Phrasing and prominence disambiguate clefted Relative Clauses

We investigated how prosody aids in disambiguating it-clefts with Connected Clauses We investigated the prosodic disambiguation of string-identical it-clefts with Connected Clauses (-Who sang? -It was [the editor] [that sang]) versus clefted Relative Clauses (-Who called? -It was [the editor [that sang]] ([that called])). Connected Clauses attach high in structure and convey background information, while clefted Relatives are nested within the focused element they modify and are also in focus. In the absence of prosodic cues, clefted Relatives tend to induce garden-path effects due to a default parsing preference for Connected Clauses. A production study revealed distinct prosodic phrasing and prominence patterns between the two structures across multiple regions, with disambiguation detectable from the first ambiguous word. Connected Clauses were prosodically separated from the clefted element, whereas clefted Relatives formed a single prosodic phrase with the head noun. These patterns align with their syntax, suggesting that syntax–prosody mismatches involving Relative Clauses are more constrained than previously assumed. In terms of prominence, clefted Relatives showed localized focus effects on the rightmost stressable word, rather than across the entire focused phrase. This supports the existence of intermediate representations linking information structure and prosody. An auditory comprehension study showed that listeners used these prosodic cues to override the default parsing preference for Connected Clauses.