Açılışa Özel %30 İndirim Tüm Materyallerde
Ünite 7 · Cleft & Emphatic Structures · Bölüm 1/6

Grammar: Cleft & Emphatic Structures

Stop stating facts flatly. Start steering the reader's eye to the exact word that matters.

Every sentence has a spotlight

A neutral sentence — Sarah called the police — treats every word as equally important. But skilled writers rarely want that. They want to aim a spotlight at one element: who did it, what they did, or when it finally happened. The grammar that does this is the family of cleft and emphatic structures. A cleft literally splits (“cleaves”) one clause into two, so that the part you care about is framed and foregrounded.

This unit treats emphasis as information management. You will learn to front an element with the it-cleft (It was Sarah who called), to reorganise a whole clause with the wh-/pseudo-cleft (What I need is time), to restrict focus with the all-cleft (All I want is peace), to insist on the truth of a verb with emphatic do (I do believe you), and to front a phrase for contrast (That, I can't accept). Used with control, these choices make writing sound assertive, precise and unmistakably C1.

  • It was Sarah who called the police, not her neighbour.It-cleft → the spotlight falls on the person responsible.
  • What the debate club needs is a clear deadline.Wh-/pseudo-cleft → reorganises the clause to foreground the need.
  • All I want is a quiet weekend.All-cleft → restricts focus: this and nothing else.
  • You doubt me, but I did lock the door.Emphatic did → asserts the truth of the verb against doubt.

1. The it-cleft (It was X who/that...)

The it-cleft takes a plain clause and lifts one element into focus: It + be + (focus) + who/that + rest. The “dummy” it carries no meaning; its only job is to build the frame. You can spotlight almost anything — a subject, an object, a time, a place — and the contrast is often implied: this one, not that one.

FocusFrameExample
a person (subject)It + be + person + whoIt was the caretaker who raised the alarm.
a thing (object)It + be + thing + thatIt was her honesty that won us over.
a time / a delayIt + wasn't + until... + thatIt wasn't until dawn that the truth emerged.
Register & nuance
  • Use who for people, that for things — but that is acceptable for people too: “It was Sarah that called.”
  • The verb be agrees with the frame, not the focus: “It was the students who complained” ✓ — not “It were the students...”

2. The wh-/pseudo-cleft (What I need is...)

The wh-cleft (also called the pseudo-cleft) reorganises a clause around a what-clause and the verb be: What + [clause] + is/was + focus. Here what means “the thing that”. It is a favourite of essays and presentations because it builds suspense — the reader waits across the whole subject to reach the point.

PatternWhat it doesExample
What + S + V + is/was...foregrounds an object or ideaWhat impresses me is her calm under pressure.
What happened was (that)...frames an event or explanationWhat happened was that the system crashed.
What + S + do + is + base Vforegrounds an actionWhat she did was (to) quit the club on the spot.
C1 subtlety — get the verb right
  • The linking verb agrees with the focus: “What I need is time” (singular); “What I need are answers” (plural).
  • Don't use a continuous form after the what-clause: “What I want is a break” ✓ — not “What I am wanting...”

3. The all-cleft & other clefts (All I want is...)

The all-cleft is a tighter cousin of the wh-cleft. Replacing what with all adds a note of restriction — “this, and nothing more”: All (that) + S + V + is + focus. English also clefts with the (only) thing, the place, the reason and so on, giving you a whole toolkit for aiming the spotlight.

CleftNuanceExample
All (that) I want is...restriction: only this, nothing elseAll I want is a straight answer.
The reason (why)... is that...foregrounds a causeThe reason he left was that nobody listened.
The one thing... is...singles out a decisive itemThe one thing they forgot was the passports.
C1 subtlety
  • The relative that is usually dropped: “All I want...” sounds more natural than “All that I want...”.
  • After the reason, prefer that, not because, in careful writing: “The reason is that...” ✓ — “The reason is because...”

4. Emphatic do / does / did (I do believe you)

When there is no other auxiliary, you can add do, does or did before the base verb to insist on its truth — typically against doubt, denial or contrast. The stress falls on the auxiliary in speech; in writing, the emphasis is understood. The golden rule: do/does/did + BASE verb — never inflect the main verb twice.

FormUseExample
do + basepresent, insisting against doubtI do understand your concern.
does + basepresent 3rd person, contrastShe rarely praises, but she does value effort.
did + basepast, correcting a denialI did hand in the essay — check again.
C1 subtlety — the base-verb trap
  • Keep the main verb in its base form: “She does value effort” ✓ — not “does values” ✗ or “did valued” ✗.
  • Emphatic do also energises imperatives: Do sit down.” — warm, insistent, very natural.

5. Fronting for emphasis (That, I can't accept)

Fronting moves a normally-later element — an object, a complement, an adverbial — to the front of the clause for emphasis or contrast, while the rest of the sentence keeps its usual order. It is a subtler tool than the cleft: no extra words, just a bold reordering that throws weight onto the fronted phrase.

Fronted elementEffectExample
objectstrong contrast with what came beforeThat I simply cannot accept.
complementvivid, literary emphasisBrilliant the plan may be, but it is risky.
adverbialsets a dramatic scene or conditionOnly later did I grasp what she meant.
C1 subtlety — when to invert
  • Plain object-fronting keeps normal order: “That, I can't accept.” ✓ — no inversion.
  • But a fronted negative/restrictive adverbial forces inversion: Only later did I grasp it” ✓ — not “Only later I grasped it” ✗. (You met this in Unit 4.)

6. Common mistakes (✗ / ✓)

These are the errors that still surface in otherwise strong C1 writing. Each one is a focus slip, not just a form slip. Audit your own emphatic sentences against every row.

Wrong ✗Right ✓Why?
It were the neighbours who complained.It was the neighbours who complained.the cleft be agrees with the frame (it), so it stays singular.
It was the noise who woke me.It was the noise that woke me.use that/which for a thing; who needs a person.
What I am needing is more time.What I need is more time.the wh-clause uses a simple, not a continuous, verb.
She does values her privacy.She does value her privacy.emphatic does takes the base verb, never the -s form.
The reason he stayed is because he was afraid.The reason he stayed is that he was afraid.after the reason...is, use that, not because.

7. Putting it together (Model Dialogue)

Two classmates argue about who deserves the credit for a rescued group project. Read it twice and watch the emphatic structures work as a system: an it-cleft to name the real hero, a wh-cleft to reframe the point, an all-cleft to restrict it, an emphatic did to counter a denial, and a fronted phrase for a final flourish.

A:Everyone's praising the group leader, but it was Devrim who actually saved the project.It-cleft → the spotlight falls on the true agent.
B:Come on — she barely opened the slides.A denial, setting up the emphasis to come.
A:She did rebuild the whole presentation the night before; I watched her do it.Emphatic did → asserts the truth against the denial.
B:Fine. But what the teacher remembers is a polished talk, not who was awake at 3 a.m.Wh-cleft → reframes the point around the teacher's view.
A:All I'm asking is that we name her in the report.All-cleft → restricts the request: only this.
B:That, I can agree to.Fronting → the fronted object throws weight onto the concession.
Test yourself
  • Why does A open with “It was Devrim who...” rather than “Devrim saved the project”? (The cleft sets up a contrast: Devrim, not the group leader.)
  • What does “She did rewrite” add that “She rewrote” would not? (It insists on the truth of the verb, answering B's denial.)
  • Rewrite B's last line without fronting. Is it weaker? (“I can agree to that” — correct, but the emphasis on that is lost.)

Exercises (Alıştırmalar)

Choose the correct answer. — 10 questions, each one is marked instantly. Questions get harder as you go.

Ünite 7 · Cleft & Emphatic Structures · Bölüm 2/6

Speaking: Making Your Point Land

Learn the words of emphasis, then use the unit's cleft structures to argue a case of your own.

emphasise (v)
to give special importance to something (vurgulamak)
Syn: stress · Ant: downplay
"She emphasised that the deadline was fixed."
underscore (v)
to make a point stand out more clearly (altını çizmek)
Syn: highlight · Ant: obscure
"The report underscores the need for reform."
assert (v)
to state something firmly and confidently (kesin biçimde ileri sürmek)
Syn: insist · Ant: concede
"He asserted that the figures were accurate."
pinpoint (v)
to identify something exactly (tam olarak belirlemek)
Syn: locate · Ant: misjudge
"Engineers pinpointed the exact fault at last."
highlight (v)
to draw attention to something important (öne çıkarmak)
Syn: foreground · Ant: conceal
"The study highlights a worrying trend."
reiterate (v)
to say something again for emphasis (yinelemek)
Syn: repeat · Ant: retract
"Let me reiterate: safety comes first."
foreground (v)
to move something into a central position (ön plana almak)
Syn: emphasise · Ant: sideline
"The essay foregrounds voices often ignored."
crux (n)
the most important or decisive point (can alıcı nokta)
Syn: heart · Ant: sideshow
"The crux of the debate was a single statistic."
salient (adj)
most noticeable or important (göze çarpan, belirgin)
Syn: prominent · Ant: trivial
"She listed the salient points in one minute."
paramount (adj)
more important than anything else (her şeyin üstünde, en önemli)
Syn: supreme · Ant: minor
"For them, trust was paramount."
compelling (adj)
so convincing it demands attention (inandırıcı, karşı konulmaz)
Syn: persuasive · Ant: weak
"He made a compelling case for change."
deliberate (adj)
done on purpose, carefully considered (kasıtlı, bilinçli)
Syn: intentional · Ant: accidental
"Her word choice was slow and deliberate."
singular (adj)
exceptional; unlike anything else (eşsiz, tek)
Syn: unique · Ant: ordinary
"It was a singular achievement for a novice."
nuance (n)
a subtle difference in meaning or tone (ince ayrım, nüans)
Syn: subtlety · Ant: bluntness
"Every cleft carries its own nuance of focus."
It was SHE who noticed it. the spotlight = the cleft
A cleft is a spotlight: everyone is on stage, but the grammar tells the listener exactly where to look.

Production Task (Üretim Görevi)

Argue a case you feel strongly about — who really deserves credit for a school win, what truly matters in your favourite subject, or a decision you'd defend. Write 8 sentences and use at least 8 of the words above. Make your emphasis do real work.

Grammar requirement — apply this unit's topic
  • Open with an it-cleft that names the real point or agent (It is trust that holds a team together.).
  • Use a wh-/pseudo-cleft to reframe your claim (What people overlook is...).
  • Use an all-cleft to restrict focus (All that really matters is...).
  • Include one emphatic do/does/did to counter an objection and one fronted phrase for contrast (That, I firmly reject.).

Sentence starters (you can begin with these):

"It was ... who really ..." "What most people miss is ..." "All I am asking is ..." "I do believe that ..." "That, I simply cannot accept ..."

Değerlendirme öğretmenin tarafından yapılacak. (Your teacher will review your task.)

Ünite 7 · Cleft & Emphatic Structures · Bölüm 3/6

Reading: The Student Who Cracked the Code

Read the feature, then work through the five tasks.

Before You Read (Okumadan Önce)

Skilled readers prepare before they start. Before you read, think about these three questions (you do not need to write the answers):

  • Think of a contest or project win usually credited to one clever app or one star student. Might someone quieter have done the real work?
  • The text argues that the official story got the hero wrong. Which structure might a writer use to correct it — a plain sentence, or a cleft like “It was X, not Y, who...”?
  • Writers use emphatic do/did to push back against a doubt. Watch for the moment it happens, and ask what claim it is defending.
How to read
  • First read: read quickly for the whole arc — who really cracked the cipher and why the official story is wrong. Don't stop for every word.
  • Second read: track the emphasis. Notice each cleft (“It was she who...”, “What made her exceptional...”, “All she had was...”) and each emphatic did. Ask what the writer is foregrounding in every case.

Words to spot (from the Speaking section): crux · pinpoint · salient · assert · compelling · paramount · foreground · singular

the celebrated program a student and a pencil who really won?
The school credited the program — but it was a student with a pencil who spotted what no software could.
The Student Who Cracked the Code

For weeks, the school's official story had credited a slick prize-winning program with winning the National Cipher Challenge. What that tidy story overlooked, however, was a quiet Year-11 student named Iris Bellamy. It was she, working alone in the corner of the library, who first noticed the flaw that the entire coding club had somehow missed. The program has been celebrated ever since; the girl has been all but forgotten.

To understand how her name slipped out of the record, you have to picture the coding club as it was that term. It was a loud, confident place, full of students who spoke fluent Python and quoted algorithms the way others quote song lyrics. Iris belonged to none of that world; what set her apart was not a rival talent for code but a stubborn refusal to be dazzled by it. While the club chased ever more elaborate scripts, she kept returning to the raw puzzles themselves, reading them as though they were short stories rather than problems to be automated away. Her teachers, busy admiring the program's polished output on the projector at every meeting, rarely thought to ask what the quiet girl in the corner was scribbling. That oversight, as it turned out, was exactly what would cost the official story its accuracy.

What made Bellamy so singular was not raw brilliance but relentless patience. She did read every puzzle line twice, underlining the salient repetitions that her classmates dismissed as meaningless noise. All she had was a pencil, a notebook and an almost unreasonable stubbornness. Where others reached for a clever algorithm, she simply watched, and waited, and counted.

Her method looked almost old-fashioned beside the club's gleaming laptops. Each evening she copied a fresh batch of encrypted messages into her notebook by hand, letter by patient letter, and only then began to hunt for patterns. What she trusted was frequency and repetition — the small, unglamorous habits that no cipher can fully hide. The others, meanwhile, fed the same messages into the prize-winning program and waited for a verdict that never quite arrived. It was precisely this contrast, human patience set against automated confidence, that the school would later find so awkward to explain. A machine, after all, makes a far tidier hero than a tired teenager with graphite smudged across her fingers, and it is the tidy hero, more often than not, that a proud school prefers to remember.

The crux came on a wet Tuesday before the final round. It was a single repeated greeting — three trivial words that opened almost every message in the puzzle — that finally pinpointed the program's weakness. What Bellamy grasped in that moment was paramount: it was the puzzle-setter's own lazy habits, not any clever mathematics, that had given the answer away. The realisation was compelling precisely because it was so ordinary.

Once the pattern surfaced, she tested it with the caution of someone who fully expected not to be believed. She did not rush to her teachers; instead, she reworked three earlier puzzles from scratch, checking whether the same lazy greeting unlocked them too. It did. Only when every message yielded to the same simple key did she allow herself to feel certain. What finally convinced her was not a single dramatic breakthrough but the dull, repeatable reliability of the flaw. That reliability, she understood, was the whole point: a genuine weakness behaves in the same way every time you press on it, whereas a lucky guess crumbles the moment it is tested twice. It was this insistence on double-checking, rather than any flash of genius, that turned a hunch into proof.

Her teachers, predictably, were slow to listen. Indeed, it was days before anyone on the judging panel did take her claim seriously. When they finally tested it, though, the result was undeniable: codes that had resisted the club's best minds for weeks now unravelled in a matter of minutes. What had changed was not the program, but the question being asked of it.

When the results were at last verified, the mood among the staff shifted from doubt to a kind of embarrassed admiration. Teachers who had barely registered Iris now spoke of her insight as though they had championed it from the start. She, for her part, seemed almost indifferent to the sudden fuss. All she wanted, she told a friend, was for the puzzle to be properly understood; a printed name meant nothing to her. It was that quiet detachment, ironically, that made her so easy to leave out of the version the school would eventually choose to tell.

There is a lesson buried here that reaches well beyond one cipher challenge. Schools, like the rest of us, are drawn to explanations that are neat, flattering and easy to repeat. A brilliant program winning a national contest is exactly such an explanation; a self-effacing student noticing what everyone else ignored is decidedly not. What tends to survive, more often than we care to admit, is the account that demands the least discomfort. Her classmates certainly learned to code that year, yet the more valuable lesson — that patient attention can quietly outperform expensive equipment — slipped out of the record almost unnoticed. Whenever a tidy story is handed to us, then, it is worth pausing to ask whose careful, unglamorous work the neat version has smoothed away.

What the school has since asserted is a neater tale, one that foregrounds the program and quietly forgets the student. Yet the deeper truth is stranger and more human. It was not the software that won the challenge; it was a girl with a pencil who did what no program ever could — she paid attention, patiently, when everyone else looked away.

A · Multiple Choice

Choose the correct answer.

B · True / False (Doğru / Yanlış)

Are these sentences true or false, according to the text?

C · Gap Fill

Complete each cleft with ONE word from the text. Mind the emphatic frame (It / What / that / did).

1  was she, working alone, who noticed the flaw. Doğru cevap: It
2  made Bellamy so singular was relentless patience. Doğru cevap: What
3It was days before anyone on the judging panel take her claim seriously. Doğru cevap: did
4It was a single repeated greeting pinpointed the program's weakness. Doğru cevap: that
5  she had was a pencil, a notebook and stubbornness. Doğru cevap: All

D · Open-Ended

Write your answer in your own words. These questions are not marked automatically.

1. Why does the writer insist that “it was she ... who” noticed the flaw, rather than simply saying “she noticed the flaw”?

Sample Answer"By using the it-cleft, the writer sets up a deliberate contrast: it was the forgotten student, not the celebrated program, that saw the flaw. The plain sentence would state the fact; the cleft foregrounds who deserves the credit and quietly rebukes the official story."

2. The text says the enemy's “own lazy habits ... had betrayed them.” What was the crux of Bellamy's discovery?

Sample Answer"The crux was that the weakness lay not in the mathematics but in human behaviour. A single greeting was repeated at the start of almost every message, and it was this predictable habit — not any technical fault — that pinpointed the program's weakness and let the codes be read."

3. The writer says history now tells “a neater tale.” Why might the true story have been forgotten?

Sample Answer"I think a story about a clever program is simply easier to tell and to celebrate than one about a patient student in a library corner. It foregrounds technology and status, whereas Bellamy had neither. The neater tale is more comfortable, even though the human truth is far more compelling."

E · Connector Hunt (Bağlaç Avı)

Find these connectors in the text — each one appears at least once: however, indeed, whereas, though, yet, precisely, since*, where. (*“ever since” sense.) Note them down, then check.

Answers however: "What that tidy story overlooked, however, was a quiet Year-11 student..."
indeed: "Indeed, it was days before anyone on the judging panel did take her claim seriously."
whereas: "...foregrounds technology and status, whereas Bellamy had neither." (Open-Ended sample)
though: "When they finally tested it, though, the result was undeniable..."
yet: "Yet the deeper truth is stranger and more human."
precisely: "The realisation was compelling precisely because it was so ordinary."
since / ever since: "The program has been celebrated ever since..."
where: "Where others reached for a clever algorithm, she simply watched..."
Ünite 7 · Cleft & Emphatic Structures · Bölüm 4/6

Extra Speaking & Practice

Rewrite a flat, neutral account into an emphatic one, then drill the cleft choices with 10 quick questions.

Speaking Task 2 (Re-tell with Emphasis)

Below is a flat account written in plain, neutral sentences. Every fact is true, but nothing is foregrounded: the reader cannot tell what the speaker thinks matters most. Your job is to re-tell it, aiming the spotlight with cleft and emphatic structures.

The new club member found the mistake. The senior members missed it for weeks. The team lost the round because nobody checked the data. I want one thing now: a proper review step. People say the new member was lucky. She was not lucky. She was careful.
Grammar requirement — apply this unit's topic
  • Use an it-cleft to name the real agent (It was the new member who found the mistake.).
  • Use a wh-cleft and an all-cleft to reframe and restrict (What went wrong was...; All I want now is...).
  • Add one emphatic did to correct the “lucky” claim, and one fronted phrase for contrast.
  • Write 6–8 sentences. Keep every fact; change only where you aim the emphasis.

Sentence starters (you can begin with these):

"It was the new member, not the senior members, who ..." "What the team lost was ..." "All I am asking for now is ..." "She did check the data, ..." "Lucky, she was not; careful, she ..."

Değerlendirme öğretmenin tarafından yapılacak. (Your teacher will review your task.)

Practice Lab (Alıştırma Turu)

10 quick questions on cleft and emphatic structures. Each one is marked instantly. Questions get harder as you go.

Ünite 7 · Cleft & Emphatic Structures · Bölüm 5/6

Writing: An Argumentative Essay

Write and submit a controlled academic argument; your teacher will review it.

Connectors that sound C1 (Linking Words)

At B2 you linked ideas with however, therefore, although, whereas. At C1 you gain a sharper, more formal register with connectors such as moreover, consequently, notwithstanding, whereas and nonetheless. Paired with cleft structures, they let you both connect ideas and foreground the one that matters. Used precisely — and sparingly — they signal a writer in full command of tone.

ConnectorUse it to...Example
moreoveradd a stronger, further pointThe plan is costly. Moreover, it is what nobody actually asked for.
consequentlystate a formal result or effectTrust collapsed; consequently, it was the whole student council that resigned.
notwithstandingconcede “in spite of” (very formal)Notwithstanding the doubts, it was she who pressed on.
whereasdraw a direct contrast between two ideasThe program is praised, whereas the student is forgotten.
nonethelesssay “even so”, after a concessionFew believed her; nonetheless, she did prove her case.
howevercontrast between two sentencesThe story seemed settled. However, one detail changed everything.

See the difference — the same idea, written two ways:

Flat argument ✗Controlled C1 argument ✓
Effort matters more than talent. Talented people often fail. Hard workers often succeed. This is the important point. What ultimately decides success is not talent but effort. Whereas gifted people frequently drift, it is the patient worker who tends to prevail; moreover, effort is the one factor we can actually control. That, surely, is the crux.
Rule
  • Use at least 3 different C1 connectors from the table. Weave your argument; don't list sentences.
  • Moreover, Consequently, However, Nonetheless usually open a sentence and take a comma: Consequently, the plan was abandoned.”

How to structure an argument (Essay Structure)

A strong C1 argument is not a flat list of opinions. It manages emphasis deliberately: it states a thesis, foregrounds the decisive point, answers an objection, and closes with force. The skeleton stays the same — you change the content, not the shape:

PartWhat to writeStructure to reach for
1. Thesisstate your position and the real pointwh-cleft (What really matters is...)
2. Main argumentforeground the decisive cause or agentit-cleft (It is X, not Y, that...)
3. Counter & replyconcede an objection, then insistconcession + emphatic do/did
4. Conclusionrestrict the claim and land itall-cleft + fronting (All that remains is...; That, we must accept.)

Task (Görev)

Write an argumentative essay responding to this prompt: “For real success, effort matters more than natural talent.” To what extent do you agree? Argue your case like a skilled writer: don't just list opinions — control where the emphasis falls.

WHAT TO INCLUDE

  • a thesis that uses a wh-/pseudo-cleft to state your real point (What matters most is...)
  • at least one it-cleft that foregrounds your decisive argument (It is effort, not talent, that...)
  • a concession + emphatic do/does/did that answers the other side (Talent does help, but...)
  • an all-cleft or a fronted phrase to land your conclusion with force
  • at least 3 C1 connectors: moreover, consequently, notwithstanding, whereas, nonetheless, however
  • at least 4 words from the Speaking section (emphasise, assert, pinpoint, crux, salient, paramount, compelling, deliberate, singular)

EXAMPLE OPENERS

"What ultimately decides success is not ..." "It is not talent but effort that ..." "Talent does matter; nonetheless, ..."

Your Essay (180-220 words / kelime)

0 kelime

Değerlendirme öğretmenin tarafından yapılacak. (Your teacher will evaluate your writing.)

Sample Answer (~205 words) What ultimately decides real success is not raw talent but sustained effort. Talent may open a door, yet it is discipline, not brilliance, that carries a person through it. This, to my mind, is the crux of the whole debate.

History offers a compelling illustration. It is rarely the most gifted who leave the deepest mark; more often, it is the patient, the stubborn and the endlessly curious. Whereas natural ability tends to fade without work, effort compounds quietly over years. Moreover, effort is the one factor we can actually control, which makes it, for most of us, paramount.

Talent does help, of course; I would not assert otherwise. A genuine gift can accelerate progress and make hard work feel lighter. Notwithstanding this, talent left unused achieves nothing, whereas ordinary ability, applied with deliberate persistence, achieves a great deal.

What the evidence consistently underscores is a single, salient truth. All that separates those who succeed from those who merely dream is the willingness to keep going when the excitement fades. Talent, we may admire; effort, we must respect. That, in the end, is the point I would defend.
Ünite 7 · Cleft & Emphatic Structures · Bölüm 6/6

Unit Check (Ünite Kontrolü)

Mixed questions from the whole unit, then check what you can do.

Mixed Quiz (Karışık Test)

14 questions: grammar + vocabulary + reading + practice. Each question is marked instantly.

Can-Do Check (Yapabiliyorum Listesi)

Tick what you can do now. Honest answers help your teacher.

İşaretlemediğin madde varsa ilgili bölüme dönüp tekrar çalış — soldaki menüden her bölüme geri dönebilirsin.

Gri English

Bu ünite için giriş gerekli

Oturum kontrol ediliyor...