Re: Pseudo-cleft ``who''

Ron Hardin <rhhardin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> At http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/
>
> Democrats don't need hearings
> by Kay Daly - Jan 23, 2006
> It has never mattered who President Bush nominated to the courts, only that it was
> President Bush who nominated them.

That's not a pseudo-cleft. A pseudo-cleft would be like:

"What got them nominated was President Bush's promise at
election time."

"Who" doesn't make a good pseudo-cleft,

*Who nominated them was President Bush.

> sounds wrong, expecting ``it was President Bush that nominated them.''
>
> It's not a relative pronoun.

"Who" is a perfectly good relativizer ("relative pronoun" to you)


--
Tom Breton, the calm-eyed visionary
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Pseudo-cleft ``who
    ... > Democrats don't need hearings ... > It has never mattered who President Bush nominated to the courts, ... > that it was President Bush who nominated them. ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Pseudo-cleft ``who
    ... Democrats don't need hearings ... It has never mattered who President Bush nominated to the courts, ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: Pseudo-cleft ``who
    ... > Democrats don't need hearings ... > It has never mattered who President Bush nominated to the courts, ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: Pseudo-cleft ``who
    ... >>> It has never mattered who President Bush nominated to the courts, ... >>> that it was President Bush who nominated them. ... > Note, eg., restrictive relative clauses can't have a proper noun as ... nominated them" (which doesn't have a proper noun) is OK with you -- or not? ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: Pseudo-cleft ``who
    ... >> courts, only that it was President Bush who nominated them." ... relativiser "that" can be used to replace either of the relative ... That is a matter of style, ...
    (sci.lang)