References

Adger, David & Gillian Ramchand. 2003. Predication and equation. Linguistic Inquiry 34. 325–359.10.1162/002438903322247515Search in Google Scholar

Augustin, Maryanne. 2007. Topic and Focus in Swahili. GIALens: Electronic Notes Series 1. 1–12.Search in Google Scholar

Benveniste, Émile. 1966 [1960]. ‘Etre’ et ‘avoir’ dans leurs fonctions linguistiques. In Émile Benveniste (ed.), Problèmes de linguistique générale, 187–207. Paris: Gallimard.Search in Google Scholar

Biloa, Gaston & Francine Fotso. 2017. The conditional mood in Ghomala. Studies in African Linguistics 46(1–2). 143–156.10.32473/sal.v46i1.107247Search in Google Scholar

Bittner, Maria. 2001. Topical referents for individuals and possibilities. Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT) 11. 36–55.10.3765/salt.v11i0.2854Search in Google Scholar

Bonami, Olivier & Daniele Godard. 2008. Lexical semantics and pragmatics of evaluative adverbs. In Louise McNally & Chris Kennedy (eds.), Adverbs and adjectives: Syntax, semantics and discourse, 274–304. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780199211616.003.0011Search in Google Scholar

Bowers, John. 1993. The syntax of predication. Linguistic Inquiry 24. 591–656.Search in Google Scholar

Büring, Daniel & Katharina Hartmann. 1995. All right!. In Uli Lutz & Jürgen Pafel (eds.), On extraction and extraposition in German, 179–211. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/la.11.07burSearch in Google Scholar

Büring, Daniel. 2016. (Contrastive) Topic. In Caroline Féry & Shinichiro Ishihara (eds.), The Oxford handbook of information structure, 64–85. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199642670.013.002Search in Google Scholar

Cao, Zhiyun. 2008. Hanyu fangyan dituji [Linguistic atlas of Chinese dialects]. Beijing: The Commercial Press.Search in Google Scholar

Chappell, Hilary (ed.). 2001. Sinitic grammar: Synchronic and diachronic perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780198299776.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Chappell, Hilary. 2015. Diversity in Sinitic languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198723790.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Chen, Jun. 2017. Towards a copular approach to clefts: Evidence from diachronic syntax. European Summer School in Logic, Language & Information (ESSLLI) 2017. 84–95.Search in Google Scholar

Chen, Jun. 2019. Locus of the exhaustiveness reading in Chinese cleft sentences. Paper presented at the “Exhaustivity in questions and answers – experimental and theoretical approaches” workshop, University of Tübingen.Search in Google Scholar

Cheng, Lisa. 2008. Deconstructing the shi … de construction. The Linguistic Review 25(3–4). 235–266.10.1515/TLIR.2008.007Search in Google Scholar

Cheng, Lisa & Luis Vicente. 2013. Verb doubling in Mandarin Chinese. Journal of East Asian linguistics 22. 1–37.10.1007/s10831-012-9095-6Search in Google Scholar

Constant, Noah. 2014. Contrastive topic: Meanings and realizations. Amherst: University of Massachusetts dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Declerck, Renaat. 1988. Studies on copular sentences, clefts and pseudo-clefts. Brussels: Leuven University Press.10.1515/9783110869330Search in Google Scholar

Den Dikken, Marcel. 2006. Relators and linkers: The syntax of predication, predicate inversion, and copulas. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/5873.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Den Dikken, Marcel. 2013. Predication and specification in the syntax of cleft sentences. In Katharina Hartmann & Tonjes Veenstra (eds.), Cleft structures, 35–70. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/la.208.02dikSearch in Google Scholar

Djamouri, Redouane. 2001. Markers of predication in Shang bone inscriptions. In Hilary Chappell (ed.), Sinitic grammar, 143–171. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780198299776.003.0006Search in Google Scholar

É. Kiss, Katalin. 1998. Identificational focus versus information focus. Language 74. 245–273.10.1353/lan.1998.0211Search in Google Scholar

Ebert, Christian, Cornelia Ebert & Stefan Hinterwimmer. 2014. A unified analysis of conditionals as topics. Linguistics and philosophy 37(5). 353–408.10.1007/s10988-014-9158-4Search in Google Scholar

Eide, Kristin & Tor Afarli. 1999. The syntactic disguises of the predication operator. Studia Linguistica 53. 155–181.10.1111/1467-9582.00043Search in Google Scholar

Erlewine, Michael. 2016. The semantics of the Mandarin focus marker shi. Paper presented at the European Association for Chinese Linguistics 9, University of Stuttgart.Search in Google Scholar

Escure, Genevieve. 1993. Focus, topic particles and discourse markers in the Belizean Creole continuum.In Francis Byrne &Donald Winford (eds.), Focus and grammatical relations in Creole languages, 233–248. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/cll.12.17escSearch in Google Scholar

Faarlund, Jan Terje & Volker Gast. 2006. From deixis to discourse: The development of focus marking in dialects of Chiapas Zoque. Paper presented at Syntax of the World’s Languages, Lancaster University.Search in Google Scholar

Gao, Mingkai. 1948. Hanyu yufalun [Thesis on Chinese grammar]. Beijing: Commercial Press.Search in Google Scholar

Geist Ljudmilla. 2007. Predication and equation in copular sentences: Russian vs. English. In: Comorovski Illeana & Klaus von Heusinger (eds.), Existence: Semantics and syntax, 79–105. Dordrecht: Springer.10.1007/978-1-4020-6197-4_3Search in Google Scholar

Geist, Ljudmila. 2011. Indefiniteness and specificity: Lexical marking and information-structural conditions. PhD diss., Habilitationsschrift. Stuttgart: University of Stuttgart.Search in Google Scholar

Grano, Thomas. 2012. Mandarin hen and universal markedness in gradable adjectives. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 30. 513–565.10.1007/s11049-011-9161-1Search in Google Scholar

Gu, Yang. 2008. Shitai, shizhi lilun yu hanyu shijian canzhao [Studies of tense, aspect and Chinese time reference]. In YangShen & Shengli Feng (eds.), Dangdai yuyanxue lilun he hanyu yanjiu [Contemporary linguistic theories and related studies of Chinese], 97–119. Beijing: Commercial Press.Search in Google Scholar

Gussenhoven, Carlos. 1984. On the grammar and semantics of sentence accents. Dordrecht: Foris.10.1515/9783110859263Search in Google Scholar

Gutzmann, Daniel. 2015. Use-conditional meaning: Studies in multidimensional semantics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198723820.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Gutzmann, Daniel, Katharina Hartmann & Lisa Matthewson. 2017. Verum focus is verum, not focus: Cross-linguistic evidence. Manuscript, University of Cologne.Search in Google Scholar

Gutzmann, Daniel & Elena Castroviejo Miro. 2011. The dimensions of verum. In Olivier Bonami & Patricia Cabredo-Hofherr (eds.), Empirical issues in syntax and semantics 8, 143–165. Paris: Colloque de Syntaxe et Sémantique à Paris.Search in Google Scholar

Haiman, John. 1978. Conditionals are topics. Language 54. 565–589.10.1353/lan.1978.0009Search in Google Scholar

Halliday, Michael. 1967. Notes on theme and transitivity in English. Journal of linguistics 3(1). 37–81.10.1017/S0022226700012949Search in Google Scholar

Hara, Yurie. 2006. Japanese discourse items at interfaces. Newark, DE: University of Delaware dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Hedberg, Nancy. 2000. The referential status of clefts. Language 76(4). 891–920.10.2307/417203Search in Google Scholar

Hengeveld, Kees. 1992. Non-verbal predication: Theory, typology, diachrony. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110883282Search in Google Scholar

Higgins, Richard. 1979. The pseudo-cleft construction in English. New York: Garland.Search in Google Scholar

Hiraiwa, Ken & Shinichiro Ishihara. 2012. Syntactic metamorphosis: Clefts, sluicing, and in-situ focus in Japanese. Syntax 15(2). 142–180.10.1111/j.1467-9612.2011.00164.xSearch in Google Scholar

Höhle, Tilman. 1992. Über Verum-Fokus im Deutschen. In Joachim Jacobs (ed.), Informationsstrucktur und Grammatik, 112–142. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.10.1007/978-3-663-12176-3_5Search in Google Scholar

Hole, Daniel. 2011. The deconstruction of Chinese shi … de clefts revisited. Lingua 121(11). 1707–1733.10.1016/j.lingua.2011.07.004Search in Google Scholar

Hole, Daniel & Malte Zimmermann. 2013. Cleft partitionings in Japanese, Burmese and Chinese. In Katharina Hartmann & Tonjes Veenstra (eds.), Cleft structures, 285–317. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/la.208.11holSearch in Google Scholar

Hu, Songbai. 2013. Ganwenhua Tongdian: Fangyan Juan [An encyclopedia of Gan culture: The dialect volume]. Nanchang: Jiangxi Renmin Chubanshe.Search in Google Scholar

Huang, James. 1998. Logical relations in Chinese and the theory of grammar. New York: Garland.Search in Google Scholar

Huang, Shi-Zhe. 2006. Property theory, adjectives, and modification in Chinese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 15. 343–369.10.1007/s10831-006-9002-0Search in Google Scholar

Jespersen, Otto. 1927. A Modern English grammar on historical principles, vol. 3: Syntax. Winter: Heidelberg.Search in Google Scholar

Jin, Dawei. 2019. Xi in Sinitic languages: the reinstatement of a new copula. Proceedings of the North American Conference on Chinese Linguistics (NACCL) 29, vol. 2, 344–362.Search in Google Scholar

Johanson, Lars. 1998. The structure of Turkic. In Lars Johanson & Éva Ágnes Csató Johanson (eds.), The Turkic languages, 30–66. London: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Kornfilt, Jaklin. 1997. Turkish. New York: Psychology Press.Search in Google Scholar

Koster, Jan. 2000. Extraposition as parallel construal. Ms, University of Groningen.Search in Google Scholar

Kuteva, Tania, Bernd Heine, Bo Hong, Haiping Long, Seongha Rhee & Heiko Narrog. 2019. World lexicon of grammaticalization. 2nd edn Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781316479704Search in Google Scholar

LaPolla, Randy. 2015. Sino-Tibetan syntax. In William Wang & Chaofen Sun (eds.), The Oxford handbook of Chinese linguistics, 45–57. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Law, Ann. 2001. A-not-A questions in Cantonese. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 13. 295–318.Search in Google Scholar

Lee, Chungmin. 2003. Contrastive topic and proposition structure. In Anna di Sciullo (ed.), Asymmetry in grammar, 345–372. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/la.57.16leeSearch in Google Scholar

Lee, Hui-Chi. 2005. On Chinese focus and cleft constructions. Hsin-Chu: National Tsing Hua University dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Leslau, Wolf. 1995. Reference grammar of Amharic. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.10.1515/9783110114263.1.8.875Search in Google Scholar

Li, Charles & Sandra Thompson. 1977. Subject and topic: A new typology. In Li Charles (ed.), Subject and topic, 457–489. New York: Academic Press.Search in Google Scholar

Li, Charles & Sandra Thompson. 1981. Mandarin Chinese: A functional reference grammar. Berkeley: University of California Press.10.1525/9780520352858Search in Google Scholar

Liu, Chen-Sheng Luther. 2010.The positive morpheme in Chinese and the adjectival structure. Lingua 120. 1010–1056.10.1016/j.lingua.2009.06.001Search in Google Scholar

Liu, Danqing. 2004. Where does topic marker come from? In Shi Feng & Zhongwei Shen (eds.), A festschrift in honor of Professor William S.Y. Wang on his seventieth birthday, 6–15. Tianjin: Nankai University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Liu, Ying & Yang Yu’an. 2016. To exhaust, or not to exhaust: An experimental study on Mandarin shi-clefts. GLOW in Asia 11, vol. 2, 103–117.Search in Google Scholar

Lohndal, Terje. 2009. The copula cycle. In Elly van Gelderen (ed.), Cyclical change, 209–242. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/la.146.13lohSearch in Google Scholar

Lohnstein, Horst. 2016. Verum focus. In Caroline Féry & Shinichiro Ishihara (eds.), The Oxford handbook of information structure, 290–313. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199642670.013.33Search in Google Scholar

Long, Haiping & Pengfei Kuang. 2017. Modern Chinese confirmative shi: Auxiliary or adverb? Functions of Language 24(3). 294–318.10.1075/fol.15018.lonSearch in Google Scholar

Lu, Wen. 2012. The syntax of the ti construction in Tunxi Hui. Hong Kong: The University of Hong Kong MPhil thesis.Search in Google Scholar

Lyons, John. 1977. Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Ma, Beijia & Rong Cai. 2006. Wenzhou fangyan cunzai dongci shi de laiyuan [The origin of the existential verb shi in Wenzhou Dialect]. Fangyan 6(3). 222–227.Search in Google Scholar

Maisak, Timur. 2012. The functions of a borrowed marker=sa in Nizh Udi. Paper presented at “Typology, Theory: Caucasus”, Boğaziçi University, Istanbul.Search in Google Scholar

Meisterernst, Barbara. 2010. Object preposing in Classical and Pre-Medieval Chinese. Journal of East Asian linguistics 19(1). 75–102.10.1007/s10831-010-9056-xSearch in Google Scholar

Mikkelsen, Line. 2005. Copular clauses: Specification, predication and equation. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/la.85Search in Google Scholar

Mikkelsen, Line. 2011. Copular clauses. In Claudia Maienborn, Klaus von Heusinger & Paul Portner (eds.), Semantics: An international handbook of natural language meaning, 1805–1829. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar

Moro, Andrea. 1997. The raising of predicates: Predicate noun phrases and the theory of clause structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511519956Search in Google Scholar

Nicolle, Steve. 2017. Conditional constructions in African languages. Studies in African Linguistics 46(1–2). 1–15.10.32473/sal.v46i1.107239Search in Google Scholar

Partee, Barbara. 1987. Ambiguous pseudo-clefts with unambiguous be. North East Linguistic Society (NELS) 16. 354–366.10.1016/0091-7435(87)90034-XSearch in Google Scholar

Patten, Amanda. 2010. Grammaticalization and the it-cleft construction. In Elizabeth Traugott & Graeme Trousdale (eds.), Gradience, gradualness and grammaticalization, 221–243. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.90.12patSearch in Google Scholar

Paul, Waltraud & John Whitman. 2008. Shi … de focus clefts in Mandarin Chinese. The Linguistic Review 25(3–4). 413–451.10.1515/TLIR.2008.012Search in Google Scholar

Percus, Orin. 1997. Prying open the cleft. North East Linguistic Society (NELS) 27. 337–351.10.1515/iabi.1997.27.3.198Search in Google Scholar

Pereltsvaig, Asya. 2008. Copular sentences in Russian. Berlin: Springer.10.1007/1-4020-5793-8Search in Google Scholar

Pollard, Carl & Ivan Sag. 1994. Head-Driven Phrase-Structure Grammar. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar

Portner, Paul & Katsuhiko Yabushita. 1998. The semantics and pragmatics of topic phrases. Linguistics & Philosophy 21(2). 117–157.10.1023/A:1005311504497Search in Google Scholar

Potts, Christopher. 2005. The logic of conventional implicatures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199273829.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Pustet, Regina. 2003. Copulas: Universals in the categorization of the lexicon. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199258505.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Rapoport, Tova. 1985. Copular constructions in Hebrew. In William H. Eilfort, et al. (eds.), CLS 21, 354–370. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Search in Google Scholar

Reeve, Matthew. 2012. Clefts and their relatives. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/la.185Search in Google Scholar

Reinhart, Tanya. 1982. Pragmatics and linguistics: An analysis of sentence topics in pragmatics and philosophy. Studia Philosophica Gandensia 27(1). 53–94.10.21825/philosophica.82606Search in Google Scholar

Sag, Ivan. 2010. English filler-gap constructions. Language 86(3). 486–545.10.1353/lan.2010.0002Search in Google Scholar

Schaffar, Wolfram & Lansun Chen. 2001. Yes-no questions in Mandarin and the theory of focus. Linguistics 39(5). 837–870.10.1515/ling.2001.036Search in Google Scholar

Schuessler, Axel. 1987. A dictionary of Early Zhou Chinese. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.Search in Google Scholar

Schwarz, Anne. 2009. Focus markers that link topic and comment. Paper presented at the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Sprachwissenshaft (DGfS), University of Osnabrück.Search in Google Scholar

Shi, Dingxu & Weifeng Han. 2013. Xici de yufahuaguocheng yu qushi [Grammaticalization of copula: Process and tendency]. Hanyu Xuexi 5. 1–12.Search in Google Scholar

Shi, Yuzhi & Jie Xu. 2001. Hanyushi shang yiwen xingshi de leixingxue zhuan bian jiqi jizhi [The process and mechanism of the typological change of the question form in the history of Chinese]. Zhongguo Yuwen 284. 454–479.Search in Google Scholar

Siegel, Muffy. 2006. Biscuit conditionals: Quantification over potential literal acts. Linguistics & Philosophy 29. 167–203.10.1007/s10988-006-0003-2Search in Google Scholar

Simpson, Andrew & Zoe Wu. 2002. From D to T-determiner incorporation and the creation of tense. Journal of East Asian linguistics 11(2). 169–209.10.1023/A:1014934915836Search in Google Scholar

Stassen, Leon. 1997. Intransitive predication. Oxford: Clarendon Press.10.1093/oso/9780198236931.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Sun, Pinjian. 2018. Mingqing gongwen yuti de yufa tezheng yanjiu [A study of the grammar characteristics of administrative language styles in Ming and Qing China]. Beijing: Beijing Language University dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Tang, Yuming. 2009. Jindai hanyu de panduan dongci xi jiqi liubian [The copula verb xi in Early Modern Chinese and its development]. Zhongshan Daxue Xuebao 6(3). 55–59.Search in Google Scholar

Teng, Shou-Hsin. 1979. Remarks on cleft sentences in Chinese. Journal of Chinese Linguistics 7. 101–112.Search in Google Scholar

Tomioka, Satoshi. 2007. Pragmatics of LF intervention effects. Journal of pragmatics 39(9). 1570–1590.10.1016/j.pragma.2007.03.002Search in Google Scholar

Tomioka, Satoshi. 2009. Why questions, presuppositions, and intervention effects. Journal of East Asian linguistics 18(4). 253–271.10.1007/s10831-009-9053-0Search in Google Scholar

Tomioka, Satoshi. 2010. Contrastive topics operate on speech acts. In Malte Zimmermann & Caroline Féry (eds.), Information structure: Theoretical, typological and experimental perspectives, 115–138. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199570959.003.0006Search in Google Scholar

Traugott, Elisabeth Closs. 1985. Conditional markers. In John Haiman (ed.), Iconicity in syntax, 289–307. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.6.14cloSearch in Google Scholar

Velleman, Dan, David Beaver, Emilie Destruel, Dylan Bumford, Edgar Onea & Liz Coppock. 2012. It-clefts are IT (inquiry terminating) constructions. Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT) 22. 441–460.10.3765/salt.v22i0.2640Search in Google Scholar

von Fintel, Kai. 1994. Restrictions on quantifier domains. University of Massachusetts dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Wang, Xu. 2011. A syntactic analysis of the Chinese cleft construction. Changsha: Hunan University MA thesis.Search in Google Scholar

Williams, Edwin. 1983. Semantic vs. syntactic categories. Linguistics and philosophy 6. 423–446.10.1007/BF00627484Search in Google Scholar

Wu, Wei. 2000. Yixian fangyan de jieci [The adpositions in Yixian Dialect]. In Rulong Li & Shuangqing Zhang (eds.), A comparative study of Southeastern Chinese dialects, 96–103. Guangzhou: Jinan University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Xie, Qiyong. 2015. Hanyu fangyan zhong de shi-ziju [The shi-sentences in Chinese dialects]. Zhongguo Fangyan Xuebao 15(1). 101–109.Search in Google Scholar

Xu, Liejiong. 2000. Topicalization in Asian languages. In Martin Everaert & Henk van Riemsdijk (eds.), The Blackwell companion to syntax, 283–322. Oxford: Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar

Xu, Liejiong & Danqing Liu. 2007. Huati de Jiegou yu Gongneng [The structure and function of topic]. Shanghai: Shanghai Education Publishing House.Search in Google Scholar

Zhan, Fangqiong & Chaofen Sun. 2013. A copular analysis of shi in the Chinese cleft construction. Language and Linguistics 14(4). 755–789.Search in Google Scholar

Zhan, Fangqiong & Elizabeth Closs Traugott. 2015. The constructionalization of the Chinese cleft construction. Studies in Language 39(2). 459–491.10.1075/sl.39.2.06zhaSearch in Google Scholar

Zhu, Dexi. 1981. Hanyu fangyan li de liangzhong fanfu wenju [Two types of alternative questions in Chinese dialects]. Zhongguo Yuwen 85(1). 1–8.Search in Google Scholar

Zhu, Yao. 1996. The focus-marking function of shi in Mandarin Chinese. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota dissertation.Search in Google Scholar