Focusing is the grammatical means to emphasize constituents that convey important information by making them prosodically prominent. Additionally, the focused constituent may appear in a special syntactic configuration. King (1993) describes the so-called èto-cleft construction as a case of positionally marked focus. Cf.:

(1) (a) Èto BoRIS vypil vodku.
'It is Boris (who) drank the vodka.'
(b) Èto VODku Boris vypil.
'It is vodka (that) Boris drank.'

King assumes a CP-FP-YP-IP clause structure. The pronoun èto is generated in SpecFP. F assigns a focus feature to its complement. Therefore, a constituent that moves to SpecYP gets focussed.

It is the aim of the present paper to show that sentences as in (1a, b) must receive another analysis. Èto is not an element creating a focus configuration. It simply connects sentences in a sense to be made precise. Focusing results from a freely assigned feature correlated with prominent stress.

King's analysis allows for two predictions: (i) Material must not intervene between èto and the focused constituent. (ii) The pronoun èto is associated with some part of the clause only, it never lets the whole IP get the focus feature. The predictions are not borne out, though. (2) illustrates that it is not necessary for a constituent to move to a SpecYP position in order to be focused. In the relevant part of (3), everything but èto is focused. It seems highly implausible that the whole IP (AgrSP) should have moved to SpecYP to receive the focus feature. The FP-YP part of clause structure loses its raison d'être.

(2) Eto i vsego jablok ty polozila? Mam, malo.
Net. Eto ja oDIN rjad posyplju (pudroj) potom drugoj.
'First I sprinkle one row with icing sugar, than (there will be) another.'
(3) Sum grozy prorezal dal'nij svist.
- Vy slysite? - sprosil master.
- Sumit groza.
- Net, èto [AgrSP menja zoVUT], mne pora, - pojasnil master i podnjalsja s posteli.
'They are calling me.'

In many cases èto can be regarded simply as an adjunct to AgrSP (IP). The following two observations lend support to this assumption: (i) èto precedes material that is adjoined to AgrSP. (ii) In embedded clauses, èto follows the complementizer. Cf. (4) and (5), respectively.

(4) Eto [AgrSP menJAi [AgrSP ty nazyvaes' ti dobrym celovekom]] ?
'You call ME a good man?'
(5) Dva dnja storoz govorit "kuda devalas' sobaka, kuda devalas' sobaka", no tak i ne vyjasnil, cto [èto [AgrSP JA otpustila]].
'... that I had let it loose.'

Here, the pronoun èto - the hierarchically highest adjunct to AgrSP - functions as quasi-topic. It stands out against the rest of the clause. As a topic, èto fulfills a text function connecting sentences. Cases like (3) are no longer a mystery. Free assignment places the focus feature on AgrSP. Note that pragmatic considerations constrain the freedom of syntactic assignment.

In sentences like (6) èto is an emphatic particle. Evidence will be put forward that in this case it adjoins to the wh-XP.

(6) Kto èto zdes' kurit otvratitel'nye sigary?
'Who the hell smokes those disgusting cigars here?'

The present analysis takes into consideration more empirical data than previous ones. The majority of cases can be treated in a uniform way. There is no need to postulate additional structure.

Zurück zur Homepage von Uwe Junghanns