CHAPTER 3 CORPUS RESULTS AND DISCUSSTION
3.2.3.4 The Emphatic Clefts = Sentence Focus and Argument Focus.77
The “emphatic” clefts, with given information in both clefted constituent and cleft clause, as in (111), can be compared to Lambrecht’s sentence focus and argument focus.
(111) A. Did you order the chicken or the pork?
B. It was the PORK that I ordered. (Gundel, 1985)
It seems that the function of the independent property is to “emphasize” what has been mentioned and what has not been mentioned in the previous context, that is, there are no other potential alternatives of what has been chosen in the scope of
shi...(de).
The results reveal, as far as the emphatic property is concerned, that there are 22 instances of Chinese shi...(de) used in English non-it-cleft, whereas only 3 used in English it-cleft. (112)-(115) are examples of the Chinese shi...(de) with sentence focus and (116) with argument focus. In (112), the English it-cleft ‘It is they who left the
firewood behind.’ is translated into the Chinese shi...(de) structure
是他們留下這些 柴火 的 with sentence focus. In the scope of shi...(de), the sentence focus is referentially given, since it is mentioned in the previous context 山姆在岩石後面找 到了一些整齊堆放的柴火...
最近有其他的遊俠來過此處. Hence, even if the
sentence focus is both relationally and referentially given, it is relationally new to“emphasize” what has been selected in previous context. Likewise, in (113), the English it-cleft ‘It is you, Frodo, and that which you bear that brings us all in peril.’ is translated into Chinese ‘shi...(de)’ structure 佛羅多，是你，和你身上所攜帶的寶 物，讓我們身陷危機. The sentence focus following the emphatic marker shi is referentially given, since it is raised in the previous utterance 如果你不在他們身 邊，他們可能就不會遇到任何的危險. Nevertheless, it is relationally new to exactly point out the cause and effect again.
(112) a. Behind them Sam came upon a small store of firewood neatly stacked..../Rangers have been here lately. It is they who left the firewood behind. But there are also several newer tracks that were not made by Rangers. (p.249)
b. 山姆在岩石後面找到了一些整齊堆放的柴火...／最近有其他 的遊俠來過此處，是他們留下這些柴火的。不過，附近也有幾個 不是遊俠的足跡。 (p.281)
(113) a. If your friends would be in danger if you were not with them! The pursuit would follow you and leave us in peace, I think. It is you, Frodo, and that which you bear that brings us all in peril.’(p.278) b.「如果你不在他們身邊，他們可能就不會遇到任何的危險！我想，
對方應該會放過我們，直接把你當做目標。佛羅多，是你，和你身 上所攜帶的寶物，讓我們身陷危機。」(p.312)
In English non-it-clefts, in (114), the English non-clefts ‘The Council laid it
upon me to bear it’ is translated into Chinese shi...(de) sentence
是那場會議決定讓 我持有它的. The constituent 那場會議決定讓我持有它in the scope of shi...(de) is referentially given, since it is raised in the immediately previous utterance 難到你沒 參加那次會議嗎？...
我絕對不會把它據為己有 ‘Were you not at the Council?....Ido not desire to keep it.’ Hence, the repetition of what has been chosen in previous
context presents new information and focuses on the asserted sentence. A similar case is given in (115) with predicate focus.(114) a. ‘Were you not at the Council?’ Answered Frodo...but I give you my word that I do not desire to keep it. Will you not at least let me make trial of my plan? Lend me the Ring!...‘No! no!’ cried Frodo. The Council laid it upon me to bear it. (p.523-524)
b.「難到你沒參加那次會議嗎？」...／但我對你保證，我絕對不會 把它據為己有。至少讓我試試我的計畫吧？把魔戒借給我！／「不！
不行！佛羅多大喊：「是那場會議決定讓我持有它的！」(p.577~579)
(115) a.‘I do really wish to destroy it!’ cried Frodo. ‘Or, well, to have it destroyed. I am not made for perilous quests.(p.81)
b.「我是真心想要摧毀魔戒的！」佛羅多大喊：「喔，說精確一點，
我是真心想要讓它被摧毀的，可是我又不是那種為民除..。 (p.98)
A slightly different example is given in (116b) with argument focus. Although the whole sentence 你起得太晚吧 following 是‘shi’ is referentially given, since it is mentioned in the previous context 我們起得太晚 ‘we slept late,’ the subject 你
’you’ is relationally new to the topic
起太晚‘slept late.’ In other words, the
speaker repeats the subject你’you’ again to correct the hearer’s understanding that the
one who slept late is you, not others.(116) a. ‘All ready to start?’ he said as Pippin ran up. ‘We must be getting off at once. We slept late; and there are a good many miles to go.’ ’You slept late, you mean,’ said Pippin. ‘I was up long before; and we are only waiting for you to finish eating and thinking.’ (p.115)
b.「準備出發了嗎？」他對跑過來的皮聘說：「我們得要馬上離開。我
們起得太晚，眼前還有很多路要趕。」／「是你起得太晚吧？」皮
聘說：「我早就起床了，大家都是在等你梳洗和吃早餐哪。 (p.137)
Like the property of “discontinuous” cleft, these examples can also solve the ambiguous problem between subject focus and sentence focus, as in (112)-(115). For example, when the NP and predicate constituent in the scope of shi...(de) bear all given information, we would regard the sentence as a sentence focus, instead of a subject focus. The sentence focus is used to emphasize the importance of the asserted proposition again. On the other hand, when the NP is referentially given, but relationally new to the topic, we would regard the sentence as a subject focus, rather than a sentence focus, as in (116).
In sum, I argue that the four property types can be compatible with Lambrechts’
three focus types (SF, PF, and AF). The relationship between the four properties and the three structures can be overlapped—argument focus can occur in Type 1 (the stress-focused cleft) and Type 4 (the emphatic cleft), sentence focus in Type 3 (the discontinuous cleft) and Type 4, and predicate focus in Type 2 (the informative-presupposition cleft) and Type 3. Also, these properties can be used to
disambiguate the relationship between the subject focus and sentence focus in the Chinese shi....de structure. In consequence, the results support Shyu’s (2008) observation that Chinese shi...(de) can manifest Lambrecht’s three focus types, and thus Chinese shi...(de) is not a cleft construction, but a predicational sentence. In addition, the results reveal that Chinese shi...(de) structure is unevenly distributed in English it-clefts and English non-it-clefts. Type 1 and Type 3 occur more frequently in English non-it-cleft, whereas Type 2 and Type 4 occur more frequently in English it-cleft. This uneven distribution of Chinese shi...(de) structure in English it-clefts and English non-it-cleft further proves that Chinese shi...(de) is not equivalent to English it-cleft.
3.2.4 A Comparison of Chinese Translation Version A and B
In order to ensure the reliability of the highly proposition of Chinese shi...(de) structure (with the number of 208 occurrences) in this thesis, I compare the present Chinese translation version (version B), with its earlier version (version A) from chapter one to five to see if there is any difference in the total number of shi...(de) in the both translation versions. Furthermore, a comparison of version A and B can answer whether the highly frequency of Chinese shi...(de) in this thesis is the translator’s preference or not. In our corpus, there are only 5 English it-clefts of English original text from chapter one to five. The Chinese translation of version B contains 57 Chinese shi...(de) sentences. When the shi...(de) sentences are much more common in the version B, then we expect that version A will have a higher occurrence of shi...(de) sentences as well. As is expected, Chinese shi...(de) is almost seven times as common in the version A (with 35 shi...(de) tokens) than its English original text (with 5 it-cleft tokens).
Comparing the total number of shi...(de) sentences in version A and B, it is found that all the five English it-clefts are translated as Chinese shi...(de) structure in both versions, as in (117) and (117). In (117), the English it-cleft ‘It was the
Sackville-Bagginses that were his downfall’ is translated as Chinese shi...(de) sentence
in (117A) and (117B). A similar case is given in (118).English it-clefts in both versions:
(117) It was the Sackville-Bagginses that were his downfall, as you might expect.
(P137)
A. 是那些薩克維爾．貝金斯讓他暴露秘密的。(p.184)
B. 是塞克維爾巴金斯一家人讓他露出馬腳 的。大概在宴會前一年左 右，...突然間，一群巴人出現..。(p.161)
(118) it was at any rate at that age that adventure had suddenly befallen Bilbo.
(p.56)
A.因為畢爾更是在這個年突然不造而別的 (p.74)
B.五十這個數字讓他覺得十分特殊(或許有些「太過」特殊了)，比爾博 就是在這個歲數突然間經歷了許多奇遇。 (p.71)
However, there are only fifteen Chinese shi...(de) sentences overlapped simultaneously by each other in both versions, as in (119) and (120). In (119), both translators select Chinese shi...(de) structure to express the English non-it-cleft sentence ‘I found it.’ Likewise, in (120), the English non-it-cleft ‘Given to me by Mrs.
Maggot’ is translated as Chinese shi...(de) sentence in both versions.
Shi...(de) in both version A and B:
(119) It’s my own. I found it. It came to me. (p.44)
A. 這是我的東西，是我發現的。這歸我所有。(p.56)
B. 他大喊：「我要怎麼處理我的財產與你何干？這是我的，是我找到
的，是它自願落到我手裡的！」(p.57)
(120) ‘They’re mine!’ said Frodo. ‘Given to me by Mrs. Maggot, a queen among farmers’ wives. (p.134)
A.「那是我的!」弗羅多把佩平推開搶著說道：「那些蘑菇是麻格特太太
特地留給我的，她在那些鄉下婦人當中，手藝可是最了不起的。(p.180)
B. 「它們都是我的！」佛羅多說：「是高貴的農婦之后馬嘎太太給我的！
把你的臭手拿開，我來分！」(p.157)
In addition to the above examples, the remaining Chinese shi...(de) sentences do not have direct English it-cleft counterparts. A noticeable feature of both versions is the differences in the use of Chinese shi...(de) as translation of English non-it-clefts.
In other words, both translators do not translate the Chinese shi...(de) sentence by the same English non-it-cleft, but they select the most suitable construction expressing the same meaning in the relevant context, as in (121)-(124). In (121), the English non-it-cleft ‘There were many Bagginses and Boffins’ is translated as Chinese
shi....(de) in version A
是姓貝金斯和波芬的, but not in version B私人宴會中有很 多巴金斯和波芬家的人.The same is true of (122).
Shi...(de) in version A, not in version B:
(121) There were many Bagginses and Boffins and also many Tooks and Brandybucks; (p.36)
A. 客人中，許多是姓貝金斯和波芬的，也有許多姓圖克和白蘭地勃。(p.46) B. 私人宴會中有很多巴金斯和波芬家的人，另外也有許多圖克家和烈
酒鹿家的成員。(p.49)
(122) But in that case there are a lot of things to do before we go to bed –under a roof, for tonight at any rate. (p.140)
A. －至少今天晚上咱們還是睡在同一個屋簷下的。(p.188) B. 而且，這也是我們最後一晚在屋簷下睡覺了。(p.164)
Conversely, examples (123) and (124) illustrate the Chinese shi...(de) translations of English non-it-clefts in version B, not in version A. In (123), the English non-it-cleft ‘The lesser rings were only essays in the craft before it was
full-grown’ is chosen to be translated as Chinese shi...(de) in version B
是在這門技術 尚未成熟時打造出來的, not in Version A. A Similar case can be seen in (124).Shi...(de) in version B, not in version A:
(123) The lesser rings were only essays in the craft before it was full-grown, and
to the Elven-smiths they were but trifles. (p.61)
A. 而法力較小的那些只是試驗品罷了，因為起初的製造技術尚未登峉造 極。(p.81)
B. 次級的戒指都是在這門技術尚未成熟時打造出來的，對精靈工匠來說 只是微不足道的裝飭品(p.77)
(124) The beginnings lie back in the Black Years, which only the lore-masters now remember (p.67)
A. 「唉！這就說來話長了。」甘達爾夫答道。事情起源於黑暗時代，說 來如今口有專門研究古代傳說的人還記得那個時代。(p.87)
B. 「啊！」甘道夫說：「說來話長，故事是從黑暗年代開始的，現在只有
學識最淵博的歷史學者記得這段歷史。．．」(p.84)
In sum, although Chinese shi...(de) sentences are more frequently used in version B (with 57 cases) than in version A (with 35 cases), they do occur more frequently than its English original text (with only 5 English it-clefts). In this view, a comparison of translation Version A and B still confirms the fact that Chinese shi...(de) sentences outweigh English it-clefts so markedly. Furthermore, in most of the cases we have witnessed above, even if translators do not translate the same English non-it-cleft by shi...(de) structure, as shown in (121)-(124), they do translate different English non-it-clefts as Chinese shi...(de) sentences. Consequently, the high number of Chinese shi...(de) in both versions corresponds to our results that Chinese shi...(de) sentences, unequaled with English it-clefts, should be regarded as a predicational sentence, which manifests Lambrecht’s (1994, 2001) three focus types.