and has not been submitted in part or full for any other diploma or
degree of this or any other university.
__________________ __________________
DR. B. M. MBAH ASOGWA AGATHA C. SUPERVISOR CANDIDATE
v
DEDICATION
This project is dedicated to my husband. Dr. Sylvanus Asogwa and
my children; Nnenna, Nnamdi, Chijindu, Chinemeogo, and my Grandma,
Late Mrs. Rosaline Asogwa.
vi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The journey to the successful completion of this study was long and
the task enormous. I could not have brought this project to a successful end
without the assistance of some individuals.
To the Almighty Creator, I am immensely grateful for giving me good
health throughout the course of my study in the University of Nigeria. God I
thank you.
My gratitude goes to my supervisor, Dr. B. M Mbah, for his guidance and
provision of cordial and conducive atmosphere throughout this exercise.
Also worthy of mention are my lecturers in the Linguistics
Department, they are: Late Professor P. A Nwachukwu, Professor I. U
Nwadike, Professor C.N Okebalama, Mz. Chukwuma Okeke, Professor
(Mrs.) G.I Nwaozuzu and Dr (Mrs.) E.E Mbah.
I also owe a lot of thanks to the following; Dr. Sylvanus Asogwa
(husband), Mr. Uchechukwu Onah, Mrs. Eucharia Onah, Mr. Jude Onah,
Mr. Hillary Onah, Mr. Benjamin Onah, Mrs. Dorothy Ani, Mrs. Angela
Origbo, Mr. A Ukwnna, Mr. M.K. Mbha and Miss C.R Onah for their
sustained encouragement and prayers, which sustained me throughout the
period of writing this project.
For all others not mentioned, their contributions to the successful
completion of this work are appreciated.
Asogwa Agatha C.
University of Nigeria, Nsukka.
vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title Page - - - - - - - - - -i
Approval - - - - - - - - - -ii
Certification - - - - - - - - -iii
Dedication - - - - - - - - - -IV
Acknowledgements - - - - - - - -v
Table of contents - - - - - - - - -VI
Abstract - - - - - - - - - - -vii
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
1.0 Background to the Study - - - - - - - -1
1.1. Statement of the Problem - - - - - - -5
1.2 Purpose of the Study - - - - - - - -6
1.3 Research Question - - - - - - - -6
1.4 Scope of the Study- - - - - - - - -6
1.5 Significance of the Study - - - - - - - -6
1.6 Limitation of the Study - - - - - - - -7
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.0 Introduction - - - - - - - - - -8
2.1 Sentences - - - - - - - - - -8
2.1.1 Syntax - - - - - - - - - -8
2.2 Theoretical Studies- - - - - - - - 13
2.2.1 Movement Transformation - - - - - - 14
2.2.2 Adjunction Transformation - - - - - 16
2.2.3 Substitution Transformation - - - - - - 17
viii
2.3 Cleft in Syntax - - - - - - - - 18
2.3.1 Relative Clause in Cleft Sentence - - - - - -22
2.3.1.1 Question – Element as Prepositional Complement
within Noun Phrase (in formal English)-- -- - - 22
2.3.1.2 Question-Element as Nominal Object - - - - 23
2.3.2 Types of Cleft Sentence - - - - - - 24
2.3.2.1 Pseudo- Cleft Sentence - - - - - - 24
2.3.2.2 Focus/ Post –Focus Cleft Sentence - - - - 26
2.3.2.3 All Focus Cleft Sentence - - - - - - 27
2.3.2.4 Broad Focus Cleft Sentence - - - - - 27
2.3.3 Cleft in Other Languages: French, Italian,
Japanese, Chinese etc - - - - - - - 28
2.4 Structural Differences in Clause-Cleft Relatives- - - 33
2.5 Empirical Studies - - - - - - - 36
2.6 Summary of Review - - - - - - - 43
CHAPTER THREE: DATA ANALYSIS
3.0 Introduction - - - - - - - - 45
3.1 Cleft Formation in Standard Igbo - - - - - 45
3.1.1 Pseudo Cleft in Standard Igbo - - - - - 45
3.1.2 All Focus Cleft in Standard Igbo - - - - - 47
3.1.3 Post Focus Cleft in Standard Igbo - - - - 49
3.1.4 Broad Focus Cleft in Standard Igbo - - - - 59
3.2 Cleft Formation in Nsukka Dialect - - - - - 61
3.2.1 Pseudo-Cleft in Nukka Dialect - - - - - 61
3.2.2 Post Focus Cleft in Nsukka Dialect - - - - 62
3.2.3 All Focus Cleft in Nsukka Dailect - - - - 66
3.2.4 Broad Focus Cleft in Nsukka Dialect - - - - 68
ix
CHAPTER FOUR: SUMMARY OF THE FINDINGS AND
CONCLUSION
4.0 Introduction - - - - - - - - 69
4.1. Conclusions - - - - - - - - - 71
4.2 Recommendations for Further Research - - - - 71
References
x
Abstract
This research work is a linguistic endeavour aimed at exploring the
grammatical components and structures of cleft sentences of the standard
Igbo language in general on the one hand. On the other hand and forming the
specific objective, is relating cleft formations and cleft structures of the
Nsukka dialect with those of the standard Igbo. Consequently, the work
unprecedented formulated, analyzed, compared and contrasted the cleft
structures of the language and dialect under study. The study was guide by
the theory of transformational grammar.
The findings from the study show that cleft formation in standard Igbo
language and in Nsukka dialect is a focussing mechanism on a particular
constituent of a sentence. The focussing emphasises the constituent element
through the operation of the S NP INFL VP rule, a concept of
transformational grammar. In both the language and dialect under study,
cleft structures have special elements that introduce the focussed
constituents. The focussing indicator may be nominal, adjectival, adverbial
or prepositional; and clefting is possible in all the kinds of sentences.
However, the clefting heads are not present in some cases in the Nsukka
dialect. In other cases where the clefting heads occur they occur next to the
constituent of focuses and not before the constituents like in the standard
Igbo. Conclusively, the clefts in syntax and meanings of sentences of the
Nsukka dialect compares tremendously with that of the standard Igbo.
xi
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.0 Background to the Study
Man’s anthropological description as a homo faber and a homo loquens
contradistinguish human from other animals and under which they are biologically
classified. Homo faber describes man’s capability to make and use tools and other objects
while his cultural linguistic attribute defines him as a homo loquens.
This latter attribute of man’s means that he is a user of human language: a system of
sound symbol used to intelligibly communicate his thoughts, ideas, feelings and desires
through speech or writing. To Strickland (1957), language is a body of sounds and
meaning held in common by the members of a linguistic group. The expressions of a
language involve a relationship between a sequence of sounds and a meaning where
sound covers phonology, morphology and syntax, (Lamb publication). In other words,
the evolution, propagation and use of a language consist in putting meaningful elements
or letters of the alphabet together to form words; putting words together to form phrases;
phrases together to form clauses,; clauses together to form sentences and putting
sentences together to form texts; Robert (1997) . It is an instrument for interactive
communication among people.
Each language--has word groups which classify its grammatical constituents. These
groups are incomprehensively and popularly called the eight parts of speech, or, in
technical term, grammatical or lexical categories. They are seven in number excluding
the articles and some particles which were not categorized, and the interjection which
belongs to mood.
Noun names an entity or abstracts; pronoun substitutes for nouns; verb says what the
subjects does in a sentence; adverb modifies the verb, adverb and adjectives; adjectives
qualifies the noun and pronoun; preposition relates the noun / pronoun with another noun
/ pronoun in terms of position or location; and conjunction which joins words, phrases,
clauses or sentences.
With relatively similar rules across global languages, these lexical categories together
with the articles are meaningfully combined.
xii
The variations in the rules of combination among language and dialectal groups but
conveying similar meaning raised the question between overt structure and under-lying
meaning and interpretation, for example,
(1) (a) J’ ai ferme (French)
I have hungry (lit trans)
(b) Aguu na-agu m (Igbo)
(Hunger is hunger me)
Both 1 a and b have the surface and expressed structure as literally translated but have
the underlying or covert interpretation:
(2) I am hungry.
This, on the other hand, has the different grammatical and semantic implications:
(3) (a) Je suis ferme (French)
(b) Abu m aguu (Igbo)
(c) I am hunger (English literal translation)
Linguistics is the branch of knowledge or discipline that semantically studies the above
and other questions on language.
Describing linguistic phenomena is one of the central goals of linguistics as well as being
the primary goal of many linguists. The description may pertain to individual languages
or to universal similarity or dissimilarity among languages and is carried out under
specific linguistic concepts which include narrative discourse structure, phonology and,
topical for this research, syntax.
Matthews (1982) defines syntax as a branch of grammar dealing with the ways in
which words are arranged to show connections of meaning within the sentence.
Radford (1988) says that syntax refers to the rules for sequencing or ordering words
within a phrase or sentence. Without syntax and its rules, there would be no key with
which to discern consistent meanings from a bunch of words lumped together. As a part
of the internalized linguistic knowledge of a language, it enables the native speaker, and
to an extent, a non-native speaker, to produce as well as recognize acceptable stretches of
utterance in that language.
xiii
What should be understood to be implicit in the above definitions however is that a
syntactic structure is not merely the sequencing of words selected from an array of
grammatical categories but a selection based on contextual semantic relevance. For
instance, in English, as applicable to the structure of some other languages such as French
and Igbo, the basic word or category order is S+V-(+O) or
- N/PP+V (+N/PP) where N/PP=Noun or pronoun phrase as subject (s) or object
(o) respectively; and V= verb intransitively or transitively used, that is:
(4) Amaka /she eats (rice)
Amalia / elle manges (du ris)
Amaka/ O na-eri nri (osikapa)
Inverting the subject-object positions, the sentence become:
(5) Rice eats her
Du ris elle manges
Osikapa na- eri ya.
Osikapa na-eri ya; are semantically fallacious although syntactically valid.
Syntax deals with a number of things, all of which help to facilitate the understanding of
a language.
Inflection is an aspect of it which deals with how the end of a word might change
to alter the role and meaning of lexical constituents and subsequently the meaning of the
sentence. For example,
(6) (a) The boy beat the girl
(b) The girl is beating up the boy
‘The boy’ is the subject/ agent while ‘the girl’ plays a role as object/ patient that under
went the effect of the action of the verb, beat, simple past tense, 6a.
In 6b, the roles have been structurally and semantically reversed with the–ing inflection
of ‘beat’ in the present tense, i.e , present continuous tense, indicating that the action is
currently in progress or being carried out, and the adverbial particle ‘up’ as action
intensifier. Another aspect of syntax comes under generative syntax and transformational
generative grammar (T G G)
xiv
Generative syntax is a syntactic model which formulates rules to describe the sentence of
a language. The structure of the rules is pyramidal. Some of the rules are explicable
within, or captured by some other rules until the whole rules are reduced to a minimum of
rules which describe the whole linguistic structure.
xv
For example,
(7) NP N
N S
N Det
N Det S
N adj
N adj adj etc;
(8) INF tns
Agr
Number
Aux (modal, be) etc.
(9) VP V
V N
V N P
V P P
V P P, P P
V N S
V N Det
V N adj adj etc
The above structures are reducible to the minimum structures as follows;
(10) S N P INFL VP…
The claim for this rule is that every sentence of every language is overtly or covertly
composed of this structural order; and that irrespective of the variation of the order of the
same lexical constituents, the sentence remains semantically true.
Transformational generative syntax on the other hand relates to the transformational
syntactic rules which generate rules of surface and deep structure syntax. It relates the
changes at the surface structure to those of the deep structure and reduces same to a
minimum of rules.
xvi
On its part, transformational syntax refers to a syntactic model which claims the existence
of surface and deep syntactic structures of which the former contains all the phonological
element used in the actual speech but containing some unexpressed elements which give
the sentence an (additional) underlying structure and meaning. For example, the
expressions
(11) (a) Come.
(b) Sit down
are considered as clauses and simple sentence because contrary to the expressed single
verb /word structure in ‘11a’ and the phrase-like structure of ‘11b’, both have the implied
subject / ‘noun’ phrase ‘you’ and, respectively, implied post adverb, ‘here’ and the post
preposition ‘on / in that chair, seat etc. They, in other words are sequentially and
semantically interpreted as the deep-surface outlay:
(12) (a) (You) come (here, in etc)
(b) (You) sit down (here, there, in / on this / that chair, Seat, sofa etc)
Where the parenthetical elements are deletable to the background.
What has been observed from the above discussion and contiguous to this study is the
submission by linguists on the syntactic flexibility of a sentence and which is achieved by
way of transformation through its aspects namely: movement, deletion, substitution and
adjunction, Mbah (2006) and Chomsky (1965).
Consequently, that different dialects of a language realize their sentence structures
differently to include a type called cleft sentences forms the basis for this study: a
comparative study of clefting, (a structural shuffling of the basic syntactic order) in the
syntax of Nsukka dialect (a unique version of a language spoken by a community) and
standard Igbo (a variety that has official backing for use at formal social occasions or
forums). This is with a view to adopting the cleft structures of Nsukka dialect towards
addressing the shortcomings of the Igbo language as an effective indigenous language of
communication.
1:1 Statement of the Problem
xvii
The effective use of language is an indispensable means for effective
communication. And the effectiveness of language communication depends on sentence
manipulation which, if not properly done, undermines the listener’s understanding of the
speaker. Communication in Igbo language is partly hindered by dearth of literatue and
knowledge of cleft structures and their formation unlike in some foreign languages like
French, English, Latin and German. The problem for this study therefore is to examine
cleft formation in the syntax of Nsukka dialect in comparison with standard Igbo.
1.2 Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this research work is to:
Identify cleft formation in syntax and analyze its process as it applies to Nsukka dialect
and standard Igbo.
Identify the area(s) of similarity in cleft formation in Nsukka dialect and standard Igbo.
Carry out differential analysis of cleft formation in Nsukka dialect and standard Igbo.
1.3 Research Questions
This research work is guided by the following questions:
(a) What is the nature of Cleft Formation in the standard Nsukka Dialect and the
Standard Igbo variety?
(b) How do we analyse and explain Clefting in Nsukka Dialect and Standard Igbo
variety?
(c) What are the similarities in Cleft Formation in the Nsukka and that of the
Standard Igbo?
(d) What are the differences in Cleft Formation in the Syntax of Nsukka Dialect
and Standard Igbo variety?
1.4 Scope of the Study
The range of coverage for the study is specifically on clefting as found in the
dialect of Nsukka, in Enugu State. It focuses strictly on the similarities and /or differences
in syntax and clefting as it pertains to sentence structures of standard Nsukka dialect and
Standard Igbo with occasional cross-reference to English, French, Latin, and German.
xviii
1.5 Significance of the Study
This study is significant in that it will provide answers to the questions of the
nature and analytical explanation of cleft in standard Nsukka dialect as well as the
similarities and / or differences between the clefting in the dialect and that of the standard
form of Igbo.
The findings will induce further researches on cleft formation in the dialect under
study and the Igbo language as a whole and thus promote and preserve the use of the
language in competition with such other Nigerian languages as Hausa and Yoruba. The
work will also provide reference material to ameliorate the lack of it for research work on
clefting and syntax in other dialects of the Igbo language.
1.6 Limitations of the Study
The researcher encountered a number of challenges in the course of the study. The
important ones are:
Firstly, there was hardly any reference material on clefting as none had been previously
written by linguists or researchers on Igbo language or any of its dialects.
Secondly, materials accessed from the internet that gave a hint on the subject matter
contained information that were abstract and the languages were foreign, complex and
strange and produced only a vague idea about clefting.
Thirdly, who could have been resource persons on the core syntactic dialect of Nsukka
are inaccessibly old leaving only the less aged and younger ones who, owing to language
and dialect diversity, socialization and enculturation could not differenciate between
dialect and standard variety of a language.
However, the researcher, being an indigene of the study area, was able to cope by
drawing references from past experiences of Nsukka dialectal expressions.
xix
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.0 Introduction
This chapter examines some available materials which are relevant to the study. It
acts as a reference point and exposes the researcher to previously accomplished research
work by experts in languages. It reviews sentences and syntax as the bases from which
cleft forms are derived. It also reviews clefts and clefting in English and several other
foreign languages at random, and their formations in the standard Igbo- the language
under study as a whole - and its component Nsukka dialect. These, together with the
review of the empirical studies, provide reference data for the data analysis of the
subsequent chapter.
2.1 Sentences
According to Palmer (1981), sentences are regarded as well-formed propositions
that may be true or not in which something is predicated or claimed about another entity
or entities. Similarly, Ogbuehi (2004) sees a sentence as a group of words with a subject
and a predicate which expresses action, condition or state of the subject and makes
complete meaning. In the expressions:
(13) (a) John loves Mary
(b) There is a book on the table
(c) Did they come early?
‘John’ in (13) (a) is the subject or referent, that is, the person (or thing) that the remaining
part of the expression ’loves Mary’, the predicate, refers to; (13) (b) has is the noun
‘book’ on which the other elements in the expression collectively predicate or say
something of its location; and the pronoun ‘they’ in ‘c’ is the subject about which time of
coming was enquired by the predicating verbs ‘Did… ‘Come’ and the adverb ‘early’.
Ogbuehi (2004) observes that there are four functions of a sentence in terms of mood
namely:
declarative sentence which makes a statement of fact e.g.
(14) Ibezimako is a bank executive
xx
Interrogative sentence which asks a question, e.g.
(15) Can true democracy operate in a multi-ethnic country like Nigeria?
Imperative sentence that gives a command, makes a request or expresses a wish e.g.
(16) (a) Get out of the class
(b) I wish I were taller.
Exclamatory sentence that expresses emotion e.g.
(17) Oh, what a sunny day!
2.1.1 Syntax
To Mbah (2006) syntax studies headedness, word order and transformation in
grammar and grammars without emphasis on meaning. Matthews (1982) and Lapolla
(1997) explain it as originating from the Ancient Greek word syntax which is a verbal
noun that literally means ‘arrangement’ or’“setting out together’. To them, syntax
traditionally refers to the branch of grammar dealing with the ways in which words are
arranged to show connections of meaning within the sentence. It is considered as the core
component of grammar which mediates between a sequence of sound and meaning
relationship that the expression of a language involves. In English and many other
languages, the arrangement of words is a vital factor in determining the meaning of an
utterance as the following sentences indicate:
(18) (a) The man saw the woman
(b) The woman saw the man
In these sentences, the swapping of positions by the subject and the object alter the roles
played by them in the sentences and consequently reverses the information supplied. The
possibility of disemphasising on meaning on the basis of word order in the study of
syntax as claimed by Mbah (2006) imports that:
(19) (a) Saw the man the woman
The woman the man saw
and,
(b) Saw the woman the man
The man the woman saw
xxi
could be semantic equivalents for them.
Dixon (1972) corroborated the above claim and possibility by observing that in Dyirbal,
Australia and many other languages, the order of words is irrelevant to the determination
of the meaning of a sentence. He states that it is rather the inflectional form of a phrase
which is the crucial factor determining the interpretation of the sentence as in:
(20) (a) Bangun dugumbi.ru bayi yara buran
(b) Balan dugumbil baggul yara- ngu buran
det woman det man see
The woman the man see (lit translation)
The woman saw the man
(c) Bayi yara bangu dugumbil-ru buran
(d) Bangul yara- ngu balan dugumbil buran
det man det woman see (lit trans)
The man saw the woman,
He notes that the form of the noun phrases for ‘the man’ and ‘the woman’ differ in the
second pair of sentences ( c, d) from the first pair (a ,b) just as they differ within the pairs
of sentences. It is this change in form, not the variation in position in the sentence that
Dixon (1972) says signals the difference in meaning.
But the non-relevance of word-order to the determination of the meaning of a sentence is
not synonymous with irrationality or haphazardness in arranging words. It is for this
reason that sentence well-formedness becomes imperative. Mbah (2006) states that the
syntax of a sentence, must comprise —NP, INFL, and VP elements for it to be well
formed or meaningful. He observes that different languages and different sentence
structures realise the sentence components differently and that the study of the different
realisations of the variables in syntax are called parameters of syntax and the parameters
subject of Universal Grammar. And, following submissions by Chomsky (1957) and
Chomsky (1965) that a sentence contains at least NP, INFL and VP, rules were developed
to capture the structures which different sentences may assume or different sentences
reduced to rules which describe such sentences. These rules known as generative rules,
xxii
formed the subject matter of generative syntax which believes that few or finite rules can
describe the infinite number of sentences available in a language. Examples of such rules
according to Chomsky (1965) include:
(21) S NP INFL VP
where S stands for ‘sentence’; NP, Noun phrase as subject; VP, Verb phrase as
predicate; and INFL, INFLection or concord elements that relate NP to VP.
The above formula claims that a sentence can be rewritten as NP,INFL and VP. That
once this formula or rule has been formed, there is no longer any obligatory order that
subsequent re-writting of its elements must take; that the end product will eventually be
the same irrespective of whether one starts from NP, INFL or VP. Each of these syntactic
elements may have many components some of which may be:
(22) NP N
N S
N Det
N Det s
N adj
N adj, adj, etc
(23) INFL tens
Agr
Number
Aux (modal, be) etc
(24) VP V
V N
V N P
V P P
V PP PP
V N S’
V N det
xxiii
V N adj adj etc.
What helps to determine the order of the components of the NP, INFL, VP rule is the
predicate structure of each language. Grammars that branch to the left e.g. English
normally have their syntactic heads to the right while those that branch to the right e.g.
Igbo will normally yield their heads to the left. The following sentences show these:
(25) (a) That old man is not as weak as he looks
(b) The beautiful girls are proud of their beauty
The syntactic order of the components of the italisized noun phrase, (NP) in ‘a’ is , from
right to left, first, demonstrative adjective (that), second, main or defining adjective
(old), and third and the last is the head, the noun (man).
The NP of ‘b’ is similar to it only that the first word ‘the ‘of the order is a determiner.
That is:
Noun phrase: that old man….
NP dem. Adj. N. etc
In Igbo sentence structure (25) above translate as follows:
(26) a) Nwoke nka ahụ adịghịike-ngwụ ka ọ dị n’anya
b) Ụmu agbọghọ ọma ahụ ji mma ha eme ọnụ
in ‘a’, NP N adj. dem.
In ‘b’, NP N. adj. adj. dem
Tree diagram will make the analyses clearer as follows:
NP
Fig 1: that old man
Dem NP
AdJ N
that old man
xxiv
fig2: Nwoke nka ahụ NP
NP Dem
N Adj
Nwoke nka ahụ
Fig.1 above shows that English grammar is head final and left branching Fg 2 shows that
Igbo grammar is (normally) head-initial and right branching.
Chomsky (1957) makes it a requirement that the rules of the grammar should be
absolutely explicit. In other words, the rules should automatically generate meaning
without the native speaker of the language having to utilize his intuitive knowledge to
interpret it. Chomsky (1965) uses the term ‘transformational generative grammar’ to
describe the use of transformational rules to link underlying or deep structure with
surface structure and the explicit generative nature of the rules.
2.2 Theoretical Studies
This project is based on Noam Chomsky’s theory of transformational grammar.
The theory states that grammars tends to assign both a deep- structure analysis and a
surface structure analysis to the sentences they generate (Chomsky 1965). According to
Chomsky (1965), the surface structure is the one that represents the superficial syntactic
structure of sentences, that is, the structure which is immediately apparent to the analyst.
The deep or underlying structure on the other hand is the structure and meaning that lies
beneath and is interpretable from the observable structure. Chomsky (1965) based his
theory of transformational grammar on some assumptions. One of the assumptions is that
the task of any adequate syntax of a language is to generate all the well-formed surface
structures of the language. Another assumption is that surface structure alone cannot
xxv
generate all the well-formed characteristic constructions in natural language. It is also
assumed that there is some intimate connection between deep syntax and semantics.
Lyons (1968) supporting to Chomsky’s theory of transformational syntax asserts that all
traditional grammars are transformational.
Radford (1981) exemplified transformatonal syntax with movement
transformation with a focuse on WH-Movement typology. This is when a wh-head is
moved from the sentence rear or object position to the initial or subject position, eg.
(27) What has he given - - - - to Mary?
In example (27) above, the noun phrase containing a wh-word has been moved
out of the position marked - - - - into the sentence initial position by WH-Movement,
Agbedo (2000) and Mbah (2006) discussed other examples of movement transformation
and types of transformastion. The other types are substitution, adjunction and deletion as
comparatively found between English and Igbo Language. The researcher however
considers the deletion type of transformation as not important for this research.
2.2.1 Movement Transformation
This is the type of transformation that moves elements of a sentence from one
position to another within the same syntactic structure. Movement transformation
includes: (a) Passivisation
This is the type of movement by which the passive voice statement is derived
from its active voice structure. Passivisation construction involves the inversion of the
grammatical subject with the logical objects so that they exchange their positions without
losing their logical functions and adding certain lexical items usually of the verb ‘to be,’
the – ed and – en inflection and the preposition ‘by’ to the elements that were base
generated, e.g.
(28) (a) (i) The bus carries them (active)
(ii) They are carried by the bus (passivised)
(b) (i) The boy kicked the ball (active)
(ii) The ball was kicked by the boy (passivised)
(c) (i) A snake bit Adaeze (active)
xxvi
(ii) Adaeze was bitten by a snake (passivised)
Mbah (2006) claims that passivisation is not possible in Igbo as the language
lacks the appropriate morphology for its construction.
xxvii
(b) Dative Movement
This is the type of movement in which the direct object is moved to the position
of the indirect object. It does not entail any change in the logical function of any of the
arguments but involves a deletion of the preposition ‘to’ from its base form. E. g
(29) (a) (i) Give the book to me (base)
(ii) Give me the book (dative form)
(b) (i) John wrote a letter to Bubby (base)
(ii) John wrote Bubby a letter (dative form)
(b) Movement in Question formation
Movement transformation is also found in question statements such as tag
question, yes/no question and wh-question.
In tag question, the entire question is moved to the end of the tag question, example
(30) Okeke came; isn’t itt (true)? (formal didn’t he?)
Okeke byara; ọ bụkwa ya ?
The proforms ‘it/ ya’ represents the entire declarative sentence from which the tag
question was derived. The tag questions may be completed thus:
Is ‘okeke came’ not a statement of fact? And
ọ bụkwa Okeke byara?
In yes/no questions, the subject is moved to the SPEC (i.e. referential specific) position to
yield a resumptive pronoun in its original position e. g
(31) a) (i) Okeke went to the market
(ii) Okeke gara ahya
b) (i) Okeke he went to the market?
(ii) Okeke ọ gara ahya?
The pronouns ‘he’ and ‘ọ’ in ‘31b’ emphasize the noun (subject) ‘Okeke’.
In Wh- or non yes/no question, the object of the sentence is focused and therefore moves
to the grammamatical subject positions e.g.
(32) a (i) Okeke looked at whom?
(ii) Okeke lere onye (anya)?
xxviii
b (i) (At) whom did okeke look ?
(ii) Onye ka okeke lere anya?
2.2.2 Adjunction Transformation
Adjunction is a type of transformation that inserts elements which were not
originally at the deep structure to the surface structure level. Examples of it are found in
the following:
(a) Do-support
Do-support attaches an element to a declarative sentence to transform it into an
interrogative statement, e.g.
(33) (a) (i) Ngige came
(ii) Did Ngige come?
(b) (i) Eze goes to school
(ii) Does Eze go to school?
Mbah (2006) claims non-existence of Do- support transformation in Igbo.
(b) There – insertion
This inserts ‘there’ to the sentence e.g
(34) (a) (i) Someone is in the house.
(ii) Mmadụ nọ n’ụlọ.
(b) (i) There is someone in the house.
(or someone is there in the house)
(ii) O nwere onye nọ n’ụlọ.
(c) Passivization
This , with reference to movement transformation according to Lester (1990: 86)
are formed from active sentences by switching the positions of the subject and the direct
object; adding ‘by’ in front of the original subject; adding the helping-verb ‘be’; and
putting the main verb into the past-patrticiple form, e.g.
(35) (a) (i) Sunday answered the question (active sentence)
(ii) Sunday zara ajụjụ ahụ.
(b) (i) The question was answered by Sunday. (Passive form)
xxix
Sentence (35) (b) (i)structure above with the insertion of ‘was’ and ‘by’ passivizes the
active voice sentence of (35) (a) (i).
(d) Extra- position
In extra position, the subject (usually a noun clause) is moved out of its topic
position to a position within the predicate, e.g.
(36) (a) (i) That he died saddens me.
(ii) Na o nwụrụ na- ewute m.
(b) (i) It saddens me that he died.
(ii) Ọ na- ewute m na ọ nwụrụu.
The italicized noun clauses functioning as subject in (36) (a) (i) / (ii) are moved to
exchange positions with the predicate VP in (36) b (i) / (ii)
2. 2.3 Substitution Transformation
This is the transformation type that substitutes or replaces a constituent or some
constituents with another constituent(s) within the syntactic structure. A type of
substitution is Pronominalization which concerns the formation of pronouns in the
grammar of a language to replace their proper nouns in all relevant contexts. In such
circumstance therefore, the pronouns substitute their referential expressions. Its use and
relevance is found in tag question and in resumptive pronoun formations, e.g.
(37) (a) Obi is no longer a boy; is he?
(b) (i) Okeke is he at home? ( i.e. is Okeke at home)
(ii) Okeke ọ nọ n’ ụlọ?
(c) (i) Ọbiageli she’s married
(ii) Ọbiageli ọ lụọla di
In the above examples, ‘he/ọ’ and ‘she/ọ’ are pronominal substitutes for the subjects
‘Obi’, ‘Okeke’ and ‘Ọbiageli’ respectively.
xxx
Agbedo (2000) captures the advantages of Chomsky’s (1965) transformational
grammar theory through noting the shortcomings of his predecessor phrase structure
grammar in accounting for all the possible sentence structure in languages such as
sentences exhibiting nested dependences; those that are ambiguous; and those that are
sructurally different but semantically similar like active and passive voice sentences,
topicalized and non-topicalized sentences, and cleft and non-cleft forms of sentences.
Thus, transformational theory has the advantages of accounting for all the possible
structures of sentences of any given language. Ndimele (1999) was categorical in
advancing the major advantages of a theory by Chomsky. According to him, a theory
shows that sentences which exhibit superficial syntactic differences can be proved to
have a common origin and should have a similar meaning. A theory of transformational
grammar also shows that sentences which exhibit striking similarities on the surface can
be proved to come from different underlying sentences.
2.3 Cleft in Syntax
Rossi (1974) holds that cleft sentences are generally viewed as focus – related
sentence types. In French, the XP in the ‘C’est XP qui/que’ frame is the focus and the
relative clause is the post – focus. Cleft formation is prosodically, marked for focus
through rhematization. Rhematization is the mental act or process of selecting a particular
topic as theme in discourse or words as theme in a sentence. Example:
(38) (a) On dit qui C’est pour cette raison qu’elle n’est plus jamais rentré mais ce
n’est pas vrai: ell est rentré plusieur fois.
They say that it’s because of this reason that she never came back but
that’s not true: She came back several times’.
(b) On dit que pour cette raison elle n’est plus jamais rentré, mais ce n’est
pas vrai: elle est rentré plusieurs fois.
‘They say that because of that reason she never came back, but that’s
not true: she came back several times.’
The cleft is a sentence that depends on the interpretation of ce. Informally, ce relates two
predicates, one of which is pragmatically given or corresponds to the coda and the other
of which corresponds to XP. It specifies that there is an event to which both predicates
xxxi
apply. Cleft sentence is not necessarily organised into post – focus sequence and that they
need not be linked to focus organisation. They differ from their non-cleft sequence
counterpart because the information in the coda of cleft sequence is expressed by a
subordinate clause and not in the matrix clause of non-cleft sequence. As a result, the
information in it coda is presupposed in the sense that its contrastive focus cannot be
affected by the negation of the entire matrix sentence.
Cleft sentence may have other types of information organisation besides the prototypical
focus / post focus one. The XP need not be prosodically focused. Thus, it will untie the
usual link between clefts and focalisation.
As a consequence, we will end up reconsidering the role of the frame c’est XP
qui/que. Our proposal will be the following: cleft sentence does not impose a focus on XP
but focus (or ‘zoom’) between the XP and the syntactic coda relationship (that is, the
following relative clause).
Lambrecht (1994) asserts that all languages have some grammatical system of
marking which type an information is, which within the utterance, may involve
intonation, morphological marking, word order or some combination thereof. This
association, of a particular information structure with a particular morphosyntactic or
intonational structure, Lambrecht calls focal structure of the sentence.
Greenbaum, Leech, Quirk and Svartvik (1985) hold that a cleft sentence is a
complex sentence in which a simple sentence is expressed using a main clause and a
subordinate clause. In English, the prototypical cleft sentence has the following form:
(39) It + be + X + subordinate clause,
where X is a subordinate clause which has the same meaning as its corresponding simple
sentence. However, the primary focus of cleft construction is often on an element marked
by intonation that introduces new information. This element appears either as X or in the
subordinate clause, eg
(40) Yes, it is his callousness that I shall ignore
In (40), the introductory It + be (ie; is) are used to focus on the noun phrase his
callousness and not any other attitude as what is to be ignored. The particle yes make the
xxxii
sentence an echo sentence and reflective (Radford 1988: 147) (40a) below is its
corresponding simple form:
(40) (a) Yes, I shall ignore his callousness.
The primary focus of the cleft sentence may be marked by intonation, as in the following
sentences:
(b) No, it is his Callousness that I shall ignore
(c) No, it is his callousness that I shall Ignore
In (40) (b), the noun phrase callousness is stressed to give it significance as what can be
ignored and not any other attitude. The focal stress in (40) (c) is on the verb ignore.
Depending on context, the sentence is an exclamatory rhetoric with an underlying
meaning implying that his callousness is too much to be over-looked.
Greenbaum, Leech, Quirk and Svartvik (1972) assert that a cleft sentence is a
special construction which gives both thematic and focal prominence to a particular
element of the clause in the sentence, so called because it divides a single clause into two
separate sections each with its own verb.
Most cleft sentences begin with the ambient pronoun “It” followed by the verb
“BE” which in turn is followed by the element on which the focus falls, for instance in
the sentence:
(41) John wore his best suit to the dance last night
It is possible to derive four cleft sentences, each highlighting a particular element in the
clause, as in the following examples:
(a) Subject as focus
who
(42) It was JÓHN that wore his best suit to the dánce last night.
(b) Direct object as focus
(43) (a) It was his best SÚIT (that) John wore to the dánce last night
Adverb of time as focus:
(44) It was LÁST NíGHT (that) John wore his best suit to the dance.
Adverb of place as focus:
xxxiii
(45) It was TO THE DÁNCE that John wore his best suit last night.
The highlighted elements have the full implication of contrastive focus; thus to
each of the above, one could add an implied negative eg.
46) (a) It WASN’T Jim but JOHN who wore his best suit to the dance last
night.
(b) It WASN’T his night-shirt, but his BEST SUIT (that) he wore to the
dance last night.
Apart from subject, direct object and adverb, the two less common clause elements,
indirect object and complement can marginally act as the focal elements of a cleft
sentence.
(c) Indirect object as focus:
(47) (a) It’s ME (that) he gave the book; or
(b) It is to ‘ME’ he gave the book (with ME as a prepositional complement)
(d) Object complement as focus:
(48) Its DARK GREEN that we’ve painted the kitchen.
DARK GREEN is the complement of the object ‘kitchen’
(e) Subject complement as focus
There are limitations in Standard English, on the use of subject complement in
this function, especially with the verb BE following:
(49) It’s a genius that he is.
(50) It’s a lecturer that I am now.
The clefting for the subject complement focusing like 49 and 50 are valid only for base
forms of which the copula is finite, its verb intransitive and its complement a noun in
apposition. Compare the base forms of (49) and (50), ie
He is a genius
I am now a lecturer with (51) below
(51) (a) Nneka is my cousin.
(b) I feel good.
xxxiv
Which gives:
(52) (a) It’s my cousin that Nneka is
(b) It’s good that I feel
While (a) is disjointed, the complement ‘good’ (an adjective) in (b) is out of place
nominally i.e. it should have been ‘goodness’ but which would not grammatically fit into
the base form.
There are also restrictions in verb focusing. In fact, the verb does not occur at all as focus
just as it does not occur as question element in this informal statement (which suggests
the use of wh-forms in questions)
One can circumvent this restriction by rendering the verb in a non-finite form to an
infinitive or participle, as follows:
(53) It’s to become an artist that she wishes for.
(54) It’s teaching that he does for a living.
In this case, the substitution verb comes into use. Example (50) is acceptable as:
(59a) It’s him that is a genius.
2.3.1 Relative Clause in Cleft Sentence
According to Greenbaum, Leech, Quirk and Svartvik (1972), the introductory part
of a cleft sentence is largely restricted to other forms of BE, such as it might be:
(55) It must have been his brother that you saw
(56) It might be his father that you are thinking of.
The final part of the clause, after the focal element, is obviously close in structure
to a restrictive relative clause; and yet, as we shall see in section 2.3.1.2 below, there are
considerable differences. Examples above show that pronouns used in relative clauses;
(who, that, ‘zero’ pronouns) are also used to introduce cleft sentences. Also reminiscent
of the relative clause is the fronting of the pronoun, moreover, as in relative clauses, the
pronoun can be fronted from a position in prepositional phrase, or from a pushdown
position in a nominal clause as object. Nominal is when any other parts of speech comes
xxxv
to occupy the slot meant for a noun. In other words it is any part of speech that has been
nominalized. It can occupy the object position, and then it becomes a nominal object.
Example of a pushdown question – element is the wh-word in the following senetence.
(57) Whom you saw must have been his brother.
In the questions with a post posed preposition we have already studied, the question –
element is a part of the main clause only indirectly, being a prepositional complement,
which is part of an adjunct, which in turn is part of the main clause.
There are other structures where the question-element is embedded further down in the
sentence:
2.3.1.1 Question – Element as Prepositional Complement within Noun Phrase (in
informal English)
In informal English, cleft construction is possible by fronting the question-element which
is the complement of a preposition while the preposition itself occupies the final position
in the sentence, eg.
(58) (a) Which professor did he marry the daughter of?
(b) The daughter of which professor did he marry?
xxxvi
2.3.1.2 Question – Element as Nominal Object
A question-element functioning as the object of the verb is not always preceded by the
verb. It can be placed in the sentence initial position as if it is a subject while its verb
remains in the last position, eg.
(59) (a) What would you like me to buy
(b) How long did he tell you to wait?
The phenomenon illustrated in (59) can occur not only in direct questions, but in
other circumstances where an element is fronted as x – element (eg. exclamation) because
it is being introduced by what or how like wh-question
(60) What an enormous crowd that came! (OdS V) - X – element as subject
(61) How delightful her manners are ! (Cs S V) - X – element as complement
(62) How I used to hate Geography! (A.S.V Od) - X – element as adverbial.
what a long time we’ve been waiting! (A.S.V)
In addition, the X-element, like the question – element of the wh-question can act as
preposition complement e.g
(63) What a mess we’re in!
The initial element ‘what’ in (63) above is referred to as a pushdown element because the
wh-question is part of the main clause.
(64) It’s the girl that I was complaining about. (not the boy)
(65) It’s next week’s match that he is hoping to attend. (not this week’s)
(66) It’s this watch I said I would let you have. (not that one)
There is a difference, however, in the use of relative pronoun, in that the wh-forms are
rare in comparison with that and zero. Although, ‘whose’ is allowed in cleft sentence e.g
(67) It’s uncle Bill whose address I lost.
xxxvii
whom and which are marginally possible but it is virtually impossible to use who and
which preceded by the preposition ‘to’ examples:
(68) She was the woman (to whom) I gave the water.
(69) It was the dog (which/that) I gave the water.
Where the relative pronouns may be and are often omitted.
But never:
(70) She was the woman to who the first prize was given.
(71) It is the dog to which I gave the water.
Compare with:
(72) It is the house in which the murder was committed /of which roof was blown
off by the wind.
The above examples are read as sentences containing a straight forward post modifying
relative clauses, rather than as a cleft sentence. Characteristic intonation is also different;
e.g.
(73) (a) It was the DÒG I gave that WÁTER to (cleft sentence)
(b) It was the dog I gave the WÀTER to (S V A sentence with relative
clause).
2.3.2 Types of Cleft Sentences
2.3.2.1 Pseudo-Cleft Sentence
The pseudo-cleft sentence is one of the types of cleft sentences. Greenbaum,
Leech, Quirk and Svatvic (1972) assert that it is a construction which like the cleft
sentence proper, makes explicit the division between given and new parts of the
communication. It is an S.V.C sentence with a wh-relative nominal clause as the subject
or complement and so differs from the cleft normal sentences in being completely
accountable in terms of the categories of main clause and subordinate clause, e.g
(74) (a) It’s a good rest that you need most
(b) A good rest is what you need most.
xxxviii
A pseudo-cleft sentence occurs more often with the Wh-clause as subject:
(75) What you need most is a good rest
And it is less restricted, while the cleft sentence with what is not because the use of the
substitute verb ‘Do’ permits marked focus to fall on the verb or predication:
(76) (a) What he’s done is (to) spoil the whole things.
(b) What John did to my suit was (to) ruin it.
(c) What I’m going to do to him is (to) teach him a lesson
The complement or ‘focus’ of these sentences is normally in the form of an
infinitival clause (with or without to). When the verb in the Wh-clause has progressive
aspect, the complement matches it with an -ing clause e.g
(77) What I’m doing is teaching him a lesson.
Occasionally, this matching of the verb is extended to verbs in the perfect aspect which
can have, as their focal counterpart, an -ed clause:
(78) What he’s done is spoil the whole thing.
In other respect, the pseudo-cleft sentence is more limited than the real cleft sentence.
Only with what clause does it freely commute with the cleft sentence construction.
Clauses with who, where and when are sometimes acceptable, but mainly when the wh-
clause is subject complement e.g
(79) (a) The police chief was whom I meant.
(b) Here is where the accident took place.
(80) (In) autumn is when the country side is most beautiful.
But whose, why and how for example, do not easily enter into the pseudo-cleft sentence
construction:
(81) With a Scottish accent is how he talked.
xxxix
(82) Why we decided to return was because he was ill.
In many cases, too, a clause beginning the person who or the one who is a more
acceptable alternative to a Wh-clause:
(83) (a) It must have been the manager who spoke to you
(b) The person/one who spoke to you must have been the manager.
According to Boulakia (1978), the search for what is focused, considers various
types of clefts according to their informational organisation along the ground/ focus
dimension. Three other types of clefts exist, namely:
Cleft sentence with a focus /post – focus organisation.
Explicative all – focus cleft sentence.
Broad – focus cleft sentence.
2.3.2.2 Focus / Post –Focus Cleft Sentence
In this structure, the focus domain is limited to a single constituent, be it subject,
object NP or nucleus.
In Frenchfor example, the prosody of focus / post – focus structure is characterized by :
a terminal boundary tone at the
end of the focus part
an intonational agreement involving
a copy of the terminal boundary tone.
a reduction of the register (Rossi 1974).
The terminal boundary tone expresses some illocutionary force (assertion, interrogation
etc). This tone is the same as the one which occurs at the end of an utterance, that is, at
the end of a broad focus. It also marks the end of the narrow focus part of sentence
without clef ting, for example,
(84) (a) Qui a tué Caesar - Who has killed Caesar?
(b) Brutus a tué Caesar - Brutus has killed Caesar.
xl
In this sentence above the NP (subject) is focused in (84) (a) Qui a tué Caesar? – Who
has killed Caesar? The focus is at the end of the utterance.
Intonational agreement concerns the post – focus part exclusively. There is the repetition
– who killed Caesar? , Brutus killed Caesar, at the boundary in answer to the question
above. According to Rossi (1974), the example in (84) (a) signals the end of any focus
domain, whether “narrow” or “broad” and it marks focus along the ground / focus
dimension. It consists in the repetition of the terminal boundary tone occurring at the end
of the focus part of the end of the utterance.
Intonational agreement is partly obvious in questions as illustrated by the sentence:
(85) [C’est pour Jospin] [qui Mathilde a voté]
It is for Jospin that Mathilda has voted.
‘C’ est pour Jospin’ has intonational boundary tone at the end of the focus XP (Jospin)
and another at the end of utterance voté.
2.3.2.3 All –Focus Cleft Sentence
Lambrecht (1994) asserts that in a sentence focus construction, the entire clause is
within the focus domain; there is no topic.
Non pragmatic presuppositions that would be involved in any focus types are normally
evoked by sentence – focus structure. Boulakia (1978) asserts that all–focus cleft
sentences are answers to such question as in 86 below:
(86), Qui est – ce qui se passé? ---What is going on?
The main intonational characteristics on this information structure are the following:
- -- Only one terminal boundary tone, located at the end of the utterance is
expected in an all – focus sentence. This terminal boundary tone may be of any
nature, marking statements, questions or requests for confirmation
---- A minor continuation rise at the end of XP {petit}, which signals the end of a
rhythmic group, but not the end of an intonational phrase: the utterance
corresponds to a unique intonational phrase and it is not divided into two
intonational phrases.
This type of cleft intonation can be illustrated by the following example in French: h
xli
(87) (a){C’est le petit} {qui est tombé dans l’escalier} Here the parenthesis marks
rhythmic groups, and the h is a minor continuation rise. Example,
(b), C’est le petit qui est tombé dans l”escalier ‘It is the little child who has
fallen on the Ladder/staire case’as an answer to ‘Qui – est. ce qui se
passé?’What is going on?
Such sentence can be analysed as truncated clefts. The clause ‘qui – est. tombé dans
l”escalier’ is not the coda, and the tacit coda ----- qui se passé {‘------ what is happening]
is left out. The morpheme ‘ce’ refers to this truncated coda, just as it does to the overt
coda in cleft sentence with a focus / post – focus organisation.
2.3.2.4 Broad Focus Cleft Sentence
Broad – focus cleft is when the focus includes more than one constituent. It may
include all but the topic, as in the common “topic comment” construction, which
Lambrecht [1994] calls predicate or it may include the entire sentence, which he calls
sentence focus.
Broad – focus is not used to answer questions. Some examples can be observed in the
reading of written texts, such as newspaper articles, given the appropriate pragmatic
contexts. The contexts, consists of the reading of an extract of an article in Le Monde by
P Bassey of 31st January 2001.
For example, the sentence:
(88) Ce sont le visiteurs qui les diposent le plus simplement du monde.
(These are visitors who have deposited the more simple ones to the world).
The main intonational characteristics are the following:-
The XP ‘Les visiteurs’ ends with a major continuation rise, the relative clause is not
realised as post – focus: there is no intonational agreement or register compression. This
sentence is divided into three intonational phrases each of which ends with a H% [cont]
continuation rise.
[Ce sont les visiteurs [qui les deposent] [Le plus simplment le monde]
H%[cont] H%[cont] H%[cont]
h
xlii
The XP ‘les visiteurs’ ends an intonational phrase, which can be analysed as part of a
broad focus. The following relative clause does not correspond to any given information
and is not backgrounded.
2.3.3 Cleft in other Languages: French, Italian, Japanese, Chinese etc.
Lapolla, Robert and Valin (jr) (1997) contend that in Japanese, French and Italian,
cleft construction uses narrow-focus. In a narrow-focus construction, the focus domain is
limited to a single constituent, and any constituent, be it subject, object, oblique NP or
nucleus, can be the focused constituent. Examples are:
(89) (a) Italian - - - -Si e rotta mia MACCHINA/É la -- (lit: broke down my
CAR/it is my car which broke down)
(b) French- - - C’est ma VOITURE qui est en panne- - (‘it’s my CAR
which broke down)
(c) Japanese- - - - KURUMA ga-kosyoo-si-ta- - (‘it’s my car which broke
down’)
In this structure, the proposition ‘something’ of the speaker’s broke down is part
of the pragmatic presupposition. The assertion is that it is the speaker’s CAR that broke
down, in contrast to the probable object ‘motorcycle’ in the possible enquiry:
I heard that your X? broken down.
The focus is ‘car’, and the focus domain is the NP i.e. noun phrase (my car). The focus
domain. ie the NP is restricted to single constituent (car), since in this particular example
(my car broke down), the open proposition ‘X’ broke down is active and the referent ‘my
car’ is not, thus, making the activation status important. However, the same answer could
have been given to the question ‘was it your car or motorcycle that broke down?’ Where
‘my car’ and the open proposition are both active. From this, we can see that the ‘new’
information in the focus is not the constituent itself, but the establishment of a
relationship that makes a focus constituent informative, not the status of the referent as
newly introduced. The information structure of this example can be represented as
follows:
(90) Sentence: My car broke down
Presupposition: ‘Speaker’s X broke down’
xliii
assertion: x = car
focus: ‘car’
focus domain: NP
Many languages have a clearly defined unmarked focus position in the clause. In English
the unmarked focus position is the final position in the core, which may or may not be the
final position in the clause. This means that in ‘My car broke down’, the focus is on ‘car’
like-wise in French, voiture; Italian, macchina; and Japan, kuruma. This makes it to be
(marked) narrow focus. English has unmarked focus which its focus position is the final
position in the core, which may or may not be the final position in the clause. This
indicates that in example 91 a-e below the focus is not steady on a particular word as in
‘my car broke down’.
The unmarked narrow focus is that falling on an element in the unmarked focus position
whereas marked narrow focus is that falling on an element in a position in the clause
other than the unmarked focus position. Consider the following English sentence with
different focus stress possibilities indicated:
(91) (a) Chris gave the book to PAT yesterday.
(b) Chris gave the book to Pat YESTERDAY.
(c) Christ gave the BOOK to Pat yesterday.
(d) Chris GAVE the book to Pat yesterday.
(e) CHRIS gave the book to Pat yesterday.
With focal stress falling on Pat in (91a), the result is ambiguous between a predicate
focus reading, in which ‘gave the book to Pat’ is the actual focus domain and a narrow
focus reading. Lapolla, Robert and Valin(jr) (1979), assert that, non-WH NP’s in the
precore slot are sometimes referred to as ‘contrastive topics’, because they are in a clause
initial position associated with topics but have marked narrow- focus i.e. are contrastive.
It should be noted however that not all non WH NP’s in the precore slot are focal. Gundel
(1976) contends that an example of a topical element in the precore slot is “Bean’s can’t
stand’, with focal stress on the verb and the precore slop NP unstressed.
All of the languages use intonation to some extent in marking the different focus structure
construction; they differ in terms of what other syntactic or morphological means they
xliv
use in addition to intonation. In the Japanese example, different focus structures are
distinguished by a combination of intonation and morphological marking essentially the
use of different post positions’, either ‘wa’ or ‘ga’ examples are
(92) (a)Kuruma ga kosyoo-si-ta- it is my car which broke down.
(b) (Kurumawa) Kosyoo-si-ta – what happened to your car?
(c) KURUMA ga Kosyoo-si-ta – what happened?
The particle ‘wa’ marks a topic in a predicate focus sentence as in (92b) above, while
‘ga’ may mark a sentence-focus structure. In (92c) above if it is unstressed, or a narrow-
focus structure this example below will be applicable.
(d) KURUMA ga kosyoo-si-ta – I heard your motorcycle broke down.
What makes (92a) and (92b) above different are that the focus structures are
distinguished by a combination of intonation and morphological marking eg ‘ga’ and
‘wa’. In (92) (c) above ‘kuruma’ is the focus. The question is what happened – it is ‘my
car’ which broke down. Focus is on noun phrase while (92) (d)) showed a marked narrow
focus still on noun phrase ‘motorcycle’
In both French and Italian, there is a restriction on focal elements appearing preverbally,
and therefore it is not possible to mark a sentence – focus or narrow-focus construction
simply by accenting a preverbal NP, as in English. Some syntactic means must be used to
distinguish the different focus structures. Example: -
(93) My car broke down.
Si è rotta la mia MACCHINA. - Italian
C’est ma VOITURE qui-est en panne- French
We can see that the cleft sentence is a way of focusing a particular part or element of a
sentence. It is normally used to focus on a noun phrase as in ‘my car’, while in Italian the
focus is on a clause element or a whole clause as in ‘si è rotta’ i.e. it broke down. In the
above examples, both languages can use cleft constructions for narrow-focus structure,
though in Italian the inverted structure is more natural in this situation. In the French
narrow-focus structure, a biclausal cleft construction is used to allow the focal NP to
appear in the post verbal position (the usual focus position) of the first clause, even
though it is the logical subject of the proposition ‘My car broke down’ with the main
It’s my car which broke down
xlv
semantic content of the assertion appearing in a relative clause. The clause then has the
syntax and accentuation of a predicate-focus structure, while the second clause is not
accented at all. In the French sentence focus structure, (c’est Ma VOITURE que est en
panne) a similar syntactic structure is used (the avoir-cleft construction), though both
clauses have normal predicate-focus accent on the predicate phrase. In Italian, the
situation is similar, though in Italian, unlike in French, it is more natural to use a type of
simple inverted structure, where the focal subject simply appears in post verbal position,
to mark both narrow and sentence-focus structure.
The constraint that these two languages share against preverbal focal NPs is
actually not uncommon in the languages of the world. Lapolla, Robert and Valin(jr)
(1995) assert that in Mandrin Chinese, the NP representing the topic in a predicate focus
construction must appear in preverbal position as in
(94) Ché lái le – (lit. vehicle come PRFV)
‘The car is here’.
The paraphrase ‘what was here is the car’, the clefted constituent is moved to the right
and transformed into a predicate noun (focus) – ‘it is the car that is here’. In a sentence
focus construction the logical subject appears in the postverbal position as in:
(95) Lái chē le _ Chinese
Come vehicle. PRFV
There is a car coming.
The above sentence is grouped under existential sentence. Existential sentences are
principally those beginning with the unstressed word ‘there’, and are so called because
when unstressed ‘there’ is followed by a form of the verb BE, the clause expresses the
notion of existence. It involves a motion/location verb i.e. the verb appears after the first
verb of the two verb serial construction in which the first verb simply serves the purpose
of allowing a focal logical subject to appear in postverbal position as in:
(96) YŎU rèn xiang kà nĭ – Chinese
(literally: exist person want see you)
‘There is someone (here) who wants to see you’.
xlvi
In the above cleft sentence, ‘There is someone’ introduced relative clause ‘who’. The
relative clause (who, that) are also used to introduce cleft sentences. In the above
sentence (there is someone (here) who wants to see you) when you ask, ‘who does he
want to see?’ ‘you’ is focused and stressed. In a narrow-focus construction, though
marked intonation alone can be used to signal this type of structure, more commonly a
cleft construction, is used which allows the focal constituent to appear post verbally (after
the copula) e.g.
‘tā laŏdă’ – her eldest (son) in
(97) Shi tā laŏdă gĕi ta nàme – duō máfán Chinese
COP 3sg old - big give 3sg that – much trouble
‘It is her eldest (son) that gives her so much trouble’.
The relative clause ‘that’ made it focus on the element – ‘ta laŏdă’ – (her eldest son).
Demuth (1989, 1990) observes that in Sesotho, one of the Sotho languages of
southern Africa, there is an absolute constraint against focal elements appearing
preverbally. This is an S.V.O language and accordingly subjects must be highly topical.
Since question words are always focal, they may not appear preverbally, in particular,
they always appear either at the end of the sentence (in the unmarked form) or post
verbally in a cleft construction. Consequently, it is not possible to have a question in
which an interrogative pronoun (the focus) is the subject such as in:
(98) Mang o –pheh –ile Sesotho language
Who SUBJ-cook-PAST food
‘Who cooked the food?
But its passive form:
(99) Lijo li - pheh - li-o-e ________ Sesotho language
Food SUBJ – AUX - Cook– PAST – mood by who
‘The food was cooked by who?’
or the cleft structure equivalents:
(100) (a) E a o – f – ile – ng ntja ke mang?
Rel OBJ - give - PAST – 2sg obj. def. art dog cop. who.
‘The one that gave you the dog is who?’
xlvii
(b) Ke mang ea o – f – ile - ng nt ja?
Cop who REL OBJ-give-PAST-rel dog.
‘It’s who that gave you the dog?
And in comparison with (98) and (99):
The one that cooked the food is who?
It’s who that cooked the food? Respectively
From these facts, we can see that languages differ in terms of what may be called the
potential focus domain that is the syntactic domain in which the focus element may
occur. Lambrecht (1994) calls it the ‘focus domain’. In English, the focus can be
anywhere in the clause and so the potential focus domain is the entire clause, while in
many other languages, such as Italian, French, Chinese and Sesotho the potential focus
domain is generally limited to the verb and post verbal positions within the clause.
Among this latter group of languages, there is also a difference in the scope of the
potential focus domain between Sesotho and the other languages as Sesotho does not
allow interrogative pronouns to appear preverbally.
This difference involves whether the restriction on prenuclear focal material holds within
the core, as in Italian, or within the clause as in Sesotho. That is, if the restriction is only
within the core, and not the whole clause, then the interrogative pronoun can appear in
the precore slot, while if the restriction holds for the whole clause, then the interrogative
pronoun is not able to appear there. This means that in English, the focus can be
anywhere in the clause while in Italian and Sesotho, the potential focus domain is
generally limited to verb and post verbal position within the clause.
2.4 Structural Differences in Clause - Cleft Relatives
With relative clauses and their cleft forms; both are likely to be concluded to be the same
but an analytical examination of their structures reveals that they are not different.
Greenbaum (1972) asserts that there are differences, however, in the use of relative
pronoun, in that the wh-forms are rare in comparison with that and zero. Although whose
is allowed in cleft sentences (e.g it’s Uncle Sam whose address I lost), whom and which
are marginally possible, and it is virtually impossible to use whom or which proceeded by
a preposition, example:
xlviii
(101) It was the dog which I gave the water:
The above example has to be read as a sentence containing a straight forward post
modifying relative clause (compare – she was the woman to whom I gave the water)
rather than as a cleft sentence. Apart from indicating a cleft sentence by the position of
the relative pronoun in the sentence, intonation of the focused elements may be used, eg.
(102) (a) It was the DÒG I gave that WATER to (cleft sentence).
(b) It was the dog that I gave the WATER to (SVA sentence with relative
‘that’ clause)
Greenbaum, Leech, Quirk and Svartvic (1972) also hold that a further difference between
the post modifying relative clause and the clause following the focusing element in cleft
sentence is the ability of the latter to have as its antecedent (ie the focused element) not
only a nominal element, but as adjunct:
(103) It was because he was ill (that) we decided to return.
(104) It was in September (that), I first noticed it.
Indeed such a construction, where there is no noun phrase antecedent, makes the use of
the term ‘pronoun’ for the linking word that misleading, and it is noticeable that a wh –
pronoun cannot be used in cleft sentences where the focus element is an adjunct, and
where consequently it does not have a strict ‘ pronominal’ status.
The clefting sentence structures can be used in questions, exclamation and subordinate
clauses. Examples are:
(105) Was it for this that we suffered and toiled?
(106) Who was it that interviewed you?
(107) What a glorious bonfire it was that you made!
(108) He told me that it was because he was ill ‘that they decided to return’
Other comparisons with respect to English clefting can be derived from such structures as
the following:
(109) (a) i. Sam told John to go to the movie.
ii Robin asked Pat to apply for the job.
xlix
(b) i. Sam stopped John from going to the movie
ii. Robin prevented Pat from applying for the job.
These sentences are quite parallel structurally; they are both instances of core
coordination. Their acceptability (or lack of it) seems comparable with respect to their
clefting thus:
(c) i. It was to go to the movie that Sam told John.
ii It was from going to the movie that Sam stopped John
iii. It was to apply for the job that Robin prevented Pat.
It appears that whatever analysis is given to ‘to’ in (109) (a) must be given to ‘from’ in
(109) (b) above and consequently the class to which ‘to’ belongs has at least one other
member. It is no accidents that ‘from’ occurs with verbs that contain a negative
component in their semantic structure, stop and prevent both mean something like ‘X
cause Y NOT to + infinitive and the semantic structure of from also contains NOT. The
negative component of from can be seen clearly in the contrast below:
(110) (a) Pam kept the dog barking.
(b) Pam kept the dog from barking.
Lapolla, Robert and Valzin(jr) (1997).
In (110) (a), above, the actor is doing something which causes the dog to bark
continually, whereas in (110) (b) above the action causes the dog not to bark and the only
difference between them is the presence or absence of from. Hence, it must be from
which is supplying the negative component of the negative causation in (110) (b). The
contrast in (110) shows that the occurrence of an element like from can contribute to the
meaning of the sentence and this is also the case with to. (Lapolla, Robert and Valin(jr)
1997).
According to Greenbaum, Leech, Quirk and Svartvik (1972), another contrast between
relative clauses and ‘cleaving’ clauses lies in the possibility, in popular English, of
omitting ‘that’ as subject in cleft sentence, but retaining it as subject of a relative clause;
e.g
(111) It is the dog I gave the meat.
l
and
(112) It is the dog that was barking respectively
Yet another contrast is that cleft sentence may have a proper noun as a focus element,
whereas restrictive relative clause cannot have a proper noun as an antecedent. Example
(113) (a) It is Mr. Okoro who discovered the leak in the pipe.
Compare with;
(b) Mr. Okoro is the plumber who discovered the leak in the pipe.
2.5 Empirical Studies
The researcher carried out a study on cleft formation in the syntax of (standard)
Igbo language. This empirical review is based mainly on her observation on the nature of
cleft and syntax of the language under study. Not much was taken from written literature
as there was none on the subject before this study.
Discussing syntax, Mbah (2006) refereeing to Chomsky (1957) and Chomsky
(1965) says that for a sentence to be well formed or to be meaningful it is believed that it
must comprise NP, INFL and VP elements. Mbah (2006) goes further to assert the claim
that the well-formedness and meaningfulness of the sentence is not affected by the order
of the NP, INFL, VP elements. But Mbah (2006) counters this claim of non-relevance of
the sequence of the NP, INFL, VP elements by observing some badly formed and
unacceptable grammatical structures in Igbo as follows:
(114) (a) Nweze ya anya lere.
(Nweze him/her/it eye looked).
(b) Ele foto sere.
(Ele picture took).
(c) Buru ya ha bee.
(Carried it they perched).
He observes that sentences (114) (a-c) are not well ordered, and consequently, they
generate meaningless structures. To make them well ordered and meaningful, they
must be re-arranged as follows:
(115) (a) Nweze lere ya anya.
li
Nweze looked at him/her/it).
(b) Ele sere foto.
(Ele took a picture).
(c) Ha buuru ya bee.
(They carried it and perched).
Sentences (115) (a-c) are the basic SVC structures in standard Igbo syntax. But there are
observed cases where the SVC elements interchange slots as in the following examples.
(116) (a) Puo gi ebe a.
(Out you here).
(b) Si gi ebe a puo.
(From you here out).
(c) Abiala ha.
(Have come they?)
Structures (116)(a-c) are strongly emotive and imperative constructions and (c) is a
dialect of Orlu in Imo State.
Igbo language sentence structures are also known to comprise interrogative and non-
interrogative forms. Structures (115) (a-c) and examples of non-interrogative form. Their
interrogative versions are:
(117) (a) Nweze o lere ya anya?
(Nweze he looked at him?)
(b)Ele o sere foto?
(Ele he took a picture?)
(c) Ha buuru ya bee?
(They carried it and perched?)
It is noted by Mbah (2006) and Nwachukwu (1995) that an Igbo interrogative sentence is
either a yes/no question or a non yes/no question. According to them, yes/no questions
are question forms which have a possibility of ‘yes’ or ‘no’ answer. Question statements
(117) (a-c) and examples of yes/no question forms. Non-yes/no questions on the other
hand are the forms that involve wh-equivalent question phrase. Their answers are not yes
lii
or no but clauses or sentences. In addition to the interrogative and non-interrogative
forms of Igbo sentences structures are the cleft and non-cleft forms. Movement
transformation operates to move the wh-phrase equivalents to clefting slots and non-
clefting slots in the basic non-question statements and the non yes/no question form
respectively. This means that the wh-phrase equivalent can appear at the initial, middle or
last position of the sentence. These are illustrated by the following examples:
(118) (a) Ị bụ onye? – You are who?
(b). Onye ka ị bụ? – Who are you?
(c) Ọ bụ onye jere ahịa? – Who went to market?
(119) (a) Gịnị bụ aha gị? - What is you name?
(b) Aha gị bụ gịnị? - Your name is what?
(c) Gịnị ka ị kworo bịa? - Why did you come?
(d). I kworo gịnị bịa? - You came for what reason?
The Wh – head include,
(120) Onye – who (?)
Gịnị – what (?)
Ebee – where (?)
Kedu/olee – which, how, when, where (?)
Ole – how many (?)
The Wh- heads have two syntactic forms: the basic form and the clefted form. The basic
form is shown when the wh-element occupy their underlying position e.g
(121) (a) Unu chọrọ onye – who (m) - You want whom?
(b) Unu na – eje ebee – where – You are going where?
(c) Unu na-eje mgbe ole – when- You are going when?
(d) Unu chọrọ gịnị - what- You want what?
liii
The above sentences can be clefted. The wh-head moves out of its underlying position to
a focus position when they are clefted: they come to the sentence’s initial position as
illustrated below:
(122) (a) Onye ka unu chọrọ t?- Who did you want?
(b) Ebee ka unu na-eje? Where are you going?
(c) Mgbe ole ka unu na-eje? - When are you going?
(d) Gịnị ka unu choro? - What did you want?
Mba (2000) asserts that the above clefted wh-element have, except for emphasis, the
same semantic implication as their basic form. The wh-heads when used with their
cognate nouns turn out to be wh-relatives. For example:
(123) (a) Onye bụ onye unu chọrọ t? – Who is the person you want?
(b) Ebee bụ ebe unu chọrọ t ?_ Where is the place you want?
(c) Gịnị bụ ihe unu chọrọ t ? – What is it you want?
(d) Etu ole bụ etu unu chọrọ t ? – How is it you want?
(e) Nke ole bụ nke unu chọrọ t ? – Which (one) is it that you want?
Nwachukwu (1995) asserts that every question in standard Igbo must contain a pronoun
subject on low tone(s). this is as it relates to Igbo question morphemes and phrases.
The following are Igbo question morphemes and phrases:
Onye who?
Gịnị what?
Ebee (olee) where?
Ańaa/olịa how? (dialect)
Ole how many?
Oge/ mgbe ole what time / when?
Maka gịnị / n’ ihi gịnị - why?
ebe where?
Kedu etu how?
nke which?
mgbe when
liv
We note that with the exception of ‘gịnị’, every interrogative word in the above lot begins
with a low tone. The reason and relevance of this initial low tone to question formation in
the language are explained as follows:
The two morphemes ‘ònye...’ and ‘ónyé...’ are obviously related in both meaning and
form: one being on a low tone, that is the question morpheme and the other, begins on a
high tone that is the non-question morpheme; they function in mutually exclusive
contexts. Although they are both nouns, only one of them the non-question morphene,
can take definite article a/ahụ
Onye a/ ahụ this / that person
Onye ọma a good person
Onye ọjọọ a bad person
By contrast, ‘ònye’ the question morpheme does not co-occur with any nominal modifier
such as the definite article, adjectives and relative clauses; only ‘ónyé’ with a nominal
modifier can function in statements, whereas ònye is limited to question constructions. It
is therefore reasonable to assume that what converts an ordinary common noun to an
interrogative noun in Igbo is its initial low tone. For example, ‘ébé’ is the common noun
meaning ‘place, or location, whereas èbeé is its question counterparts meaning ‘where’, If
we take the analysis right to fundamental details, we can assume it that the noun is ‘bé or
ébé’, bé is the simple root, where ébé is a derivative consisting of a high – tone prefix and
the root thus:
Pref + root
e + be ebe (noun)
H H
e + be + e ebee – (question morpheme)
L H S
So we can see that both the root, the common noun and the interrogative noun are related
in meaning and form, that is, semantically and morphologically related. Other analogous
lexemes in Igbo are
Òleé and ańaa
The history of ‘olee’ proves the point. This is a lexeme derived from the verb ‘le’
(look). Lèé, a derivation from this root, is the common cry in a market in session in
lv
Mbaise for drawing the attention of buyers and sellers, ‘lee’ in this contexts roughly
equivalent to look (here)!, in English. As one would expect, its question counterpart is
‘olee’ meaning ‘where’?
According to Nwachukwu, (1995), it is clear that low tone is an essential factor in
Igbo question. For every basic content question in Igbo there is a corresponding ‘kedu’ –
version: a cleft and emphatic version. Kedu is the only Igbo question word or phrase that
functions only in sentence – initial position, because of its composite nature being wh –
plus is – it is always followed by a noun as its complement. Examples
Kedu nna gị?
(124) Wh – is your father: where is your father?
Kedu aha gị?
(125) What is your name
Kedu aha gị (ebe a)?
(126) Where is your name here?
Kedu oge ị byara?
(127) What is time you came: when did you come?
Kedu etu ha dị?
(128) Wh – is way they are: how are they?
Kedu etu ọ ha n’ ogologo?
(129) Wh – is manner he is in height: How tall is he?
Kedu Ihe kpatara i ji mee ya
(130) Wh – is thing that caused you do it: why did you do it?
It can be seen from these examples that whether ke is translated as what, where, when,
how etc depends on the complement noun. This explains why this category of questions
in Igbo has two variants – a basic form and a non – basic or cleft form: the cleft form is
an emphatic form, as the following examples show:
(131) O kwuru gịnị (Basic non-emphatic)
(132) Kedu ihe o kwuru? (Cleft and emphatic)
What is it that he said?
(133) Uche ọ hụrụ onye? (Basic non – emphatic)
lvi
(134) Kedu onye Uche hụrụ (cleft and emphatic)
A cleft question structure in Igbo is known to generate its corresponding cleft
non-question answer which is always a declarative sentence. In cleft question structures,
the focus is on a grammatical category. But in their corresponding answers, the focus is
mandatorily on a particular element of the category that was focused e.g.
(135) (Ọ bụ) onye bụ onye-isi ala Naijiria?
(Who is the president of Nigeria?)
(Ọ bụ) Goodluck Jonathan bụ onyisial Niajiria
(Goodluck Jonathan is the president of Nigeria)
Examples (135) further reveals that the response to a cleft question is not always in cleft
form. This is shown by excluding the elements in the parentheses in both the
interrogative sentence and its response. Similarly, a non-cleft question statement may
give rise to a cleft answer, e.g.
(136) Unu siri ji?
(You cooked yam?)
Ọ bụ ‘akpu ka anyi siri
(It is cassava that we cooked)
Implicit in sentences (136) is the fact that a yes/no cleft question can produce a cleft
answer statement. This is when a specific element of inquiry is in question. In this case,
the yes or ‘no’ answer head is in combination with a complementary cleft sentence and
the focus is on both the specific information constituent and the wh-word equivalent as an
emphatic relative pronoun, eg.
(137) (a) Ọ bụ Obasanjo bụ Onyeisi ala Naijiria?
(Is Obasanjo the President of Nigeria?)
(b) Mba, ọ bụghi Obasanjo; Ọ bụ Jonathan (bụ onye bụ Onyeisi ala
Naijiria)
(No, it is not Obasanjo; it’s Jonathan)(Who is the president of Nigeria?)
(c) Ọ bụ Goodluck bụ President Naijiria.
(Is Goodluck the President of Nigeria?
lvii
(d) Ee, ọ bụ ya (bụ President Naijiria)
(Yes, it is him (who is the president of Nigeria)
The significance of the above examples on cleft sentences and the relevance of
the wh-head in cleft formation is that in Igbo language the element of any lexical or
grammatical category, excluding the interjection is excluded because hardly any word of
the English language is an interjection. And the ‘verb’ can be focused only as a noun (eg.
Gerund and to-infinitive) or as an adjective (eg participle). The following sentences are
some are examples.
(138) (a) Ọ bụ so ji ka unu siri?
(It is only yam that you cooked?)
(b) Ọ bụ ya ‘na’ agwa
(It is it and beans)
(c) Kedu ebe nche-mmiri di?
(Where is umbrella?)
(d) Ọ bụ ‘n’ azu’ mgbo (ka ọ di)
(It is behind the door)
lviii
In (138) (b), a conjunction is focused, and in (d) the focused constituent is a preposition.
Focusing in cleft sentences in Igbo is not limited to only one constituent. More than one
constituent may be focused depending on the question or information pre-emptive of a
question.
Another feature of the Igbo cleft - and non-cleft- sentences is their dual structural
composition. Most of the sentences have both surface and underlying structures and
meanings especially the figurative cleft forms. In their observation about these features,
Anagbogu, Mbah and Eme (2007) say that:
there are three linguistic phenomena on which the difference between syntax and
semantics are founded… the three phenomena can be explained in a two way or
binary opposition. On the one hand, there exist lexical items which acquire their
inherent or incidental meanings through occupying specific syntactic contexts.
These kinds of lexical items… acquire their meanings figuratively or by
metaphorical extension or registers. The other set of words comprises lexical
items, which by their nature have inherent semantic properties and are capable of
definition or have been so described in isolation of grammatical or syntactic
contexts (Mbah 2006:207).
Tone in addition to context is also observed to be the linguistic and grammatical
characteristic of the Igbo syntactic structures, cleft and non-cleft, in determining semantic
interpretations. The homophones and homonyms especially of the wh-equivalent clefting
heads are distinguished as interrogative pronouns or relative pronouns in cleft sentences
by tone. Consequently, interrogative and non-interrogative expressions are indicated by
tone. And tone excavates underlying meaning from surface structures and differentiates
idiomatic usage of expressions from their literal and normal meaning which the
constituent’s words generate.
2.6 Summary of Review
The review of related literature on the topic reveals a similitude of sequence of
lexical elements relative to the semantic implication in sentences formation among
languages. The similarities and differences among the representative languages of study:
lix
Igbo, English, French, Italian, Japanese etc. derive from the S → NP INFL VP syntactic
formula which makes no particular syntactic order obligatory. The formula is commonly
written as SVO and SVC. Both sequences are the basic sentence structures on which
permutation and transformation operate. Transformation produces cleft sentence forms, a
construction that puts a particular sentence constituent element into focus. Permutative
and transformational configurations designate a sentence as having both surface and
underlying and implied lexical and grammatical composition respectively.
The relationship between the surface and underlying structures, and the syntactic
interpretation and semantic implication are determined by the context, intonation and the
native speakers intuitive knowledge of the constructions of the sentence.
lx
CHAPTER THREE
DATA ANALYSIS
3.0 Introduction
This chapter examines the Igbo equivalent of cleft sentence formation. This is
done under the types of sentences eg, declarative, imperative, interrogative and
exclamatory; and basically under the types of cleft sentences namely pseudo cleft, post
focus cleft, all focus cleft and broad focus cleft types as identified in section 2.3.2.1.
3.1 Cleft Formation in Standard Igbo
The it + be + x + subordinate clause clefting structure by Greenbaum, Leech,
Quirk and Svartvik (1985) hold in forming cleft sentences in Igbo language. Its parallel in
Igbo is Ọ + bụ + x + subordinate clause, where ‘x’ is the element of the sentence that is to
be focused. This is usually an NP constituent inclusive of pronouns, and transformed
from the basic S + V + C syntax. Besides the introductory it + be cleft formation
mechanism, wh-word equivalents are also used to form cleft structures in Igbo. The
words are Onye (who), gịnị (what), ebee (where), ebe (where), ańaa (how), olee (how
many), mgbe/oge (when) and oge ole/mgbe ole (what time /when).
Also used in cleft formation in Igbo language is a wh-word equivalent resulting from the
combination of ‘kedu’ and its cognate nouns, eg. Kedu nke (which).
3.1.1 Pseudo-Clefting in Standard Igbo
Some cleft sentences in Igbo make explicit the division between given and new
parts of the communication. Their structures are SVC syntax of which the subject or
complement is the Igbo version of the wh-relative nominal clause eg.
(139) (a) Ọ bụ ihụ Onyeisi ihu-na-ihu bụ ihe/ka anyị chọrọ
(It is to see the boss face to face that we want)
The italicized part of this cleft sentence is the nominal complement of focus. This is made
the focal clause by the post posed ‘that’ equivalents ‘bụ ihe/ka’. It is the new part of the
communication while the second part, the relative clause ‘ka anyị chọrọ’ is given,
lxi
whether implied or expressed. In more common constructions, the introductory Ọ bụ (it
is) is omitted to give an infinitive phrase, eg
(139) (b) Ịhụ Onyeisi ihu na-ihu ka/bụ ihe anyị chọrọ
(To see the boss face to face is what we want)
In this construction, the infinitive phrase deletes the ‘that - relative’ of example
(139) (a) for ‘what-relative’
The implied ‘ka’ (ie. ‘to’) corresponding to the to-infitive in the translation of sentence
(139) (b) May be moved from its deep level in example (139) (b) to the initial position on
the surface level as in the following example:
(c) Ka anyị hụ onye isi ihu-na-ihu ka/bụ ihe anyị chọrọ
But on the surface, sentence (139) (c) translates as follows:
That we see the boss face – to- face is what we want.
In alternative construction, the order of the subject and complement is reversed. The
reversing produces a wh-clause as subject of the sentences, eg
(d) Ihe anyị chọrọ bụ ihu onye isi ihu-na-ihu
What we want is to see the boss face – to– face
In all the sentences (139) (a-d), the focal element is the complement ‘ihụ Onyeisi ihu-na-
ihu’ with the introductory ‘Ọ bụ’ and the copula ‘bụ ihe’ in (139) (a), the sentence is most
emphatic and insistent sentences (139) (b - c) are diminishingly emphatic but in insistent
with the copula ‘bụ ihe’. The fronting of the wh-head makes sentence least emphatic but
insistent. When ‘bụ ihe’ is deleted for ‘ka’, sentence (139) (a) is less emphatic and less
insistent; sentence (139) (b) formal; and (139) (c) more formal.
The sentences (139) (a-d) are declarative derivations from the most formal and basic
form:
(e) Anyị chọrọ ihụ Onyeisi ihu-na-ihu
(We want to see the boss in person).
Pseudo clefting is not limited to declarative sentence. It can be shown in interrogatives
and exclamations, eg
(f) Ọ bụ ihụ Onyeisi ihu-na-ihu ka anyị chọrọ?
(Is it to see the boss in person that we want?)
lxii
(g) Ịhụ Onyeisi ihu-na-ihu ka anyị chọrọ!
(To see the boss in person is what we want!)
The structures of the pseudo-cleft interrogative and exclamatory sentences in
(139) (f) and (139) (g) respectively are similar with those of the declarative sentences
(139) (a) and (139) (b) respectively. There similarity is one surface. At the deep level
tone and context make them different structurally and semantically, ie. (139) (f) has the
rising tune of interrogative statement, and (139) (g) is an echo statement which intones or
echoes an emphatic protest or a disappointment. In pseudo-cleft sentences, the structural
sameness between the interrogative form (139) (f) and the declarative from (139) (a) is
because of the dual usage of ‘Ọ bụ’ as introductory words it is/was and ‘as’ a question
marker ‘is it/was it’? sentences (139) (b-d) become interrogatives only by placing the
question marker Ọ bụ’ (is it) in front of the main clause or the subordinate clause, eg
(h) Ịhụ Onyeisi ihu-na-ihu ọ bụ ya ka/ ọ bụ ihe anyị chọrọ?
(To see the boss in person is it what we want?)
(i) Ọ bụ ka anyị hụ Onyeisi ihu-na-ihu ka/ bụ ihe anyị chọrọ?
(Is it to see the boss in person that we want?
(j) Ihe anyị chọrọ ọ bụ ihu Onyeisi ihu-na-ihu?
(What we want is it to see the boss in person?)
Cleft sentences 139a, b and d are also imperative sentences by implication of tone and
context.
Further examples of pseudo-cleft sentences are:
(140) (a) (Ọ bụ) ọkwụkwụ ụdọ bụ ka Okonkwọ si nwụọ
(It is) by hanging that Okonkwọ died)
(b) Ka Okonkwọ si nwụọ bụ site n’ikwugbu onwe ya
(How Okonkwọ died was by hanging himself)
(c) Ka ọ gbanaghụ akaja ka o jiri gbuo onwe ya
(To escape humiliation was why he killed himself)
3.1.2 All-focus Clefting in Standard Igbo
All-focus clefting sentence is the cleft sentence of which the focus domain is the
entire clause and it has no topic (Chomsky, 1965). Consequently, all-focus cleft sentences
lxiii
answer such question as ‘what’s happening?’ In Igbo language, there are similar
constructions in which the whole clause is focused in answer to questions such as ‘ọ bụ
gịnị?’ (What is /was it?), gịnị mere? (What happened) whether implied or expressed.
All-focus cleft formation in Igbo involves the fronting of the ‘existential’ adverb ‘onwe’
or ‘ọdị’ (there is/was) as in the existential sentence:
(141) ‘There are seven days in a week’
In clefting, this construction has the structure:
O nwe/ Ọ dị + X + subordinate clause
There + be + X + subordinate clause;
Where the subordinate clause is a relative clause as usual and the ‘be’is implied in the
introductory existential adverb o nwe / ọ dị inclusive of number and tense as shown in the
following example:
(142) (a) O nwere / Ọ dị ndị na-enwe Chi ọma.
There are those who are fortunate.
(b) O nweghi/ Ọ dịghị onye n’ime ha kwuru eziokwu.
There was no-one among them who spoke the truth.
(c) Ọ dị ewu Omenka kpunyere anyị.
There is a goat which Omenka gave to us.
(d) O nweghị / Ọ dịghị Ekeresimesi ọ naghị akpunye anyị ewu.
There is no Christmas that he does not give us a goat.
(e) O nwere onye na- amaghị na ihe dị njọ dị njọ.
Is there any one who doesn’t know that what is evil is evil?
In sentence (142) a-e, the cleft head o nwe/o nweghị and ọ di/ọ dịghị introduce undefined
and unspecified subjects and objects which they stressed. Sentences (a) and (e) are not
specific on subject that generates the inclusive subjects; (b) and (d) generalize the
subjects. Sentence ‘a’ is both declarative and exclamatory in reference to an underlying
reference subject that had a rare goodluck; ‘b’ is a formal expression for ‘ha nile ghara
ụgha’ (all of them lied),’d’ emphasizes the regularity: ‘every Christmas’ that the gift is
given; ‘e’ is a rhetorical interrogative sentence of the base form ‘Madụ nile mara na ihe dị
njọ dị njọ’ (every body knows that what is evil is evil). In (142) (c), the adverb introduces
lxiv
the element ‘ewu’ (goat) as a non definite object in the sentence as a statement of fact to
the 2nd person.
In Igbo language, all-focus clefting of interrogative sentences is also obtainable. In this
construction, the interrogative Wh-head equivalents come at the sentence initial position
instead of the grammatical final position in the basic form. The Wh- head equivalents
may be used with their cognates either in the emphatic order (when the cognate comes
next after its interrogative head) or in the reflexive order (when the cognate and its head
are brought at the sentence extremes, usually the cognate first). Constructions with the
cognates unlike without them are for emphasis and have semantic implications that are
generated by tone and context.
(143) (a) Oge/ Mgbe ole ka (ọ bụ) unu ga-amuta nnagide takọrịta?
When is it that you will learn to tolerate one another?
(b) Etu ole bụ etu ị chọrọ ka arụọ ọrụ ahụ?
How is it (that) you want the work to be bone?
(c) Nke ole bụ ụlọ (bụ nke) gị n’ ụlọ ndị ahụ?
Which of the house is (it that is) yours
(143) (a-c) are rhetorical questions, they are emotive. ‘a’ has an underlying implication of
reproach and corresponds with; why is it that you have refused to learn to tolerate one
another in spite of all efforts? ‘b’ has two interpretations namely:
(i) In short, there is no how else I know to do the work;
(ii) However you want the work to be done, I can do it.
Example ‘c’ is confrontational, thus:
‘You have no authority in any of those houses because none of them is yours’:
The sentences compare with their simple forms:
(144) (a) Oge / mgbe ole ka (or kedụ mbge) unu ga-amụta nnagịde takorita?
(b) Kedu etu ị chọrọ ka arụọ ọrụ ahụ?
(c) Kedụ ụlọ (nke) gị na ndị ahụ?
Clefting with ‘kedu’ to give rhetorical interrogatives is also possible, e.g.
(145) (a) (Kedu) Onye sịrị na gị agaghị ańu mmịrị dowe ịko?
Who is it/he that said you would not have peace?
lxv
(b) Kedu ihe/gịnị bụ na ị naghị anabata ndụmọdụ?
Why is it that you wouldn’t listen to advice?
Where as sentence (145) (a) is threatening, ‘b’ is admonitory.
On observation, all the sentences under all-focus cleft sentences focus on the entire
clauses, and they can be exclamatory sentences according to context but they cannot be
imperative sentences.
3.1.3 Post Focus Clefting in Standard Igbo
Some Igbo languages sentences are constructed in a way that specifically makes a
single constituent a term of reference by focusing on it. The focusing provides a
particular information relative to an explicit or implicit question and determined by some
wh-heads such as onye (who), gịnị (what), ihe (what), ebe (where), mgbe (when) etc. The
wh-heads may be used alone or preceded by ‘kedu’, and as question heads or relative
pronouns. Like pseudo clefting, the introductory ‘ọ bụ’ (it is) and its inflections are used
in focusing on an element in post-focus cleft sentences. The following examples are post-
focus cleft structures as derived from their basic forms.
Example 1:
(146) (a). Anyị hụrụ ya n’ ụzọ (we saw him on the way; basic SVOA structure)
Clefts as follows:
(b) Ọ bụ anyị (bụ ndi) hụrụ ya n’ ụzọ
(It is we that saw him/her/ it on the way)
(c) Ọ bụ ya ka / bụ onye anyị hụrụ n’ ụzọ
(It is him/her/it that we saw on the way
(d) Ọ bụ n’ụzọ ka anyị hụrụ ya
(It is on the way that we saw him/her/it)
In the example above, the subject, ‘anyị’; the object, ‘ya’ and the adverb, ‘n’ ụzọ are
focused in b – d’ respectively.
Example 2:
(147) (a) Omenka kpunyere anyị ewu
Omenka gave us a goat Basic
lxvi
Clefts as follows:
(b) Ọ bụ Omenka (bụ onye) kpunyere anyị ewu
It is Omenka that/ who gave us a goat
(c) Ọ bụ mkpunye ka Omenka kpunyere anyị ewu
It is giving that Omenka gave us a/the goat
(d) Ọ bụ anyị ka/ bụ ndị Omenka kpunyere ewu
It is us that/whom Omenka gave a goat
(e) Ọ bụ ewu ka/ bụ ihe Omenka kpunyere anyị
It is a goat that/which Omenka gave to us.
Where the subject, ‘Omenka’, the gerund, ‘Mkpunye’; the indirect object, ‘anyị’; and the
direct object, ‘ ewu’ are the focused elements in b – e respectively.
Example 3
(148) (a). (Gị) Nye m akwụkwọ ahụ
(You) Give me the book
Becomes:
(b) Ọ bụ gị (bụ onye) ga-enye m akwụkwọ ahụ
It is you who will give me the book
(c) Gị (ka ọ bụ) ga-enye m akwụkwọ ahụ
You it is/are the one who will give me the book
(d) Ọ bụ onyinye ka ị ga – enye m akwụkwọ ahụ It is giving that you will give me the book
(e) Ọ bụ m ka/ bụ onye i ga – enye akwụkwọ ahụ
It is (to) me that you will give the book
(f) Ọ bụ akwụkwọ ahụ ka/ bụ ihe ị ga – enye m
It is the book that/which you will give (to) me
(g) Ọ bụ akwụkwọ (nke) ahụ bụ nke / ya ka ị ga-enye m
It is that very book that/which you shall/are to give to me.
In all of the above cleft examples, an initial pronoun Ọ (it) followed by the verb
bụ (is), is noticed. These are followed in close proximity by the element of focus which
they introduce. Sentences ‘a’ are the basic structures while ‘b - d’, b - e’, and ‘b – g’
Basic structure
lxvii
respectivly are their cleft forms with the consecutive components as focused elements. In
(146), (b – d), the elements are ‘anyị’, ‘ya’ and ‘n’ ụzọ’. The focusing highlights the
element in contrast to an impression. For example, the focused elements ‘anyị’, ‘ya’ and
‘n’ ụzọ emphasize the elements in correction of the possible misinformed impressions
‘unu’ ‘mụ’ and n’ụlọ’ respectively. In (148) (b), the focus is ‘Omenka’ in contrast to any
other person e.g. Menakaya as the subject, or ‘agent’ of the verb ‘kpunyere’; in ‘c’, the
gerund ‘mkpunye’ contrasts with ‘nresi’ (selling) as the mode, vehicle or transit in the
transfer of the object ‘ewu’; and ‘d’ and ‘e’ oppose ‘unu/ha’ (you/them) and atụrụ/ehi
(sheep/cow) as the ‘benefactuve’/recipient and object respectively. In other words,
Ọ bụghị Menakaya Kama OMENKA bụ onye kpunyere anyị ewu
(It WASN’T Menakaya but OMENKA who gave us a goat) and,
Ọ bụ MKPUNYE, ọ bụghị nresi, ka Omenka kpunyere anyị ewu
(It is GIVING, not selling, that Omenka gave us a goat) etc.
The extension of the introductory part of a cleft sentence to other forms of BE such as ‘it
must have been’ and ‘it might be’ by Greenbaum, Leech, Quirk and Svartvik (1972) also
applies to post - focus cleft formation in Igbo. That is:
It + must + have been + X + subordinate clause.
and
It + Might + be + X + subordinate clause.
These are obtained in Igbo by suffixing – ‘rịrị’ to the ‘BE’ as in the previous examples.
The constructions become:
Ọ (+ ga) + burịrị + X + subordinate clause.
Where with and without ‘ga’ the sentence denotes the future/future in the past and future
time respectively. However, the ‘rịrị’ inflexion may be left out for the future tense. In this
structure,
(149) (a) ‘Omenka kpunyere anyị ewu’
Omenka gave us a goat.
Becomes:
(b) Ọ ga-abụrịrị Omenka bụ onye kpunyere anyị ewu
It must have been Omenka who gave us a goat (ie considering that it is
his usual practice to give us a goat)
Basic structure
lxviii
(c) Ọ ga- abụrịrị ewu ka Omenka kpunyere anyị
It must have been a goat that Omenka gave to us (ie. Considering that he
has so many goats)
(d) Ọ ga-abụ ewu ka Omenka kpunyere/ga-akpunye anyị
It might be/shall be a goat that Omenka gave/shall give to us (i.e. it is
uncertain but likely considering such hospitality in the past considering
that the constitution says so).
(e) Ọ ga- abụrịrị anyị ka Omenka kpunyere ewu.
It must have been to us that Omenka gave a goat.
(i.e. since everyone else had been given).
(f) Ọ ga-abụ anyị ka Omenka kpunyere ewu.
It may/might be us that Omenka gave a goat (i.e. because it is his custom
to honour such an invitation as ours with such a gift).
In each of sentences (149) (a - e) the information elements are understood except the
focused element which the focus establishes or seeks to establish. Like sentences (147) (b
- e) the focused elements in (149) (a-e) are the one’s next in sequence to the focus
indicators ‘Ọ ga-a bụ’ or ‘Ọ ga-a bụrịrị’. The elements are Omenka, ewu (goat) and anyị
(us). Their semantic imports are based on probability and considerations.
In (149) (a):
Ọ ga- abụrịrị Omeka bụ onye kpunyere anyị ewu.
It must have been Omenka, not Menakaya, who gave us a goat considering
that it is Omenka usual practice to give us a goat.
In (149 ) (b).
Ọ ga-abụrịrị ewu ka Omenka kpunyere anyị.
It must have been a goat, not any other gift, which Omenka gave to us. It
considers that Omenka has so many goats and he is liberal with them. The first part of
(149) (c):
‘Ọ ga-abụ ewu ka Omenka kpunyere anyị’, is past tense.
It has two interpretations as follows:
lxix
It is uncertain and less likely than (149) (b). To be a goat that Omenka gave to us. The
second Interpretation is that it is uncertain but likely that it is a goat which Omenka gave
to us considering such hospitalities in the past. The second part of (149) (c):
‘Ọ ga – abụ ewu ka Omenka ga-akpunye anyị’ is also interpreted in two ways
depending on context.
Firstly, from statements or observations, it is suspected that Omenka is going to give us a
goat.
Secondly, Omenka must pay a fine of a goat in accordance with the constitution.
(149) (d) and (e) are the same except that (d) is more emphatic by a difference of the –riri
inflexion of the introductory ‘Ọ ga- abụ-’. In (d):
Ọ ga- abụriri anyị ka Omenka kpunyere ewu.
It means that it is most possible that we are the beneficiaries of the goat, ie. since
everyone else had been given.
In (e), it might be us that Omenka gave the goat (because it is his custom to honour such
an invitation as ours with such a gift).
Similarly, the basic sentence:
(150) (a) ‘(Gị)’ Nye m akwụkwọ ahụ’
Clefts as follows:
(b) Ọ ga-abụ gị ga-enye m akwụkwọ ahụ
It might be you (i.e. who knows) who will give me the book.
It shall be you (i.e. your responsibility) who will give me the book
(c) Ọ ga- abụrịrị gị (bụ onye) ga-enye m akwụkwọ ahụ
It must be/has to be you (i.e. compulsorily)
Who will give me the book.
(d) Ọ bụrịrị gị bụ onye ga-enye m akwụkwọ ahụ
It is you (i.e. unavoidably/ I’m certain) who will give me the book
lxx
(e) Ọ ga-abụrịrị m ka i ga-enye akwụkwọ ahụ
It shall have to be me that you will give the book
(f) Ọ ga-abụrịrị m ka i nyere akwụkwọ ahụ
It must have been me you gave the book (i.e.since the book is returned
only through me although I can’t remember receiving it from you).
(g) Ọ ga-abụ m ka i nyere akwụkwọ ahụ.
It might be me you gave the book (i.e. it is possible you gave it to me and
possible you gave it to someone else).
In the above constructions, ọ bụrịrị/ ọga-a bụrịrị’ is stronger or more emphatic than ọ bụ/
ọ ga-abụ.
In (150), like in (149), the focused constituents are ‘gị’ (you) (150) (a-d) and ‘m’ (me)
(150) (e-g). The focusing implies ‘you’ and no-one else (as the subject and agent who are
to give me book; and ‘me’ and no-one else (as me indicates object/beneficiary who is to
be given the book. As explained in (149), the -rịrị inflexion places more emphasis on the
focused constituent and with semantic implications derived from context and tone. (150)
(a) implies ‘I think I heard it said that you are the one who would give me the book’; (b)
has two connotations thus; ‘it might be you, who knows, who will give me the book’,
and, ‘it is your responsibility to give me the book’; (c) implies ‘it is compulsorily you or
necessarily you’ who will give me the book. (d) interprets as: ‘it is certain it’s you/it is
unavoidably you’ who will give me the book; (e) means ‘I must be the one’ you will you
give the book. While sentence (f) is interpreted as; ‘it’s most likely I’m the one’ you gave
the book since it is returned only through me although I can’t remember receiving it from
you, (g) means ‘it is possible it is to me’ you gave the book but I’m not convinced.
The introductory o ga-abụ (rịrị)…’ (It might be) in Igbo cleft formation is replaceable
with ‘O nwere ike bụrụ/o nwere ike ị bụ, as follows:
(151) (a) O nwere ike bụrụ Nwokedi ka anyị hụrụ n’ụzọ.
It might be Nwokedi that we saw on the way.
(b) O nwere ike ị bụ nwunye ya ka anyị ga-ahụ, n’ ụlọ.
It might be his wife we shall see at home.
lxxi
Like in declarative and interrogative statements, cleft exclamatory sentence is possible by
implication of tone in speaking and the mark (!) in writing, eg.
(152) (a) Ọga- abụrịrị Omenka bụ onye kpunuyere anyị ewu!
(It must have been Omenka who gave us a goat!)
(b) Ọga – abụ gị ka m nyere akwụkwọ ahụ!
(It might be me you gave the book!)
Example (151) (a) and (b) are largely echo statements. (a) Expresses both excitement and
disappointment thus:
Of course it is Omenka who gave us a goat.
And
Impossible, Omenka is too stingy to give us a goat.
Similarly, (b) means it is certainly you that I gave the book.
Imperative forms are also derivable from the structures but this is limited to only those in
the future tense, eg.
(c) Ọ bụrịrị gị ga-enye m akwụkwọ ahụ.
(It must be you who will give me the book)
Post-focus cleft formation is also realizable in interrogative sentences in Igbo.
This is done by placing a wh-word, equivalent at the sentences initial position as follows:
(153) (a) Gịnị ka ị chọrọ?
(What do you want?)
(b) Gịnị bụ ihe ahu / ihe ọ bụ ị chọrọ?
(What is it that you want?).
(c) Gịnị ka Omenka nyere anyị?
(What is it that Omenka gave to us?).
(d) Gịnị bụ ihe ahu / ihe ọ bụ Omenka nyere anyị?
(What is it / the thing Omenka gave to us?).
Sentences (153) (a) and (c) are simple un-emphatic and unemotive clefts. The speaker
simply wants to know what the 2nd person wants, and the thing which Omenka gave to
them respectively. Example (153) (b) and (d) are emotive and emphatic. Usually, all the
lxxii
words especially the interrogative heads and their cognates are stressed. Contextually
they are rhetorical questions and have the underlying meaning:
(b) What is it that you want that I cannot give you; or, that I have not provided for you?
and
(d) What is it that Omenka gave to us that we should be so servile to him?
Consequently, (153) (b) and (d) may be considered as all-focus interrogative cleft
sentences.
Further examples are:
(154) (a) Onye bụ onye unu chọrọ?
(Who is the one (whom) you wanted / looked for?).
(b) Ebee bụ ebe unu chọrọ?
Where’s the place (which) you wanted /which place did you search?
(c) Gịnị bụ ihe unu chọrọ?
What’s the thing (which) you wanted?
(d) Mgbe ole bụ mgbe unu chọrọ?
When is it you wanted?
(e) Etu ole bụ etu unu chọrọ?
How is it that you wanted?
(f) Nke ole bụ nke unu chọrọ?
Which was the one (which) you wanted?
(g) Onye bụ onye unu na-chọ?
Who’s the person you’re looking for?
lxxiii
The above related examples are as they relate to the kinds of interrogatives,
(154), (a), (c) and (g) are pronoun Wh-head;
(b), (d), (e) are adverbial focus wh-head; and (f) is an adjectival focus Wh-head
equivalent.
They have the implications of normal questions and further underlying rhetorical and
exclamatory interpretations.
Example:
(155) (a) onye unu chọrọ!
ebe unu chọrọ!
ihe unu chọrọ!
Unu amaghi mgbe unu chọrọ!
etu unu chọrọ!
nke unu chọrọ!
onye unu na-achọ!
That is; (b) have looked for me!
have searched those places!
You can’t have what you asked for!
have it that way!
have that one!
be looking for me!
Clefting using kedu…..? or wh-head+ka…? deletes the underlying interpretation for
the normal surface meaning e.g.
(156) onye
ebe
Kedu ihe Unu chọrọ?
mgbe
etu
lxxiv
nke
Onye
(157) Ebee
Gịnị
Mgbe ole Ka unu chọrọ?
Etu ole
Nke ole
For interrogatives (154), (156), and (157) the expected answers are also cleft (declarative)
sentence whether expressed or implied and in the structure of their respective cleft
interrogatives as follows:
(158) (a) Onyeisi bụ onye /ka anyị chọrọ.
The boss is whom we wanted.
(b) Ebea bụ ebe/ka anyị chọrọ.
Here is where we searched.
(c) Ịhụ onyeisi bụ ihe/ ka anyị chọrọ.
To see him in person is what we wanted.
(d) Ugbu a bụ mgbe/ ka anyị chọrọ.
It’s now that we searched.
(e) Ịhụ ya ihu-na-ihu bụ ihe/ ka anyị chọrọ.
To see him in person is what we wanted.
(f) Nke afọ ukwu bụ nke /ka anyị chọrọ.
The big bellied one is the one we wanted.
In sentence (158) a-f, the focus elements are the subject part. This can exist independent
of the predicate part. The focus answer elements therefore come at the sentence initial
position in correspondence with the initial position of the Wh-heads in the interrogatives.
By implication, the focus answer element may vary its position in the sentence usually to
reflect similar positions of the Wh-head interrogative as in examples below:
lxxv
(159) (a) Onye anyị chọrọ bụ onyeisi.
Whom we want is the boss.
(b) Ebe anyị chọrọ bụ bee onyeisi.
Where we want is the boss’ house.
(c) Ihe anyi chọrọ bụ ịhụ Onyeisi.
What we want is to see the boss.
or:
(160) (a) Ọ bụ Onyeisi ka / bu onye anyị chọrọ.
It is the boss we want.
(b) Ọ bụ bee Onyeisi ka / bụ ebe anyị chọrọ.
It is the boss that we want.
(c) Ọ bụ ịhụ onyeisi ka / bụ ihe anyị chọrọ.
It is to see the boss that we want.
as opposed to:
(161) (a) Anyị chọrọ ihụ Onyeisi.
We want to see the boss.
(b) Onyeisi ka / bụ onye anyi chọrọ ịhụ.
The boss is whom we want to see.
(c) Anyi chọrọ be Onyeisi.
We want the boss’house.
(d) Be Onyeisi ka / bu ebe anyi chọrọ.
The boss house is where we want.
3.1.4 Broad Focus Clefting in Standard Igbo
As noted on 2.3.2.4, broad focus clefting is the type of cleft sentence formation
that focuses on two or more constituents. The focusing is not meant to answer any
question but to provide bits of relevant information, not based on any question, but on
content of the message. Consequently, it is the type of focusing that is found in text on
prose wok. This may be said to derive from the principle that non-grammatical words, ie,
the main parts of speech of an expression or sentence are stressed when reading a text.
lxxvi
These principles of broad focus clefting and sentence stressing also translate into the Igbo
language, eg.
(162) (a) A ga - enwe Ọgbakọ ndi nhazi nke Nsukka Students Asosieshion UNN na
Fraide, Ọgost 2, 2013 na G S bildiň rum 8 n’elekere abụọ nke ehihie.
There will be a meeting of the executives of Nsukka Students Association, UNN on
Friday, August 2013 at G S building, room 2 at 2pm.
In example (162), the presence of the introductory head ‘Aga-enwe’ corresponding to the
existential phrase ‘there will be’ makes the expression a broad foucs cleft sentence. The
italicized phrases are the focus elements of the information, because they are various
complements of the introductory head. The information may be stated differently using
the clefting head ọ bụ (it + be), example;
(b) Ọ bụ n a Fraide, Ọgost 2, 2013 na G S bildiň rum 8 n’elekere abụọ nke ehihie ka
Ọgbakọ ndi nhazi Nsukka Students’ Asosieshion nke UNN ga adị
It is on Friday , 2nd August 2013 at G S building room 8 at 2pm that a meeting of the
executive of Nsukka Students’ Association will hold.
Like in example (162) (a), the italicized components of example (162) (b) are the focused
element of the sentence. In (162) (b), the introductory ‘Ọ bụ’ compel the title ‘Ọgbakọ
ndi nhazi Nsukka Students’ Asosieshion’ to move from its position in front in (162) (a) to
a position at the back.
Another example is this
(163) Ọ bụ ọnọdu dị otu a kpatara ndị Igbo ji ekwu okwu were na asị na ekele
anaghị ala ọria mana ọ na ada onye ọria obi
(It is a situation like this that makes the Igbos say that greeting does not cure a
sickness but that it calms the nerves of the sick person).
Example (163) sentence extracted from the text ‘JỤỌ M Igbo’ is another example of
broad focus cleft sentence. The italicized words are the more important words than the
lxxvii
others. They are therefore the focused constituents. Broad focus clefting using a wh-head
gives the following example extracted from ‘JỤỌ OBINNA’
(164) Ihe Obinna mere bụ na ka ọ gafere ha abụọ, o jiiri nwayọọ bamie n ime ọhịa, na
eche ka Mazị Onyido lọghchite.
(What Obinna did was that as he passed by the two, he gently went deep into the bush and
waited for Mr. Onyido to return).
Like example (162) and (163), example (164) is a broad focus cleft sentence. It is
identified by the wh-word equivalent ‘ihe’ (what) at the head of the sentence and a focus
on the italicized elements.
It is apparent from the nature of the broad focus cleft sentences exemplified above that it
is possible mostly in declarative sentence while some constructions eg (162) and (163)
with the introductory ‘A’ (there) and ‘ọ bụ’ (it is/was) can become interrogatives or
rhetorical questions by putting a question mark at the end of the sentences. Also putting
an exclamation mark converts to exclamatory sentences.
3.2 Cleft Formation in the Nsukka Dialect
Sentences of Nsukka dialect, like those of standard Igbo language, are made up of cleft
forms as transformed from their basic SVC structures. The structures are identified by
their possession of question morphems eg. The wh- word equivalents, or question phrase
eg ‘kedee’ as in ‘kedu’ cleft. They are illustrated with reference to the cleft types namely
pseudo cleft, all-focus cleft and broad focus cleft, and drawing some reference also from
the example on standard Igbo.
3.2.1 Pseudo-Cleft in the Nsukka Dialect
Pseudo-cleft sentence, which makes explicit the division between given and new
parts of a sentence, occur in the sentences of Nsukka dialect as follows:
(165) (a) Ọ bụ ịhwụ Onyishi ihu n’ ihu bә ihe anyә chọrә.
(It is to see the boss face to face that we want).
(b) Ịhwụ Onyishi ihu n’ ihe bә ihe anyә chọrә.
(To see the boss face to face is what we want).
(c) Ka anyә hwụma Onyishi ihu n’ ihu bә ihe anyә chọrә.
lxxviii
(That we see the boss face to face is what we want).
(d) Ihe anyә chọrә bә ihwụ Onyishi ihu n’ ihu.
(What we want is to see the boss face to face).
(e) Anyә chọrә ịhwụ Onyishi ihu n’ ihu.
(We want to see the boss in person).
(f) Ọ bә ịhwụ Onyishi ihu n’ ihu bә anyә chọrә.
(It is to see the boss in person that we want).
(g) Ịhwụ Onyishi ihu n’ ihu bә anyә chọrә.
(To see the boss in person is what we want).
(h) Ịhwụ Onyishi ihu n’ ihu ọ bә ya be anyә chọrә?
(To see the boss in person is it what we want?)
(j) Ihe anyә chọrә ọ bә ohwụhụ Onyishi ihu n’ ihu?
(What we want. Is it to see the boss face to face?)
Pseudo-cleft sentences (165) are structurally and overtly declarative. (165) (a), (b) and (d)
can also pass as imperative statements depeading on tone and context.
Other examples of pseudo cleft sentence are:
(166) (a) (Ọ bә) ọkwụkwụ ụdo bә ke Okonkwo shi je nwụ.
(It is by) hanging that Okonkwo died.
(b) Ke okonkwo shi je nwụ bә shite n’ ikwugbu onwo ye.
(How Okonkwọ died was by hanging himself).
(c) Ke ọ gbalaga akaja bә o jirә je gbә onwo ye.
(To escape humiliation was why he killed himself).
3.2.2. Post-Focus Cleft in the Nsukka Dialect
Post-focus cleft constructions in Nsukka dialect include the following examples
with their basic forms:
(167) i, Kedee onye ị hụrụ? - Who did you see?
ii. Ị hụrụ onye? - You saw who?
Question introduced by ‘kedee’ is a different structure. ‘kedee’ marks wh- question.
(168) (a) i. I jeko wee? - You are going where?
lxxix
ii. Wee bә i jeko? - Where are you going?
iii. Mbә ole bә i jeko? - Which place are you going?
(b) i. Ị latarә mgbә ole? - You returned when?
ii. Mgbe ole bә ị latarә? -when did you returned?
(c) i. Agaa bә ọ ha?
ii Ọ ha agaa? - How big / large is it?
(d) Gedә unu? - Where are you?
(e) Gәnә bә eha gә? - What is your name
(f) Ọ bә mọọ gәnә bә ijәrә je bịanә? Is it for what reason that you came?
(g) i. Ị bә onye - You are who?
ii. Onye bә i bә? - Who are you?
(h) Ọ bә onye jerә ashụa? - Who went to the market?
These question morphemes occur at sentence initial position and can also occur at the
middle or sentence final position. Other examples in cleft question formation are:
(169) i. Ị hụrә onye? – You saw who?
ii. Onye bә ị hụrә? – Who did you see?
iii. Kedee onyә ị hụrә – Whom did you see? (kedu cleft question)
(169) have the same basic meaning. Every basic question in Nsukka dialect has the same
basic meaning. Every basic question in Nsukka dialect has other two variants eg direct
cleft and kedu cleft. but they differ in emphasis, eg.
(170) (a) Basic questions:
i Ị bә onye? - (Who are you?)
ii Ị hụrә onye? - (Who did you see?)
iịi. Ị chọrә onye? - (Who do you want?)
(b) Direct cleft:
i Onye bә ị hụrә ? – (Whom did you see?)
ii Onye nwụrә? - (Who died?)
iii Onye gbәrә madụ? - (Who killed somebody?)
lxxx
(c) Kedu cleft question:
i. Kedee Onyә ị hụrә? - (Whom did you see?)
ii Kedee onye nwәrә - (Who died?)
iii Gedee onye gbәrә madu? – (Who killed somebody?)
iv Kedee onyә ị hụrә?- (who died?)
The above examples show that the cleft formation can appear both with and without a
Wh-word like the Wh-relatives. The cleft construction can also appear both with and
without a Wh-word: eg.
(d) Ọ bә Eze bə onye anyә hụrә.
(It is Eze who/that we saw).
in declarative statement with ọ bụ -------,( it is / was e t c), onwe/ ọ dị ---,(there is / was e
t c), and the Wh - elements equivalents, onye, ebe, nke, etu, mgbe/ oge , ihe ( ie who,
where, which, how, when e t c ). These show that relative clauses also reflect in Nsukka
dialect as cleft formations. Examples are:
(171) (a) Ọ bә anyә (bә ndә ) hụrịa n’ụzọ
(It is we that saw him /her /it on the way)
(b) Ọ bә ya bә onye anyә hụrә n’ụzọ.
(It is him /her /it that we saw on the way)
(c) Ọ bә n’ụzọ bә anyә hụrịa.
(It is on the way that we saw him/her/it)
(172) (a) Ọ bә Omenka (bә onye) kpịịrә anyә ewu.
(It is Omenka that/who gave us a goat)
(b) Ọ bә mkpịị b’Omenka kpịịrә anyә ewu.
(It is giving that Omenka gave us a/the goat)
(c) Ọ bә anyә bә ndә Omenka kpịịrә ewu.
( It is us that/whom Omenka gave a goat)
(d) Ọ bә ewu bә ihe Omenka kpịịrә anyә .
(It is a goat that/which Omenka gave to us)
(173) (a) Ọ bә gә (bә onye) j’anә m ekwụkwọ n’ ụhwa.
lxxxi
( It is you who will give me the book).
(b) Gә (b’o bә) jeko je nә m ekwụkwọ n’ ụhwa.
(You it is /are the one who will give me the book)
(c) Ọ bә ọnәnә bә ị ja- anә m ekwụkwọ n’ụhwa.
(It is giving that you will give me the book)
(d) Ọ bә m bә onye ị ja- anә ekwụkwọ n’ụhwa.
(It is (to) me that you will give the book)
(e) Ọ bә ekwụkwọ n’ụhwa bә ihe ịja-anә m.
(It is the book that/which you will give (to) me)
(f) Ọ bә ekwụkwọ onuhwe bә nke ye bә ị ja- anә m.
(It is that very book that/which you shall/are to give to me)
(174) (a) Ọ ja-abәrәrә Omenka bә onye kpәịrә anyә ewu.
It must have been Omenka who conceded/gave us a goat (i.e. considering
that it is his usual practice to give us a goat)
(b) Ọ ja-abәrәrә ewu b’ Omenka kpәrә anyә.
(It must have been a goat that Omenka gave to us (i.e. considering that he
has so many goats)
(c) Ọ ja-abә ewu b’Omenka kpәrә/ja-akpәi anyә.
It might be/shall be a goat that Omenka gave/shall give to us (i.e. it is
uncertain but likely considering that the constitution says so)
(d) Ọ ja-abәrәrә anyә b’Omenka kpәrә ewu
(It must have been to us that Omenka gave a goat e.g. since everyone else had
been given)
(e) Ọ ja-abә anyә b’ Omenka kpәrә ewu.
It may/might be us that Omenka gave a goat (i.e. because it is his custom to
honour such an invitation as ours with such a gift.
(175) (a) Ọ ja-abәrәrә gә b’ ekwuru j’ anә m ekwụkwọ n’ ụhwa.
It must have been you that was said would give me the book (i.e. I
think I remember hearing it said)
(b) Ọ ja-abә gә j’anә m ekwụkwọ n’ụhwa.
lxxxii
It might be you (i.e. who knows) that will give me the book.
It shall be you (i.e. your responsibility) who (that) will give me the book.
(c) Ọ ja-abәrәrә gә ((bә onye) j’anә m ekwụkwọ n’ụhwa.
It must be /has to be you (i.e. compulsorily) who will give me the
book.
(d) Ọ bәrәrә gә bә onye j’anә m ekwụkwọ n’ụhwa.
It is you (i.e. unavoidable /I’m certain) who will give me the book .
(e) Ọ ja-abәrәrә m bә ị j’anә ekwụkwọ n’ụhwa.
It shall have to be me that you will give the book.
(f) Ọ ja-abәrәrә m bә ị nәrә ekwụkwọ n’ụhwa.
It must have been me; you gave the book (i.e. since the book is returned
only through me although I can’t remember receiving it from you)
(g) Ọ ja abә m bә ị nәrә ekwụkwọ n’ụhwa.
It might be me you gave the book ( i.e. it is possible you gave it to me and
possible you gave it to someone else).
Clefting with introductory ‘o nwere ike’ (It might be) produces the following examples:
(176) (a) O nwәrә ike bәrә Nwokedә b’anyә hụrә n’uzọ.
(It might be Nwokedi that we saw on the way).
(b) O nwәrә ike ị bә nwunye ye bә anyә j’ahwụ n’uzọ.
(It might be his wife that we shall see on the way).
lxxxiii
3.2.3 All Focus in the Nsukka Dialect
Some sentences in the dialet can have their focus on the entire clouse as in the
following all focus- cleft examples:
(177) (a) Gәnә bә ihe ọ bә ị chorә?
What is it that you want?
(b) Gәnә bә ihe ọ bә Omenka nyerә anyә?
What is it that Omenka gave to us?
(c) Oge /mgb’ole bụ oge/mgbe unu ja-amәta idi nә madụ ihe?
When is it that you will learn to tolerate one another?
(d) Agaa bә /.Gedee kә ị chọrә ka a rәma ọrụ n’ụhwa?
How is it (that) you want the work to be bone?
(e) Nke ole bә ụlọ (bә nke) gә n’ụlọ ndә n’ụhwa?
Which of the houses is (it that is) yours?
(f) (Kedee) onye sәrә ne gә anәkogә mәnyi tọbә iko?
Who is it /he that said you would not have peace?
(g) Gedә ihe/ gәnә bә ne ị nәgә anabata ndụmọdụ?
Why is it / what is the reason that you wouldn’t listen to advice?
(178) (a) Onye bә onyә unu chọrә?
Who’s the one (whom) you wanted?
(b) Wee bә mbәunu chọrә
Where’s the place (which) you want?/ which place did you search?
(c) Gәnә bә ihә unu chọrә?
What’s the thing (which) you wanted?
(d) Mgb’ole bә mgbә unu chọrә?
When was the time (which) you wanted?
(e) Agaa bә kә unu chọrә?
How’s the way (which) you wanted?
(f) Nkә ole bә nkә unu chọrә?
Which was the one (which) you wanted?
lxxxiv
The declarative counterparts of the above interrogative all-focus cleft sentences
include the following examples:
(179) (a) Onwere ndә n’enwe chi-ọma.
There are those who are fortunate.
(b) Onwegә/ Odәgә onye n’ime hә kwәrә eziokwu.
There was no-one among them who spoke the truth.
(c) Onwerә ewu Omenka kpịịrә anyә.
There is a goat which Omenka gave to us.
(d) Onwegә /odәgә krismasә ọ ganәgә akpiә anyә ewu.
There is no Christmas that he does not give us a goat.
(e) Onwerә onye ga-amagә n’ihe dә njọ dә njọ?
Is there any one who doesn’t know that what is evil is evil?
(180) (a) i. Mbәnәme bә mbe ihә iberedu n’uhwa merә
Here/ this is where the accident happened.
ii. Mbe ihә iberedu n’ụhwa merә bә mbenәme.
Where the accident happened is here/this place.
(b) i. Mbenәme bә mbe e lirә onye chọfәtarә ama anyә.
Here/ this place is where the founder of our clan were buried.
ii. Mbe e lirә onye chọfәtarә ama anyә bә nwabe.
Where/ the place the founder of our clan was buried is here.
The semantic explanations for the cleft sentences under standard Igbo also explain the
above cleft examples under Nsukka dialect.
Examples (167-176) have their focus on the single elements of interest indicated as in the
declarative forms, or implied as the interrogatives. The declarative forms are emphatic
with the cognate pronouns than without them. Sentences (177) and (178) are emotive,
emphatic and rhetorical with the inclusion of the cognate pronouns. The substitution of
the cognate with ‘ka’ or with neither of them makes them (more) formal but limiting to a
single constituents or clause, ie post-focus or pseudo-cleft interrogative structures, eg.
Genә bә ihe (ọ bә) Omenka nyerә anyә?
lxxxv
Gịnị ka Omenka nyere anyị?
Gedә ihe/ gәnә bә ne ị nәgә anabata ndụmọdụ?
Kedu ka / gịnị ka ị naghị anabatara ndụmọdụ?
lxxxvi
3.2.4 Broad Focus Clefting in the Nsukka Dialect
As broad focus clefting is observable in the international characteristics of
languages when discussions and conversation are carried on, so also it is observable in
Nsukka dialect of the Igbo language. During the transactions, prominence is given to
certain words and not given to others in the sentences which include cleft sentences. In
the cleft sentences, and of course, all the sentences, the focused words are the ones
considered to be important to answer predetermined tacit questions in the context. In the
discussion, the clefting heads ‘Ọ bә’ (it is / was), aje- / eje (there …) and the wh- word
equivalents are followed by some constituents of the sentences which are focused. The
following sentences are examples:
(181) Ọ bụ onye kpatarә nkә ahәhә sәrә ngwere bianә ya ọrә.
(It is the person who fetched ant-infested fire-wood that asked the lizard to be his
guest).
(182) O nwerә akәkọ m ja- akọnә unu. Ọ bә akәko ihe merә eme. Ihe merә mgbә ụzọ dị
n’ ukwu ụkwa; mgbe elә bә alә ọsa; mgbe ngwere dә naa naa; mgbe ọ bụ anyịnyә
igwe ne ọba ji ne ndә nwunye bә eji ama ọgerәnyә.
(There is a story I shall tell you. It is a story of what actually happened. What
happened when home steads were shaded by bread-fruit trees, when tree tops were
ground for the squirrel, when lizards were found in ones and twos, when bicycle
and yam barns and wives were the status symbols of a wealthy man).
lxxxvii
CHAPTER FOUR
SUMMARY OF THE FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION
4.0 Introduction
In this research work the researcher discovered that the word order of the Igbo
sentences is in agreement with the SVC-NP INFL VP. The researcher also observed that
transformational generative syntax also applies to the Igbo language to yield a
configuration and modification of the SVC-NP INFL VP basic structure, and that cleft
sentence constructions are products of the transformational modification. It was also
found that the governing principles of cleft and syntax formation extend beyond.
Standard Igbo language to include the core dialect of Nsukka. Consequently, the Nsukka
dialect in some respects aligns with the standard Igbo language and with the English
language and differs in other respect as regards cleft and syntax construction, and with
relevance to the research questions.
Firstly cleft formation in standard Igbo language and Nsukka dialect is a
focussing mechanism on a particular sentences element for emphasis. In both the
language and dialect under study, the focussing and consequently clefting have
introductory elements or determinants.
The elements Ọ bụ (ghị) / Ọ bә (gә), Ọ dị (ghị) / ọ dә (gә); onwe (ghi)/onwe (gә)
Ọ ga-abụ (rịrị) / Ọ ji-abә (rәrә) and their other inflectional forms are placed at the head of
the syntactic structure or emebeded in the structure with the verb ‘be’ so placed to mark
the sentence component to be focussed
Secondly cleft sentences in standard Igbo, likewise in Nsukka dialect, are analyzed and
explained on the basis of clefting heads in realtion to the focused constituent. The clefting
heads of interrogative sentences indicate the constituent to be focused in the declarative
answer. But in independent declarative statements, the element to be focused pre-
emptively imply its interrogative Wh-head. The Igbo Wh-head equivalent ‘kedu’ is
undefined but gives rise to a specific Wh-word when used with a Wh-head cognate.
lxxxviii
Thirdly, context and tone guide the analysis and explanation of cleft
constructions. For instance, the wh-words equivalents in Igbo as question words and as
relative pronouns are differentiated by tone. Surface and deep structures of cleft
expressions, written or spoken, and meaning are also differentiated and dertermined by
context and tone.
The Nsukka dialect and the standard Igbo ‘dialect’ are connected by virtue of
their common origin: The Igbo Language, which is the matrix of the variety of its
dialects. Both of them align with the theory of universal grammar structurally and
semantically. Their sentences are constructed following the same syntactic SVC or NP
INFL VP order and their permutations
Similarly, cleft sentence formation in standard Igbo and Nsukka dialect are of the
same lexical composition and syntactic order. The cleft indicatators:’ọ bụ’ (it is); onwere/
ọ dị (there is); etu (how); and the phrasal Wh- equivalents eg ebee/kedu ebe (where?);
mgbe/kedu mgbe (when) onye/kedu onye (who?); ihe/kedu ihe (what?) ; kedu nke
(which?) etc introduce cleft sentences by taking initial positions followed by the
constituent word(s) of focus in the sentences.
In declarative statements fronted with a wh-equivalent relative pronoun, the
focusing element ‘bu’ (be) is suspended at the middle position after the main verb
followed by the focused constituent.
In both the standard Igbo and Nsukka dialect of the language, highly emphatic,
emotive and figurative cleft structures are achieved through a concurrent or reflexive
placement of the wh-head equivalent and their corresponding cognate pronouns.
Yet another important relationship between the dialect of the standard Igbo language and
that of Nsukka is the reflection of the semantic imports on the sentence formations –
basic and cleft. The sentences of both the standard Igbo and the dialect may have both
surface and underling meanings. This conflict is resolved by tone verbally and by context
and intuition literally. This is evident in rhetorical questions and ironical expressions.
One of the differences between the dialect of Nsukka and the standard Igbo in the
syntax of cleft formation lies in the syntax of their interrogative and declarative
sentences. In Nsukka dialect, the element of focus is usually not preceded by the cleft
indicators ‘onye’ (who/whom) and ‘ọ bụ’ (it is/ was) contrary to usage in standard Igbo.
lxxxix
The indicators are either entirely left out and the focused element taking the front position
of the sentence; or the verb ‘to be’ of the indicator, where it applies, is placed next to the
focused constitutent.
A second difference between the standard Igbo and Nsukka dialect syntax of cleft
formation is found in the use of the question head ‘kedu’. In standard Igbo, the use of
‘kedu’ is frequent whereas Nsukka dialect, the base form is preferred to clefting with
‘kedu’ clefting with the ‘kedu’ version 'kedee’ is rather for emphasis in Nsukka dialect.
Consequently, the kedu-cleft in standard Igbo is basically a wh-cleft in Nsuka dialect and
their semantic implications are interpretable on the basis of context and tone as
interrogative or rhetorical statements.
A third difference is in cleft constructions with ‘olee’-phrase, an alternative to kedu-cleft
formation. In standard Igbo, the order of the ‘olee’-phrase is ‘olee’ followed by a wh-
question morpheme eg. ‘olee mgbe’ (which time, ie when?). These phrases may come at
the initial position of interrogative statements or they may be preceded in some cases by
‘ọ bụ’? (is it/was it). In Nsukka dialect, the order of the ‘olee’ phrase is ‘olee’ preceded
by a wh-morpheme e.g, ‘mgb’ ole’, ‘otu ole’, and their position at the head of the
sentence is not usually contested for by ‘ọ bụ…?’
4.1 Conclusion
The syntax and cleft formation in the foreign languages of reference are
considerably the same. The Igbo language, by inference, shares the same similarities with
and upholds the theory of transformational grammar. On the other hand, the dialect of
Nsukka, a component of the Igbo language, and by tentative analogy and reasoning, all
dialects of the Igbo language concur with the standard Igbo in rules for syntax and cleft
formation.
Their word combinations and transformations are alike and their meanings consistent.
However, the meanings deep or surface of the cleft forms, even the basic forms
cannot possibly be generalized and conclusive especially in the case of Nsukka dialect
depending on the fact of scarcity of literature and on the local mass ignorance about the
concepts of the study.
xc
4.2 Recommendations
The Igbo language is the ancestral heritage of the Igbo people and their cultural
identity which principally distinguishes them from other ethnic and language groups.
Evidently and unfortunately, the language is tending towards the archives of historical
languages as predicted by the African union that it might go into extinction in the near
future. To forestall the fulfilment of this dangerous prediction, the Igbo language needs to
be preserved, nurtured, overhauled, uniquely standardised and sustained strictly within its
lexical and structural ambits.
Cleft structures should be studied and treated in this language development
project as it pertains to the representative Nsukka dialect and dialects that make up the
language.
In general, the researcher recommends the following:
The Igbo language should be reengineered and up-graded to the standard that will
give it a pride of place as a means of communication among languages. This will boost
the lingua-cultural status of the Igbo people competitively with the Hausas and the
Yorubas and English.
Linguists with the support of other stake holders in education should study the different
aspects of the Igbo language including sentence clefting as spoken by Nsukka community
and other Igbo dialectal communities. With their research findings, they should produce
textbooks that comprehensively and comparatively treat cleft sentence formations. This
project is a stepping stone and a reference material for further and more in depth
researches in cleft structures in Igbo syntax for the text and subsequent project and to
thus overcome the limiting challenges that beset this pioneer work on the topic.
xci
REFERENCES
Agbedo, C.U (2000). General Linguistics. An Introductory Reader. Nsukka: ACE Resources Konsult.
Anagbogu, P.N, Mbah, B.M. & Eme, C.A. (2010) Introduction to Linguistics. Awka. Amaka Dreams Ltd.
Asogwa, P, Nwachukwu R and Nweke N. (1989). ‘Error Analysis of Written Igbo Composition in Junior Secondary School in Awak Local Goernment Area.’ B.A. (Ed) project University of Nigeria Nsukka.
Atterton, D. (1990). Language as Form and Pattern: Grammar and its Categories. Ed Collinge N.E. Routledge. London.
Boulakia, G. (1978). Phonosyntaxe: Etudes Psychacoustiques et Linguistiques. Thése University Paris V11.
Bussmann, H. (1996). Routledgte Dictionary of Languages and Linguistics, Trauth and Kazzazik (eds) Routledge. London and New York.
Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic Structures. The Hague: Mouton.
Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the Theory of Syntax, Cambridge, M.A. MIT Press.
Composition in Junior Secondary School in Awka Local Government Area’. B.A (Ed) project University of Nigeria Nsukka.
Craig, C. (1977). The Structures of Jacaltec. London: Texas Press.
Demuth, K. (1990). ‘Subject Topic and the Sesotho Passive.’ Journal of Child Language. Vol. 6 page 84. Ekwudu, S.E (1986). Ụtasụsụ ọgbara ọhụrụ Maka Sekọndịrị na Kọleeji Edukeshọn, Onitsha. Educational Publishers (Nig) Ltd.
Greenbaum, Leech, Quirk and Svatvic (1972), A Grammar of Contemporary English, Longman Group Limited, London, England.
Gundel, J. (1976). The role of Topic and Comment in Linguistic Theory. Distributed by the the Indian University Lingistics Clubn, Bloomington.
Jesperseen, O. (1937). Analytic Syntax. London: Allen and Unwin.
Lambrecht, K. (1994). Information Structure and Sentence Form. Cambridge University Press.
Lapolla R, Robert D and Valin (jr) V (1997). Syntax: Structure, Meaning and Function. Cambridge University Press.
Little, P. (1973). Oral and Written Communication, London. Longman Group Limited. Longman Group Limited, London, England.
Lyons, J. (1968). Introduction to Theoretical Linguistics. Cambridge: C.U.P
Mbah, B. (2006). GB Syntax: Theory and Application to Igbo. Enugu ANA: CRS Chapter
xcii
Ndimele, O. (1999). Morphology and Syntax. University of Port Harcourt. Emhai Printing and Publishing Company Ltd.
Nwachukwu, P. (1995). Tone in Igbo Syntax. Nsukka. Igbo Language Association.
Nwadike, I.U (1981). ‘A Development of Written Igbo as a School Subject 1966-1980: A Historical Approach’. M.Ed Degree Thesis, State University of New York, Buffalo, USA.
Nwankwo, S.C (1995). An Analysis of Errors in Written Igbo Language Composition of Senior Secondary School Student Unpublished M.A Project University of Nigeria Nsukka.
Ogbuehi, (2004) The use of English Unit School of General Studies UNN
Palmer, F. (1981) Language Arts and Discipline CUP.
Prince, E.F. (1981). Topicalization, Focus Movement and Yiddish Movement: a Progmatic Differentiation. New York Academic press.
Radford, A. (1981) Transformational Syntax Cambridge: C.U.P
Radford, A. (2004). Minimalist Syntax: Exploring the Structure of English. Cambridge University press.
Riemsdijk, H. (1986). Introduction to the Theory of Grammar London. Mit Press.
Rossi, M. (1974). ‘Lintonation predicative dans Lesphrases Transformées pass Permutation’, Linguistics 103, 54-84.
Strickland, R. (1957). The Language Art in Elementary School. Boston: D.C Heath and Co.
Trask, R. (1993) A Dictionary of Grammantical Terms in Linguistics, Routledge London England.
Tregidgo, O. (1979). English Gammar in Practice. London. Chancer Press Ltd.
![UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA, NSUKKA 1 · IGBO/HAUSA], University of Nigeria Nsukka [BA/ED IGBO/LINGUISTICS], University ... Dr E.E. Mbah UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA NSUKKA [B.A(ED)], UNIVERSITY](https://static.documents.pub/doc/80x56/5b8215817f8b9a2b678dcc3a/university-of-nigeria-nsukka-1-igbohausa-university-of-nigeria-nsukka-baed.jpg)
