The basic syntactic pattern of the dit cleft is as follows, where lower case letters represent specific words, and upper case letters represent general categories: [dit is FOCUS ELEMENT wat/dat SUBORDINATE CLAUSE] [it is FOCUS ELEMENT that SUBORDINATE CLAUSE]. The construction consistently begins with dit is, irrespective of the grammatical number (singular or plural) of the thematised focus element. If the element is an NP argument, then it is followed by a relative clause introduced by wat, as is exemplified by the examples in (4). The primed reformulations represent the regular syntactic equivalent of the emphatic construction.

If the element in focus is an adverbial or a PP complementive or argument, then the subordinate clause can be introduced by wat that.REL or dat that.COMP, but it still resembles the syntax of a relative clause, as is exemplified in (5), rather than a complement clause, because the subordinate clause retains the gap that corresponds to the thematised element, unlike a complement clause that is syntactically complete in Afrikaans. The primed reformulations once again represent the regular syntactic equivalent of the emphatic construction.

Afrikaans allows a wide range of clausal constituents as focus element. The main constraint, according to Ponelis (1979:549), is that this element should be short, a single word or a single, relatively short phrase. A clause is possible, especially if it is an adverbial clause, but it remains a dispreferred option. The range of constituents is exemplified in (6). Ponelis (1979:551) only points to time adverbials that indicate a specific point in time, clausal adverbials and adjectival complementives that are not readily available as focus elements in the "dit" cleft construction, as exemplified by (7), while not all manner adverbs seem to yield equally felicitous results, although some of them are possible.

The basic syntactic pattern of the wh-cleft is [WH-CLAUSE is FOCUS ELEMENT]. The word order is largely the inverse of the dit cleft, except that there is no need for the dummy subject pronoun dit, since the subordinate clause, introduced by an interrogative pronoun or adverb (wh-word) occupies the subject position. The subject clause is followed by the copular verb is be.PRS, followed by the extracted element, which is formally presented as predicate of the copular construction.

Where the dit cleft construction shows a clear preference for a shorter element in the focus position, the wh-cleft allows for longer elements, even clausal rather than just phrasal. This is in accordance with the processing constraint that results in the placement of longer constituents towards the end of the clause and shorter constituents towards the beginning, that can be observed quite widely in Afrikaans, e.g. in the consistent preference to have nominal argument (complement) clauses right-dislocated to the post-verbal field, and split extraposition that also moves a subordinate clause to the end of the sentence, separating it from the constituent it may be dependent on.

The examples in (8) show the range of syntactic constituents that can be given special focus by the wh-cleft construction. All examples are taken from Ponelis (1979:555-559).

These constituents, phrases and clauses, can perform the full array of syntactic functions in the clause, such as subject, object, prepositional object, adverbial, exemplified in (8). A further possibility of the wh-cleft, which is not typically possible with "dit" clefts, is to put the verb, the entire predicate (verb+arguments), or an entire clause in focus, as is illustrated in (9). Generally, it is only activity verbs that can be placed in the focus position of the wh-cleft, in which case a dummy verb doen to do is used in the wh-clause to anticipate the main verb that follows, as shown in (9a). The focus clause is often an infinitiv clause, rather than a finite one, as in (9b). The same dummy verb doen can also be used to place an entire finite clause in focus, as in (9c).

The wh-clause of the wh-cleft construction can also be used as if it is the relative clause that retains the same focal properties (Ponelis 1979:558). The construction uses an indefinite pronoun like al all or iets something, or a semantically empty shell noun like ding thing as subject, followed by the copular verb is, and then the focus element as predicate of the copular verb. The syntactic pattern that results is: [al +RELATIVE CLAUSE + is + FOCUS ELEMENT] [all + RELATIVE CLAUSE + IS + FOCUS ELEMENT]. In the place of al, other similar forms can be used as well, as shown by the examples in (10).