A cleft sentence takes a single ordinary clause and splits ("cleaves") it into two parts so that one element can be spotlighted: Peter har gjort det ("Peter has done it") becomes Det er *Peter, der har gjort det ("It is *Peter who has done it"). The frame Det er/var ... der/som/at ... lifts one constituent into a position of contrastive focus and parks the rest of the sentence in a relative-like clause behind it. Danish uses this device more freely than English does — including to focus adverbials of time and place, where English would struggle — and the small choice of relativiser inside it (der versus som/at) is governed by exactly the same rule as ordinary relative clauses.
What a cleft is — and is not
Compare two surface-similar sentences:
Det er en god bog.
It is a good book. (a plain identity statement — 'det' refers to something)
Det er Peter, der har skrevet bogen.
It is Peter who wrote the book. (a cleft — 'Det er' is an empty frame focusing 'Peter')
In the first, det is a real pronoun pointing at a thing. In the second, det is a dummy — it refers to nothing; it is just structural scaffolding. The whole job of the frame Det er ... der ... is to put Peter under a spotlight and present the rest, ...har skrevet bogen, as already-known background. You use a cleft when you want to assert which one — to single out one candidate against others, stated or implied.
Det var min søster, der ringede, ikke min mor.
It was my sister who called, not my mother. (clefting picks one referent against an alternative)
Der or som? The relativiser inside the cleft
The clause after the focused element behaves like a relative clause, and it takes the same relativiser you would use in an ordinary relative clause:
- If the clefted element is the subject of the back clause, use der (or som, but der is the default and far more common).
- If the clefted element is the object or otherwise non-subject, use som — or drop it entirely, exactly as relatives can be dropped when they are objects.
- If you cleft an adverbial (a time, place, or reason phrase), the link word is at, and it is usually optional.
Clefting a subject → der
Det er Peter, der har gjort det.
It's Peter who has done it. (Peter = subject of the back clause → der)
Det var naboen, der klagede.
It was the neighbour who complained.
Clefting an object → som (or nothing)
Det er den her model, (som) de fleste vælger.
It's this model (that) most people choose. (model = object → som, droppable)
Det var dig, jeg ledte efter.
It was you I was looking for. (object cleft with the relativiser dropped)
Clefting an adverbial → at (optional)
This is where Danish ranges further than English. You can cleft a time, place, or manner adverbial:
Det var i går, (at) jeg så ham.
It was yesterday that I saw him. (time adverbial clefted)
Det er her, (at) vi mødtes første gang.
This is where we first met. (place adverbial clefted)
Det var på grund af vejret, (at) vi aflyste.
It was because of the weather that we cancelled. (reason clefted)
Tense agreement: er or var
The copula in the frame matches the tense of the event. Present-time focus takes Det er ...; past-time focus takes Det var .... Danish is more flexible than careful written English, which sometimes insists on "It was ... that I saw" even for present relevance:
Det er dig, der bestemmer.
It's you who decides. (present)
Det var dig, der bestemte.
It was you who decided. (past)
How Danish clefts differ from English
English clefts ("It is X that/who ...") are a real construction, so the pattern transfers in outline. Three differences matter:
- Danish clefts adverbials more readily. Det var i går, jeg så ham is everyday Danish; the English "It was yesterday that I saw him" is grammatical but feels heavier, and English often prefers fronting or simple stress instead. Danish reaches for the cleft routinely for time and place.
- The relativiser splits by function. English uses who/that for people and that/which for things, with no neat subject/object cut. Danish uses der specifically for a clefted subject and som/zero for objects — the same der/som distinction that governs all Danish relatives, so getting it wrong in a cleft is the same error as getting it wrong in a relative clause.
- Spoken Danish leans on intonation too, but the cleft is the structural way to mark focus unambiguously, and it survives in writing where stress cannot be heard.
Det er ikke pengene, der er problemet — det er tiden.
It isn't the money that's the problem — it's the time. (contrastive cleft, both halves clefted)
When to reach for a cleft
Use a cleft when you need to contrast one element against alternatives or answer a 'which one?' question explicitly. If a friend says someone broke the vase, Det var katten, der gjorde det ("It was the cat that did it") points the finger precisely. Without the cleft — Katten gjorde det — the contrastive force is weaker and depends on stress alone.
Hvem betaler? — Det er firmaet, der betaler, ikke dig.
Who's paying? — It's the company that's paying, not you. (cleft answers 'which one' and excludes an alternative)
Do not over-cleft. If there is no contrast and no 'which one' in play, a plain clause is better; a string of clefts sounds laboured.
Common mistakes
❌ Det er Peter, som har gjort det.
Marginal — for a clefted SUBJECT, der is the standard relativiser, not som.
✅ Det er Peter, der har gjort det.
It's Peter who has done it. (subject cleft → der)
❌ Det er i går, der jeg så ham.
Incorrect — a clefted adverbial links with at (optional), never der.
✅ Det var i går, (at) jeg så ham.
It was yesterday that I saw him.
❌ Det er du, der bestemmer.
Incorrect — the clefted pronoun takes object/oblique form after 'er'.
✅ Det er dig, der bestemmer.
It's you who decides. (use dig, not du, in the focus slot)
❌ Katten gjorde det. (when you mean to insist WHICH one)
Weak — without a cleft the contrast rests on stress alone and can be missed.
✅ Det var katten, der gjorde det.
It was the cat that did it. (the cleft makes the contrast explicit)
Key takeaways
- A cleft is Det er/var ... der/som/at ... — a dummy det frame that spotlights one constituent and backgrounds the rest.
- Relativiser by function: clefted subject → der; object → som or zero; adverbial → at (optional) — the same rule as ordinary relatives.
- Use Det er for present focus, Det var for past.
- The focused pronoun takes object form: Det er dig, not *Det er du.
- Danish clefts time and place adverbials freely, where English often prefers stress or fronting — reach for the cleft to make a contrast explicit.
Now practice Danish
Reading grammar gets you part of the way. The exercises are where it sticks — free, no signup needed.
Start learning Danish→Related Topics
- Emphasising with Clefts and FrontingB2 — Put the spotlight on one part of a Danish sentence using the cleft (Det er/var ... der/som ...) and by fronting an element — and why fronting forces V2 inversion.
- Relative Pronouns: Der and SomB1 — Danish links relative clauses with der (subject only) and som (subject or object, and droppable when it is the object) — plus hvad, hvilket, and prepositional relatives.
- Topicalisation and Fronting for EmphasisC1 — Marked frontings beyond the neutral fundament — moving objects, predicates, and even parts of idioms to the front for contrast or emphasis, with V2 inversion forced and a clear sense of when the discourse actually licenses it.
- The Diderichsen Sentence SchemaC1 — The sætningsskema — the field model taught in Danish schools that generates correct Danish word order, from which V2, inversion, and ikke-placement all fall out automatically.
- Order of Objects and Light ElementsC1 — How Danish orders two objects (indirect before direct) and the hallmark Scandinavian rule of object shift — unstressed pronoun objects hopping leftward past ikke and other sentence adverbs.