This paper asks whether there are any pseudo-cleft structures in Estonian. Grammars do not account for them, but we found fitting examples from both spoken and written usage, in particular from public speeches. Functionally, they are similar to what has been described in other languages: what-initial constructions project longer explanations and launch new topics, thereby structuring discourse and (re-)engaging participants. Since studies on pseudo-clefts in spoken interaction have revealed a high degree of structural variability even in languages that make prolific use of them, such as French and Hebrew, we suggest that they are also grammaticized in Estonian.
Apothéloz, Denis; Marie-Noëlle Roubaud 2018. Constructions pseudo-clivées. – Encyclopédie Grammaticale du Français.
http://encyclogram.fr/notx/003/003_Notice.php
Biber, Douglas; Stig Johansson; Geoffrey Leech; Susan Conrad; Edward Finegan 1999. Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.
Calabria, Virginia; Elwys De Stefani 2020. Per una grammatica situata: Aspetti temporali e multimodali dell'incrementazione sintattica. – Studi Italiani di Linguistica Teorica e Applicata 49 (3), 571–601.
Chafe, Wallace 1976. Givenness, contrastiveness, definiteness, subjects, topics, and point of view. – Subject and topic. Ed. by Charles Li. New York: Academic Press, 25–56.
Collins, Peter Craig 1991. Cleft and pseudo-cleft constructions in English. London, New York: Routledge.
Erelt, Mati 2014. Eesti keele lauseõpetus. Komplekslause. Tartu: Tartu Ülikool.
Erelt, Mati 2017. Liitlause. – Eesti keele süntaks. Toim Mati Erelt, Helle Metslang. (= Eesti keele varamu III.) Tartu: Tartu Ülikooli Kirjastus, 647–755.
Erelt, Mati; Tiiu Erelt; Enn Veldi 2012. Eesti-inglise keeleteaduse sõnastik. 2., täiendatud ja parandatud trükk. Tallinn: Eesti Keele Sihtasutus.
Günthner, Susanne 2008. Projektorkonstruktionen im Geschpräch: Pseudoclefts, die Sache ist-Konstruktionen und Extrapositionen mit -es. – Gesprächsforschung 9, 86–114.
http://www.gespraechsforschung-online.de/fileadmin/dateien/heft2008/ga-guenthner.pdf
ISK = Auli Hakulinen, Maria Vilkuna, Riitta Korhonen, Vesa Koivisto, Tarja Riitta Heinonen, Irja Alho 2004. Iso suomen kielioppi. (= Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seuran toimituksia 950.) Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura.
Halliday, Michael A. K. 1985. An introduction to functional grammar. London: Edward Arnold.
Harris, Alice C.; Lyle Campbell 1995. Historical syntax in cross-linguistic perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620553
Hennoste, Tiit 2004. Et-komplementlause kesksete põhiverbide funktsioonid eestikeelses vestluses. – Keel ja Kirjandus 7–8, 504–523, 590–609.
Henricson, Sofie; Jan Lindström 2020. „Va ja inte gillar e hennes nasala röst“: Fokusfinala utbrytningar i tal i interaktion. – Svenskans beskrivning 37: Förhandlingar vid trettiosjunde sammankomsten, Åbo 8-10 maj 2019. Red. Saara Haapamäki, Ludvig Forsman, Linda Huldén. (= Skrifter från Svenska institutionen vid Åbo Akademi nr 8.) Turku: Åbo Akademi, 96–110.
Hopper, Paul J. 2001. Grammatical constructions and their discourse origins: Prototype or family resemblance? – Applied cognitive linguistics I: Theory and language acquisition. Ed. by Martin Pütz, Susanne Niemeier, René Dirven. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 109–129.
Hopper, Paul J., Sandra Thompson 2008. Projectability and clause combining in interaction. – Crosslinguistic studies of clause combining: The multifunctionality of conjunctions. Ed. by Ritva Laury. (= Typological studies in language 80.) Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 99–123.
https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.80.06hop
Keevallik, Leelo 2000. Keelendid et ja nii et vestluses. – Keel ja Kirjandus 5, 344–358.
Keevallik, Leelo 2008. Conjunction and sequenced actions: The Estonian complementizer and evidential particle et. – Crosslinguistic studies of clause combining: The multifunctionality of conjunctions. Ed. by Ritva Laury. (= Typological studies in language 80.) Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 125–152.
https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.80.07kee
Keevallik, Leelo 2011. Pro-forms as projective devices in interaction. – Discourse Processes 48 (6), 404–431.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2011.559150
Koops, Christian; Martin Hilpert 2009. The co-evolution of syntactic and pragmatic complexity: Diachronic and crosslinguistic aspects of pseudoclefts. – Syntactic complexity: Diachrony, acqusition, neuro-cognition, evolution. Ed. by Tom Givón, Masayoshi Shibatani. (= Typological studies in language 85.) Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 215–238.
https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.85.09the
Lambrecht, Knud 2001. A framework for the analysis of cleft constructions. – Linguistics 39 (3), 463–516.
https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.2001.021
Leino, Pentti 1982. Suomen kielen lohkolause. (Suomi 124, 2.) Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura.
Lindström, Liina 2005. Finiitverbi asend lauses. Sõnajärg ja seda mõjutavad tegurid suulises eesti keeles. (= Dissertationes philologiae estonicae Universitatis Tartuensis 16.) Tartu: Tartu Ülikooli Kirjastus.
Lindström, Jan; Sofie Henricson; Martina Huhtamäki 2022. Pseudo-cleft constructions in Swedish talk-in-interaction: Turn projection and discourse organization. – Lingua 265, 103–167.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2021.103167
Maschler, Yael; Stav Fishman 2020. From multi-clausality to discourse markerhood: The Hebrew ma she- ‘what that’ construction in pseudo-cleft-like structures. – Journal of Pragmatics 159, 73–97.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2020.01.002
Maschler, Yael; Simona Pekarek Doehler; Jan Lindström; Leelo Keevallik 2021. The grammar-body interface: A cross-linguistic analysis of pseudo-cleft-like constructions in Hebrew, French, Swedish and Estonian interaction. – 17th International Pragmatics Association conference, Winterthur, 27 June – 2 July, 2021.
Müller, Gabriele M. 2007. La construction pseudo-clivée dans l’organisation d’activités complexes: questions de portée. – Cahiers de praxématique 48, 213–238.
https://doi.org/10.4000/praxematique.837
Pekarek Doehler, Simona 2011. Clause-combining and the sequencing of actions: Projector constructions in French talk-in-interaction. – Subordination in conversation: A cross-linguistic perspective. Ed. by Ritva Laury, Ryoko Suzuki. (= Studies in language and social interaction 24.) Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 103–148. https://doi.org/10.1075/slsi.24.06doe.
Prince, Ellen 1978. A comparison of wh-clefts and it-clefts in discourse. – Language 54 (4), 883–906. https://doi.org/10.2307/413238.
Quirk, Randolph; Sidney Greenbaum; Geoffrey Leech; Jan Svartvik 1985. A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.
Riegel, Martin; Jean-Christophe Pellat; René Rioul 1999. Grammaire méthodique du français. Paris: PUF.
Roubaud, Marie-Noëlle 2000. Les constructions pseudo-clivées en français contemporain. Paris: Champion.
Sahkai, Heete 2015. Demonstratives and information structure in spoken Estonian. – Information structuring of spoken language from a cross-linguistic perspective. Ed. by M. M. Jocelyne Fernandez-Vest, Robert D. Van Valin, Jr. De Gruyter Mouton, 211−236.
https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110368758-011
Sahkai, Heete; Mari-Liis Kalvik; Meelis Mihkla 2013. Prosodic effects of the information structure in Estonian. – Proceedings of International Conference Nordic Prosody XI, Tartu, 15.–17.08.2012. Ed. by Eva Liina Asu-Garcia. Peter Lang Verlag, 323−332.
Valdmets, Annika 2013. Modal particles, discourse markers, and adverbs with lt-suffix in Estonian. − Discourse markers and modal particles: Categorization and description. Ed. by Liesbeth Degand, Bert Cornillie, Paola Pietrandrea. (= Pragmatics & beyond new series 234.) Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 107−132.
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.234.05val
Vääri, Eduard; Richard Kleis; Johannes Silvet; Tiina Paet; Tuuli Rehemaa 2012. Võõrsõnade leksikon.
https://www.eki.ee/dict/vsl/index.cgi?Q=pseudo&F=M&C06=et
