Cover not available
Article published In:
English World-Wide
Vol. 37:2 (2016) ► pp.197–220

Cleft constructions in Hong Kong English

| Renmin University of China
Existing second language acquisition research converges on a picture where learners of English exhibit marked divergence from native speakers in their use of information-packaging constructions, even at advanced stages of acquisition. This study extends the investigation of these constructions to an emerging institutionalised second language variety, Hong Kong English. Based on the Hong Kong and British components of the International Corpus of English, the study examines the formal and functional properties of it-clefts and wh-clefts, revealing regional variation in a number of areas, particularly in the use of that’s why constructions. Importantly, the grammar of the contact variety is found to be shaped by the transfer of gradient grammatical rules from the substrate language, and by stratification along stylistic parameters.
Keywords: British English, variation, register, it-cleft; wh-cleft, Hong Kong English
Published online: 30 June 2016
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.37.2.07yao
References (71)
Bao, Zhiming. 2010. “A Usage-Based Approach to Substratum Transfer: The Case of Four Unproductive Features in Singapore English”. Language 861: 792–820. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Benson, Phil. 2002. “Hong Kong Words: Variation and Context”. In Kingsley Bolton, ed., Hong Kong English: Autonomy and Creativity. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 161–70.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Stig Johansson, Geoffrey Leech, Susan Conrad, and Edward Finegan. 1999. Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Bolton, Kingsley, ed. 2002. Hong Kong English: Autonomy and Creativity. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.Google Scholar
. 2003. Chinese Englishes. A Sociolinguistic History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bolton, Kingsley, and Shirley Geok-lin Lim. 2002. “Futures for Hong Kong English”. In Kingsley Bolton, ed. Hong Kong English: Autonomy and Creativity. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 295–313.Google Scholar
Boström Aronsson, Mia. 2003. “On Clefts and Information Structure in Swedish EFL Writing”. In Sylviane Granger, and Stephanie Petch-Tyson, eds. Extending the Scope of Corpus-Based Research: New Applications, New Challenges. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 197–210. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2005. “Themes in Swedish Advanced Learners’ Written English”. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Gothenburg.
Callies, Marcus. 2009. Information Highlighting in Advanced Learner English. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Census and Statistics Department, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. 2012. “Population Aged 5 and Over by Duration of Residence in Hong Kong, Ethnicity and Usual Language”. <[URL]> (accessed January 30, 2015)
Census and Statistics Department. 2014. “Hong Kong Monthly Digest of Statistics. June 2014 Feature Article. Use of Language in Hong Kong in 2012”. <[URL]> (accessed January 30, 2015)
Chafe, Wallace L. 1976. “Givenness, Contrastiveness, Definiteness, Subjects, Topics, and Point of View”. In Charles N. Li, ed. Subject and Topic. New York: Academic Press, 25–56.Google Scholar
Chan, Alice Y.W. 2004. “Syntactic Transfer: Evidence from the Interlanguage of Hong Kong Chinese ESL Learners”. The Modern Language Journal 881: 56–74. DOI logo
Cheng, Lisa Lai-shen. 2008. “Deconstructing the Shì…De Construction”. The Linguistic Review 251: 235–266. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cheng, Winnie, Chris Greaves, and Martin Warren. 2008. A Corpus-Driven Study of Discourse Intonation. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1977. “On wh-Movement”. In Peter Culicover, Thomas Wasow, and Adrian Akmajian, eds. Formal Syntax. New York: Academic Press, 71–132.Google Scholar
Collins, Peter. 1991. Clefts and Pseudo-Cleft Constructions in English. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009. “Information-Packaging Constructions”. In Pam Peters, Peter Collins, and Adam Smith, eds. Comparative Studies in Australian and New Zealand English: Grammar and Beyond. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 293–314. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Declerck, Ranaat. 1984. “The Pragmatics of it-Clefts and wh-Clefts”. Lingua 641: 251–289. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Deroey, Katrien L.B. 2012. “ What They Highlight Is…: The Discourse Functions of Basic wh-Clefts in Lectures”. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 111: 112–124. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Deshors, Sandra C. 2014. “A Case for a Unified Treatment of EFL and ESL: A Multifactorial Approach”. English World-Wide 351: 277–305. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Deterding, David, Jennie Wong, and Andy Kirkpatrick. 2008. “The Pronunciation of Hong Kong English”. English World-Wide 291: 148–175. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Evans, Stephen. 2009. “The Evolution of the English-Language Speech Community in Hong Kong”. English World-Wide 301: 278–301. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2011. “Hong Kong English and the Professional World”. World Englishes 301: 293–316. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fang, Mei. 1995. “Hanyu Duibi Jiaodian de Jufa Biaoxian Shouduan”. Zhongguo Yuwen 41: 279–288.Google Scholar
Gass, Susan. 1996. “Second Language Acquisition and Linguistic Theory: The Role of Language Transfer”. In William C. Ritchie, and Tej K. Bhatia, eds. Handbook of Second Language Acquisition. San Diego CA: Academic Press, 317–345.Google Scholar
Gazdar, Gerald, Ewan Klein, Geoffrey K. Pullum, and Ivan A. Sag. 1985. Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Gisborne, Nikolas. 2007. “Aspects of the Morphosyntactic Typology of Hong Kong English”. English World-Wide 301: 149–169. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gómez-González, María A. 2001. The Theme-Topic Interface. Evidence from English. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Götz, Sandra, and Marco Schilk. 2011. “Formulaic Sequences in Spoken ENL, ESL and EFL: Focus on British English, Indian English and Learner English of Advanced German Learners”. In Joybrato Mukherjee, and Marianne Hundt, eds. Exploring Second-Language Varieties of English and Learner Englishes: Bridging a Paradigm Gap. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 79–100. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gundel, Jeanette K., Nancy Hedberg, and Ron Zacharski. 1993. “Cognitive Status and the Form of Referring Expressions in Discourse”. Language 691: 274–307. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane, André Meinunger, and Aleksandra Vercauteren. 2014. “The Architecture of it-Clefts”. Journal of Linguistics 501: 269–296. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halliday, Michael Alexander Kirkwood. 1985. An Introduction to Functional Grammar (1st ed.). London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Hedberg, Nancy, and Lorna Fadden. 2007. “The Information Structure of it-clefts, wh-Clefts and Reverse wh-Clefts in English”. In Nancy Hedberg, and Ron Zacharski, eds. The Grammar-Pragmatics Interface: Essays in Honor of Jeanette K. Gundel. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 49–76. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Herriman, Jennifer. 2003. “Negotiating Identity: The Interpersonal Function of wh-Clefts in English”. Functions of Language 101: 1–30. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hinkel, Eli. 2002. Second Language Writers’ Text. Linguistic and Rhetorical Features. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hopper, Paul J., and Elizabeth Closs Traugott. 2003. Grammaticalization (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huang, James C.-T. 1984. “On the Distribution and Reference of Empty Pronouns”. Linguistic Inquiry 151: 531–574.Google Scholar
. 1998. Logical Relations in Chinese and the Theory of Grammar. New York: Garland Publishers.Google Scholar
Hung, Tony T.N. 2000. “Towards a Phonology of Hong Kong English”. World Englishes 191: 337–356. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lambrecht, Knud. 2001. “A Framework for the Analysis of Cleft Constructions”. Linguistics 391: 463–516. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Li, David C.S. 2009. “The Functions and Status of English in Hong Kong: A Post-1997 Update”. English World-Wide 201: 67–110. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Li, Charles N., and Sandra A. Thompson. 1981. Mandarin Chinese: A Functional Reference Grammar. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Liu, Yuehua, Wenyu Pan, and Wei Gu. 2001. Shiyong Xiandai Hanyu Yufa. Beijing: Shangwu Yinshuguan.Google Scholar
Luke, Kang Kwong, and Jack C. Richards. 1982. “English in Hong Kong: Functions and Status”. English World-Wide 31: 47–64. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mair, Christian. 2002. “Creolisms in an Emerging Standard: Written English in Jamaica”. English World-Wide 231: 31–58. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matthews, Stephen, and Virginia Yip. 1994. Cantonese: A Comprehensive Grammar. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Mesthrie, Rajend. 2006. “Anti-Deletions in an L2 Grammar: A Study of Black South African English Mesolect”. English World-Wide 271: 111–145. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mufwene, Salikoko S. 2001. The Ecology of Language Evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mukherjee, Joybrato, and Stefan Th. Gries. 2009. “Collostructional Nativisation in New Englishes: Verb-Construction Associations in the International Corpus of English”. English World-Wide 301: 27–51. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oberlander Jon, and Judy Delin. 1996. “The Function and Interpretation of Reverse Wh-Clefts in Spoken Discourse”. Language and Speech 391: 185–227. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Prince, Ellen. 1978. “A Comparison of wh-Clefts and it-Clefts in Discourse”. Language 541: 883–906. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech, and Jan Svartvik. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Rowley-Jolivet, Elizabeth, and Shirley Carter-Thomas. 2005. “Genre Awareness and Rhetorical Appropriacy: Manipulation of Information Structure by NS and NNS Scientists in the International Conference Setting”. English for Specific Purposes 241: 41–64. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schachter, Jacqueline. 1974. “An Error in Error Analysis”. Language Learning 241: 205–214. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schneider, Edgar W. 2007. Postcolonial English. Varieties around the World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sharwood Smith, Michael. 2013. “Only Connect: The Interface Debate in Second Language Acquisition”. Psycholinguistic and Sociolinguistic Perspectives on Second Language Learning and Teaching. Berlin: Springer, 27–39. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shi, Yu-Zhi. 2005. “Lun Panduan, Jiaodian, Qiangdiao yu Duibi zhi Guanxi: ‘Shi’ de Yufa Gongneng he Shiyong Tiaojian”. Yuyan Yanjiu 251: 43–53.Google Scholar
Sorace, Antonella, and Ludovica Serratrice. 2009. “Internal and External Interfaces in Bilingual Language Development: Revisiting the Processing vs. Representation Distinction”. The International Journal of Bilingualism 131: 195–210. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Teng, Shou-hsin. 1979. “Remarks on Cleft Sentences in Chinese”. Journal of Chinese Linguistics 71: 101–113.Google Scholar
Tsao, Feng-fu. 1990. Sentence and Clause Structure in Chinese: A Functional Perspective. Taipei: Student Book Co., Ltd.Google Scholar
Tsimpli, Ianthi Maria, and Antonella Sorace. 2006. “Differentiating Interfaces: L2 Performance in Syntax–Semantics and Syntax–Discourse Phenomena”. In David Bamman, Tatiana Magnitskaia, and Colleen Zaller, eds. Proceedings of the 30th Boston University Conference on Language Development. Somerville: Cascadilla Press, 653–664.Google Scholar
Wang, Li. 2004/1980. Hanyu Shigao. Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju.Google Scholar
Wang, Lifei, and Gong Chen. 2008. “Daxuesheng Yingyu Xiezuo Zhong Fenlieju de Tezheng”. Waiyu Jiaoxue yu Yanjiu 401: 362–367.Google Scholar
Ward, Gregory, Betty Birner, and Rodney Huddleston. 2002. “Information Packaging”. In Rodney Huddleston, and Geoffrey K. Pullum et al. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1363–1448. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
White, Lydia. 2011. “Second Language Acquisition at the Interfaces”. Lingua 1211: 577–590. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Williams, Jessica. 1987. “Non-Native Varieties of English: A Special Case of Language Acquisition”. English World-Wide 81: 161–199. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yip, Virginia, and Stephen Matthews. 1991. “Relative Complexity: Beyond Avoidance”. CUHK Papers in Linguistics 31: 112–124.Google Scholar
Zerbian, Sabine. 2015. “Syntactic and Prosodic Focus Marking in Contact Varieties of South African English”. English World-Wide 361: 228–258. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zhan, Fangqiong. 2012. “The Structure and Function of the Chinese Copular Construction”. Ph.D. dissertation, Stanford University.
Cited by (5)

Cited by five other publications

Sharma, Devyani
2024. Chapter 6. Language acquisition across the lifespan and the emergence of new varieties. In Lifespan Acquisition and Language Change [Advances in Historical Sociolinguistics, 14], ► pp. 127 ff. DOI logo
Liu, Kanglong, Joyce Oiwun Cheung & Nan Zhao
2022. Learner corpus research in Hong Kong: past, present and future. Corpora 17:Supplement ► pp. 79 ff. DOI logo
Poon, Vinton W. K.
2018. Approaching Linguistic Norms: The Case of/for Hong Kong English on the Internet. In Cultural Conflict in Hong Kong, ► pp. 107 ff. DOI logo
Wong, May
2017. Hong Kong English: An Overview. In Hong Kong English, ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2021. Corpora, Constructions, New Englishes [Studies in Corpus Linguistics, 100], DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 2 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.