380 Chapter 11 Complex sentences
That the presuppositional clause asserts the existence of the state of af-
fairs is also indicated by negation of the focused set, as seen in the contrast be-
tween (189) and (190).
(189) Tadha' burus ngekke' Ali.
not.exist dog AV. bite Ali
‘There is no dog that bit Ali.’
(190) Tadha' burus se ngekke' Ali.
not.exist dog REL AV.bite Ali
‘No dog is what bit Ali.’ (but something else DID)
The sentence in (189) asserts that there is no dog that bit Ali but does not com-
mit the speaker to the proposition that Ali was bitten at all. Conversely, the
sentence in (190) also asserts that there is no dog that bit Ali but does commit
the speaker to the proposition that Ali was bitten, as the headless relative clause
sets up precisely that presupposition. Thus, (190) asserts that Ali was indeed
bitten by some other set of entities in the candidate set, however the discourse
establishes that set.
The assertion of existence by the presuppositional clause is also indicated
by the following situation. The assertion of a cleft can be contradicted by anoth-
er cleft structure. But only certain cleft structures are admissible as well-formed,
pragmatically coherent contradictions. Consider the exchange in (191)
(191) A: Siti se melle motor.
Siti REL AV.buy car
‘Siti is who bought a car.’
B1:Banne, Ali se melle motor.
no Ali REL AV.buy car
‘No, Ali is who bought a car.’
B2:#Banne, Siti se melle prao.
no Siti REL AV.buy boat
‘No, Siti is who bought a boat.’
B3:#Banne, Ali se melle prao.
no Ali REL AV.buy boat
‘No, Ali is who bought a boat.’
B4:Banne, Siti melle prao.
no Siti AV.buy boat
‘No, Siti bought a boat.’